diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/56039-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/56039-0.txt | 22600 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 22600 deletions
diff --git a/old/56039-0.txt b/old/56039-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 50d09c8..0000000 --- a/old/56039-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,22600 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction, by Charles H. McCarthy - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction - -Author: Charles H. McCarthy - -Release Date: November 23, 2017 [EBook #56039] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LINCOLN'S PLAN OF RECONSTRUCTION *** - - - - -Produced by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - - - - - - - - - Lincoln’s Plan of Reconstruction - - - _By_ - CHARLES H. McCARTHY - =Ph.D.= (_Pa._) - -[Illustration] - - New York - McCLURE, PHILLIPS & CO. - MCMI - - - - - _Copyright_, 1901 _by_ - McCLURE, PHILLIPS & CO. - - - PUBLISHED NOVEMBER, 1901 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - CONTENTS - - - Page - - =Introduction= xv - - - I - TENNESSEE - - Election and Policy of Lincoln 1 - - East Tennessee 3 - - Secession 8 - - Federal Victories 10 - - A Military Governor 11 - - Origin of Military Governors in the United States 12 - - Measures of Governor Johnson 17 - - Negro Troops 20 - - Nashville Convention of 1863 21 - - Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction 23 - - Steps to Restoration 27 - - Nashville Convention of 1865 30 - - Election of William G. Brownlow 32 - - Nomination of Lincoln and Johnson 32 - - Presidential Election in Tennessee 34 - - - II - LOUISIANA - - Popularity of Secession 36 - - Financial Embarrassment 37 - - Capture of New Orleans 38 - - Lincoln’s Advice 38 - - General Shepley appointed Military Governor 39 - - Election of Representatives to Congress 45 - - Division among Unionists 47 - - Military Operations 49 - - Lincoln Urges Reconstruction 51 - - Political Activity among Loyalists 53 - - Title of Louisiana Claimants 58 - - Opposition to General Banks 61 - - Plan of Reconstruction proposed 66 - - Election of 1864 70 - - Inauguration of Civil Government 72 - - Lincoln’s Letter on Negro Suffrage 73 - - Constitutional Convention 75 - - Congressional Election 76 - - - III - ARKANSAS - - Indifference to Secession 77 - - The Fall of Sumter 78 - - Seizure of Little Rock 79 - - Military Matters 79 - - Threat of Seceding from Secession 82 - - General Phelps appointed Military Governor 82 - - Enthusiasm of Unionists 83 - - Lincoln’s Interest in Arkansas 83 - - Inaugurating a Loyal Government 84 - - The Election of 1864 90 - - - IV - VIRGINIA - - Secession 93 - - Physical Features and Early Settlements 94 - - Society and Its Basis 95 - - The Counter-Revolution 97 - - Convention at Wheeling 99 - - Organizing a Union Government 100 - - Legislature of Restored Virginia 103 - - The State of Kanawha 105 - - Attorney-General Bates on Dismemberment 105 - - Making a New State 107 - - Compensated Emancipation 108 - - Formation of New State discussed in Congress 110 - - Cabinet on Dismemberment 120 - - Lincoln on Dismemberment 124 - - Webster’s Prediction 126 - - Inauguration of New State 128 - - Reorganizing the Restored State 129 - - Right of Commonwealth to Representation in Congress 131 - - Rupture between Civil and Military Authorities 133 - - The President Interposes 135 - - Congress Refuses to Admit a Senator-Elect 138 - - - V - ANTI-SLAVERY LEGISLATION - - Compensated Emancipation in Congress 142 - - Contrabands 143 - - The Military Power and Fugitive Slaves 144 - - Lincoln on Military Emancipation 148 - - Andrew Jackson and Nullification 151 - - Lincoln on Compensated Emancipation 152 - - Compensated Emancipation in Delaware 155 - - Abandoned Slaves 160 - - Border Policy Propounded 163 - - General Hunter and Military Emancipation 168 - - Slavery Prohibited in the Territories 170 - - Attitude of Border States on Slavery 172 - - Lincoln Resolves to Emancipate Slaves by Proclamation 177 - - - VI - THEORIES AND PLANS OF RECONSTRUCTION - - The Presidential Plan 190 - - Sumner’s Theory of State Suicide 196 - - “Conquered Province” Theory of Stevens 211 - - Theory of Northern Democrats 217 - - Crittenden Resolution 220 - - - VII - RISE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL PLAN - - Bill to Guarantee a Republican Form of Government 224 - - Henry Winter Davis on Reconstruction 226 - - House Debates on Bill of Wade and Davis 236 - - Pendleton’s Speech on Reconstruction 257 - - Provisions of Wade-Davis Bill 262 - - Senate Debate on Bill of Wade and Davis 264 - - President’s Pocket Veto 273 - - Proclamation concerning Reconstruction 278 - - Manifesto of Wade and Davis 279 - - - VIII - AN ATTEMPT TO COMPROMISE - - President ignores Controversy with Congress 286 - - Summary of Military and Naval Situation 288 - - Attempt to Revive the Pocketed Bill 289 - - House Debates on Ashley’s Reconstruction Bill 291 - - Defeat of Ashley’s Bill 311 - - - IX - THE ELECTORAL VOTE OF LOUISIANA - - Resolution excluding Electoral Votes of Rebellious States 314 - - Amendment of Senator Ten Eyck 315 - - Senate Debate on Ten Eyck’s Amendment 316 - - Defeat of the Amendment in favor of Louisiana 334 - - Senate Passes Joint Resolution 338 - - Counting the Electoral Vote 339 - - The President’s Message 339 - - - X - SENATE DEBATE ON LOUISIANA - - Congressmen from Louisiana at the National Capital 341 - - Proposal to Recognize Louisiana 343 - - Powell’s Speech opposing Recognition 344 - - Henderson’s Argument for Recognition 348 - - Howard’s Argument in Opposition 358 - - Reverdy Johnson’s Speech for Recognition 370 - - General Discussion on Louisiana 374 - - - XI - INCIDENTS OF RECONSTRUCTION - - The Thirteenth Amendment 384 - - The Freedmen’s Bureau 385 - - Volunteer Diplomats 389 - - The Hampton Roads Conference 395 - - Lincoln’s Letter to General Hurlbut 401 - - Lincoln’s Letter to General Canby 402 - - Lincoln’s Last Words on Reconstruction 403 - - - XII - CULMINATION OF THE PRESIDENTIAL PLAN - - Lincoln and the South 407 - - Inauguration of Andrew Johnson 408 - - Arkansas after the War 409 - - Condition of Tennessee 412 - - Louisiana 417 - - Reorganization of Virginia 425 - - The Wreck of the Confederacy 431 - - Andrew Johnson on Reconstruction in 1864 438 - - Johnson’s Speeches after Accession to the Presidency 440 - - Raising the Blockade 444 - - The Executive Department Recognizes Virginia 445 - - Restoration of North Carolina 448 - - The President Hesitates 458 - - Executive Policy in Mississippi 460 - - Restoration of Georgia 465 - - Texas 466 - - The Reconstruction Conventions 468 - - Temper of the South 472 - - Mississippi Legislation relative to Freedmen 475 - - Southern Reaction 482 - - The President’s Change of Opinion 487 - - Examination of Lincoln’s Plan 491 - - - APPENDIX A - - =Thirty-Seventh Congress= 499 - - - APPENDIX B - - =Thirty-Eighth Congress= 502 - - - - - Preface - - -_Much of the material included in this volume was collected several -years ago while the author was a graduate student at the University of -Pennsylvania. The researches then commenced probably first suggested to -him the lack in our political literature of an ample and interesting -account of the return of the States. Students, librarians, and even -professors of history knew no adequate treatise on the era of -reconstruction, and their testimony was confirmed by the authority of -Mr. Bryce, who happily describes the succession of events in those -crowded times as forming one of the most intricate chapters of American -history. No apology is offered, therefore, for considering in this essay -so important and so long-neglected a theme as the rise of the political -revolution that occurred before reunion was finally accomplished._ - -_On the general subject several excellent monographs have recently -appeared; these, however, are nearly all employed in discussing the -second stage in the process of restoration, and, except incidentally, -anticipate scarcely anything of value in the present work, which, so far -at least as concerns any logical exposition, conducts the reader over -untraveled ground. As the introduction indicates with sufficient -accuracy both the scope and method of this study, nothing is required -here beyond a concise statement of the author’s obligations._ - -_Like many other students of American institutions, the writer -cheerfully acknowledges his indebtedness to the works of Brownson, Hurd -and Jameson, and, by transferring some of their opinions to his book, -has shown a practical appreciation of their researches. In addition to -these obligations, in which the author is not singular, he profited for -four years by the lectures of Dr. Francis N. Thorpe, his professor in -constitutional history. Except in a very few instances, where the name -of an author was forgotten, credit for both suggestions and material is -uniformly given in the references and footnotes._ - -_For the selection, arrangement, and treatment of topics the author -alone is responsible; he desires, however, to take this opportunity of -acknowledging generous assistance received from three intimate friends: -his colleague, Dr. Charles P. Henry, found time in the midst of arduous -literary engagements to read the whole of the manuscript and to make -many valuable suggestions, especially in matters of style and diction; -the book is not less fortunate in having been critically read by Thomas -J. Meagher, Esq., whose extensive and accurate knowledge of public as -well as private law contributed to a more clear and scientific statement -of many of the constitutional questions discussed; the technical skill -and the superior intelligence of Mr. George M. Schell were of -considerable assistance to the author in correcting the proofs of the -entire book. Nor must he omit to record his appreciation of the courtesy -of Mr. L. E. Hewitt, the efficient librarian of the Philadelphia Law -Association. Finally the writer gratefully acknowledges his chief -obligation to the scholarship of his former teacher, Dr. John Bach -McMaster, who kindly interrupted the progress of his great historical -work long enough to read a considerable portion of this essay. Indeed, -it was the encouragement of that eminent author which first suggested -the publication of these pages._ - -_Before concluding his remarks the writer wishes to disclaim any -sympathy with the progressive school of historical criticism, which -derides the Constitution as a thing of the past and learnedly -characterizes all veneration for its authority as the worship of a -fetich. This book will have attained one of its principal purposes if, -in the language of a distinguished surviving statesman of the war -period, it will teach “the constant and ever-important lesson that the -Constitution is always a more reliable guide for the legislator than -those fierce passions which war never fails to excite.”_ - - =Philadelphia=, September 14, 1901. - - - - - INTRODUCTION - - -So closely blended with the essential principles of our federal system -of government were the causes of the Civil War that a clear -understanding of its results appears to require some account of the -origin, the independence and the permanent union of these States. Upon -the eventful years between the Treaty of Paris and the Declaration of -Independence, crowded as they are with work of note, one could linger -with pleasure; this epoch, however, has already engaged the pens of so -many writers, eminent as well as obscure, that a re-study of the -blunders of England’s ministers and the revolt of her distant colonies -might justly be regarded as a piece of presumption. - -Nor does it seem necessary to recite the familiar achievements of the -succeeding period; for, perhaps, the portion of American history most -attractive to the general reader is included between the 4th of July, -1776, and the 4th of March, 1789. To these years belong the most -conspicuous services of that giant race of leaders whose swords relieved -a gallant people from oppression and whose wisdom established a form of -government not, indeed, in universal harmony with popular prejudice, but -admirably designed for the popular welfare. - -It was at the outset of what may properly be styled the national era -that there appeared the remarkable group of statesmen who guided the -infant Republic on its dim and perilous way. On their broad experience -gleamed a vision of the future touching all their work with elements of -immortality. By them was skillfully established a system of revenue and -of finance adequate to all the exigencies of the time, and a foreign -policy inaugurated which for generations together preserved unbroken -harmony with the world outside. They doubled by wise and peaceful -acquisition the area of that Union whose independence had been wrested -from George the Third, and with no less wisdom prescribed the procedure -and defined the jurisdiction of Federal courts. - -The forty years following March 4, 1789, form an epoch with -characteristics of its own. This was the period of Virginian ascendency, -the Adamses alone breaking the line of illustrious Presidents furnished -by the Old Dominion. Introduced by an experiment in government which -aroused the slumbering energies of the nation, its conclusion was marked -by the disappearance from political life of the splendid ideals and rich -traditions of the Fathers. - -The election of General Jackson coincides with the beginning of a new -phase in American political and industrial development. It was not that -the fame of a splendid military record had raised its possessor to an -office for which long experience in governmental affairs had hitherto -been thought indispensable, or that the selection of Presidents had -passed from an intellectual few to the control of a much more numerous -class who were willing to bestow on politics the attention and energy -requisite for success in trade; but it was about this time that the -imperious power of slavery entered upon its career of aggression. -Philosophic statesmen of a previous epoch had ardently hoped that the -institution would be permitted quietly to disappear; indeed, the -greatest among them, though divided upon a multitude of political and -economic questions, agreed in encouraging every movement designed for -its extinction. These humane efforts, however, were not destined to win -immediate success, and even with the coöperation of the General -Government served only to demonstrate the difficulty of such an -undertaking. - -After 1820 all the dangers which menaced the integrity of the Union -were, with one notable exception, traceable to this cause. When Mr. -Lincoln in his discussions with Senator Douglas declared that it was the -sole cause of all the troubles which had disturbed the nation, he meant, -probably, to assert no more than that in his own time it had been the -most conspicuous one. - -Long before slavery became a subject of embittered controversy the -doctrine of State Rights had agitated the country. As early as the -summer of 1793 it had found in Justice Iredell an able advocate on the -bench of the United States Supreme Court. For party purposes it was -adopted five years later by Madison and Jefferson in the celebrated -Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, and during the second war with Great -Britain these statesmen were startled to find New England Federalism -vindicating its unpatriotic, if not treacherous, conduct in the exact -language which they had invented to embarrass a former administration. -With this instrument, too, Calhoun in 1832 shook the foundations of the -Union. Both Northern and Southern statesmen of that generation, however, -pushed the principle of State sovereignty as far only as their immediate -object seemed to require. - -It is a popular mistake to suppose that beyond the limits of the South -this erroneous doctrine found little favor in the minds of men; for on -the eve of the War of 1812 a Governor of conservative Pennsylvania had -armed her citizen-soldiers against Federal power. - -The illustrious Marshall could relate how, before the highest tribunal -in the land, its champions with unwearied zeal renewed the battle for a -hopeless cause. The eloquent voice of Webster hushed for a time the -fretful agitation of South Carolina statesmen, and his genius fixed in -imperishable literary form that interpretation of the Constitution which -called forth the abundant resources of both the Nation and the States. -In his conquering words lived those elevated thoughts that in future -years sustained the defenders of the Republic. - -President Jackson, for the energy and promptness by which he defeated -the projects of the Nullifiers, has been justly eulogized; but, when the -excitement of the hour had passed away, the calmer judgment of even his -admirers perceived that victory inclined rather to the side of Calhoun. - -Discussion of the abstract question of State sovereignty might, -probably, have long continued without endangering the Union had the -principle not been invoked to defend the institution of human servitude; -yoked to that powerful interest it was inevitable that both should go -down together in undistinguishable ruin. - -From the Protean fount of slavery flowed an hundred various streams -coloring almost every important question in the tide of events. In the -generation between the election of General Jackson and the inauguration -of Mr. Lincoln its defeats were few, its triumphs numerous and -important. Prosperity revealed its weaknesses and encouraged its -experiments. The fruits of its greatest victory, the dismemberment of -Mexico, revived those stormy scenes which thirty years before had for -the first time been witnessed in an American legislative hall. -Dissolution of the Union was once more threatened, and again averted by -the genius and patriotism of the venerable triumvirate, who scarce -outlived their noble work; but the compromise from which Clay, Calhoun -and Webster expected a restoration of former tranquillity contained -within itself the very seed-plot of even graver troubles. - -After 1850 the attachment of Southern men to their industrial system was -played upon by ambitious politicians more and more, until the final -overthrow of themselves and the government which they sought to -establish for its preservation. It could be shown how before that time -one war was prolonged for the protection, and another undertaken chiefly -for the extension, of that aggressive institution; how its existence was -supposed to require Federal interference with the mails and an -abridgment of even the ancient right of petition. Every power of the -national Government and all the resources of the cotton States had been -employed for its advantage. - -The United States Supreme Court was the last agent within the Union by -which its advocates sought to dignify and perpetuate human servitude, -and so successful were their efforts that an enlightened and humane -Chief Justice was but little misrepresented in language or in sentiment -when political opponents ascribed to him the doctrine that “the negro -has no rights which the white man is bound to respect.” - -The moral progress of the United States during the last forty years -finds, probably, in no single event a better illustration than the -change in public opinion upon the interesting question of human rights. -When the majority opinion was delivered in the Dred Scott case it -excited among members of the dominant political party but little -surprise. The shock which a judicial utterance of such sentiments would -give in our time to the ethical notions of the American people affords -at once both a measure of the advance that has been made in the interval -and an undoubted proof that progress has not been, as is commonly -supposed, exclusively or even mainly along material lines. It is -singular, too, that the first serious attempt of the Federal Supreme -Court to set at rest a dangerous political question should have been -followed by effects of so alarming a tendency. - -It is not intended to relate in these pages the origin or the fate of -those compromises designed to avoid the inevitable conflict already in -the closing months of President Buchanan’s administration casting -ominous shadows in the pathway of the nation, nor to describe the -uncertain policy of the General Government or attempt to determine the -measure of its responsibility for the fearful rebellion which that -hesitation encouraged. - -The skill and industry of a multitude of laborers have gathered from the -field of conflict a harvest as bountiful as the result was satisfactory. -We have general histories and bird’s-eye views, military accounts and -naval accounts of the Civil War; memoirs and diaries, by actors more or -less prominent in the events which they describe, and narratives of -battles and of sieges. In this varied and ample field even a belated -worker might hope to glean something of value; but this study, whatever -it may discuss incidentally, will be chiefly concerned with the subject -of Reconstruction, a phase of our political and constitutional -development which, though beginning during the progress, lies mainly -beyond the close of the Rebellion. - -The organization into a separate government of the late Confederate -States, with their resolute struggle for independence, is the chief -event in the extraordinary career of this favored nation. The story of -their submission to Federal power and the return to their former places -in the Union is not inferior either in interest or instruction to any -political event recorded in history. This return is what is commonly -known as Reconstruction. Though the term on its introduction into -political discussion was frequently objected to as inaccurate, it has -been generally adopted in the writings of publicists as well as in -popular speech. The word “restoration,” which was at first preferred, -was soon found to be inexact; for while former relations were resumed by -the erring States, they came back, one with diminished territorial -extent and all with domestic rights greatly abridged. They had, in fact, -been _reconstructed_. It is true that even the loyal States did not -emerge unscathed from this political revolution. In the South, however, -the established industrial system had been swept completely away. - -The theme falls naturally under two heads, Presidential Reconstruction -and Congressional Reconstruction. An account of the former, which -extended from the summer of 1861 to the autumn of 1865, occupies the -whole of this volume. Any adequate treatment of the latter, including as -it does the eventful period from the meeting of Congress in December, -1865, to the withdrawal of Federal forces from the South in 1877, will -require a narrative somewhat more ample. - -The conspicuous landmarks of Reconstruction require no extraordinary -talent to recognize and locate. It is the unfamiliar region between that -is difficult accurately to map out. The failure hitherto to present in a -single view the striking features of these neglected parts is chiefly -responsible for the fact that Reconstruction remains one of the most -obscure parts of our history. A candid and comprehensive account of the -political events of the time appears to divest the subject of much of -the difficulty commonly supposed to attend its investigation. From a -sufficient body of essential facts the step to an understanding and -exposition of every principle of moment is comparatively easy. - -Though the general design of this volume will be suggested to the -student of American history by an inspection of its principal -subdivisions, it may not be unnecessary for the benefit of the general -reader to add a brief outline of the plan that has been adopted. - -Chapter I. relates the most important political events in the history of -Tennessee from its attempted secession to the restoration, in March, -1865, of a civil government loyal to the United States. Military -movements in that Commonwealth have been noticed only so far as to -render intelligible the successive steps by which that reorganization -was accomplished. - -Chapters II. and III. bring the affairs of Louisiana and Arkansas, -respectively, down to about the same time. Events in those States have -been treated, so far as conditions permitted, in the same manner as in -the case of Tennessee. - -Chapter IV. is concerned with the secession, restoration and -dismemberment of Virginia. The formation out of a portion of that -Commonwealth of the new State of West Virginia, both because of the -grave constitutional question which arose on a division of the parent -State and the intrinsic interest of the subject, has been considered -with some degree of minuteness. - -In Chapter V., which discusses anti-slavery legislation, it will appear -how Mr. Lincoln, though never an Abolitionist or even a radical -Republican, became by pressure of military necessity an instrument in -the hands of God to destroy an institution opposed by a long line of -American statesmen and condemned by the light of the nineteenth century. - -The succeeding chapter considers the various theories and plans of -restoration presented during the progress of the war. The rise of the -Congressional plan, which ultimately prevailed, is treated separately in -Chapter VII. Only the first stage of its development, however, falls -within the limits of this inquiry, which ends with the meeting of the -Thirty-ninth Congress in December, 1865. - -Chapters VIII., IX. and X. trace the progress of the controversy between -the Legislative and the Executive branches of Government. The -culmination of this difference, however, in the impeachment and trial of -President Johnson is a phase of Congressional Reconstruction. - -The topics treated in the eleventh chapter, having frequently employed -the pens of able and popular writers on the Rebellion, are considered in -this study merely for the purpose of making it complete in itself; hence -that section is little more than an epitome of what has already been -said on those subjects. - -The twelfth and last chapter brings every part of the narrative up to -December 4, 1865. To clearly comprehend the arduous task that confronted -President Johnson this section includes a rapid survey of the wreck of -the Confederate States. The principal part, however, is reserved for an -account of the conventions assembled under his authority, the method of -instituting loyal governments and the spirit and tendency of Southern -legislation relative to freedmen. An examination of the Presidential -plan of Reconstruction completes the volume. - - - - - Lincoln’s Plan of Reconstruction - - - - - I - TENNESSEE - - -While the celebrated joint debates with Senator Douglas in 1858, the -Cooper Union and other addresses, marked Mr. Lincoln, in the new -political party just rising to power, as the intellectual peer of able -and trusted leaders like Sumner, Chase and Seward, his conservative -opinions on the subject of slavery made his nomination by the Chicago -Convention more acceptable to delegates from the border States. Though -his competitors received, in the memorable contest which followed, -almost a million votes in excess of the number cast for Mr. Lincoln and -his associate, the fierce conflict among fragments of the Democratic -party resulted, as is well known, in the choice of a decided majority of -Republican electors.[1] This rather unexpected defeat of a political -organization that had lost but two Presidential contests since its first -success under Jefferson afforded Southern leaders a pretext for urging a -dismemberment of the Union. Indeed, there is evidence that the more -impetuous among them had, four years earlier, seriously determined, in -case of Fremont’s election, upon a similar course.[2] Thus the present -event, so far from being an universal disappointment to members of the -defeated party, had been ardently hoped for by many. - -The choice of a minority party, and not at first possessing the entire -confidence of even that minority, Mr. Lincoln, unable to divine the -future, was compelled in dealing with the insurrection to proceed with -the utmost caution. Washington himself, in organizing the Federal -Government, had a task of less magnitude, and the renown of his military -achievements silenced for a time even the boldest in opposition. -President Lincoln’s victories, gained on a different field, gave no such -unquestioned authority to his name. This peculiar situation forced him -to adopt for the guidance of his administration a policy not altogether -free from embarrassment to both himself and his successor. His purpose -at that time appears to have been to meet the demands of the moment by -the contrivances of the moment. Whether a different course would have -been rewarded by earlier or by more complete success is a hazardous -subject for speculation. If his theory of our national existence be -liable to the multitude of objections which have grown up in these -fruitful times of peace, no other has been suggested that is free from -criticism. His political doctrine, too, had the advantage of always -recommending measures scarcely less distinguished for enlarged views -than those enlightened convictions which characterize his first -inaugural address. Whatever may be concluded of its merits, the theory -embraced at the outset exerted on many administrative acts of President -Lincoln an influence that continued to be felt during his entire -executive career; and without remembering this fact we shall not easily -comprehend either the extent of his “Border Policy,” as the plan of -compensated emancipation is often called, or his undoubted concern for -persecuted Union men in the seceded States. - -The sufferings of loyal citizens in East Tennessee had early enlisted -the President’s sympathies, and almost from the commencement of -hostilities measures for their relief formed in his mind part of the -plan of operations by the army under General Buell. Writing, January 6, -1862, to that commander he gives reasons for suggesting the occupation -of some point there rather than Nashville, and adds: “But my distress is -that our friends in East Tennessee are being hanged and driven to -despair, and even now, I fear, are thinking of taking rebel arms for the -sake of personal protection. In this we lose the most valuable stake we -have in the South.”[3] The cause of these outrages may be briefly -explained in a digression. - -In no part of the late Confederate States was the slave interest more -feeble than in the thirty counties comprising East Tennessee.[4] That -portion of the State contained in 1860 slightly over 300,000 -inhabitants,[5] of whom only about one tenth were slaves, while in many -counties they formed no more than one in seventeen of the population. -Here and there, indeed, were persons of wealth some of whom owned a few -negroes. But though a majority of the people looked upon domestic -slavery as something foreign to their social life, they had no strong -philanthropic impulse to oppose it. While quite willing to allow their -countrymen elsewhere to keep bondmen at pleasure, they did not regard it -any concern of theirs to assist either in extending or perpetuating -human servitude. If the existence of the Union or of slavery was the -issue, they would have hesitated little in deciding which should perish. -Though, as we shall presently see, they were as intolerant of the -Republican party as any community in the South, they were devotedly -attached to the Union. The fact is partly explained by the industrial -basis of society in this favored region. - -Cut off from Middle Tennessee by lofty ranges of the Cumberland, and -from North Carolina by the Great Smoky, the Black and the Stone -mountains, this extensive district is traversed in its entire length by -the Tennessee and its chief tributaries, the Clinch and the Holston; as -the great river flows down to Alabama it receives, before turning west -and north to join the Ohio, the waters of many important and beautiful -streams, some of which, as the French Broad and Nolachucky, are -associated with deeds of note in the War for Independence; indeed, one -of its crowning victories was chiefly won by settlers from the banks of -the Watauga. Other names, like Hiwassee, are familiar to readers of -later events in Tennessee history, and Chickamauga Creek was destined -shortly to become more famous than any. - -Knoxville, in early times a capital of the State, was, in 1860, the -metropolis of East Tennessee; Chattanooga, at the southern extremity of -the valley, is separated from Bristol, on the Virginia line, by a -distance of more than two hundred and forty miles; Cleveland and -Greenville were towns of less importance. The absence of large cities -makes it evident that manufacturing had not yet begun to attract serious -attention. Like early settlers everywhere in America, the pioneers of -Tennessee sought the most immediate returns from the products of the -forests and fields around them. The rich mineral deposits, then either -unknown or almost untouched, had not given rise to those great -extractive operations which in our time have so stimulated the -commercial life of East Tennessee. Vast cotton plantations, worked by -multitudes of slaves, like those in the western portion of the State, -had no existence in these mountain valleys, though occasionally small -“patches” were cultivated for domestic use. - -Citizens of West Tennessee would naturally place upon the Federal -Constitution an interested construction; their industries, they -believed, required such an interpretation of that instrument as would -place the institution of slavery beyond the reach of Congressional -interference. While the people of East Tennessee, too, believed in the -several sovereignty of the States, the question of slavery did not touch -them so nearly. Indifferent to the subject themselves, they had little -sympathy with those who had determined to break up the Union from a mere -suspicion that their interests were menaced by the success of a new -political party. But to ascribe to the want of interested motives their -indifference to the great disturbing question of the time would be to -assign but one and that, perhaps, not the chief cause. - -Except on its northern and southern boundaries this delightful region is -practically isolated from several adjacent States as well as from the -remainder of Tennessee. It was in this by-place of nature and amidst -such a population that _The Manumission Intelligencer_, a weekly -newspaper, made its appearance in 1819.[6] It was followed the next year -by _The Emancipator_ of Elijah Embree, a Pennsylvania Quaker; this in -turn was soon succeeded by a more celebrated publication, _The Genius of -Universal Emancipation_, conducted by Benjamin Lundy. While these -publications served to perpetuate and to extend, they did not create the -sentiment of which they became exponents, for, several years before -their appearance, an anti-slavery society flourished in Jefferson -County. Its existence is noticed as early as 1814.[7] This anti-slavery -feeling was part of the philosophic movement encouraged by nearly all -Southern as well as Northern statesmen before the inauguration of -General Jackson. A new industrial era, beginning about that time, put an -end to the abolition societies in the South; and though Lundy’s paper -was discontinued in Tennessee after 1824, events of frequent occurrence -sustained the anti-slavery sentiments of the people. - -The Tennessee valley was a natural thoroughfare from Virginia to the -south-west, and when slaves were purchased on the Potomac they were -chained together, to prevent escape, and in that condition driven to the -homes of their new masters.[8] The plaintive songs of captives as they -were marched in lines along the valley highways often caused the free -mountaineer to pause in his labors and reflect on what was passing -before his eyes. He “saw slavery in its bitterness and without -disguise.” The remembrance of such spectacles was apt to strengthen in -him anti-slavery feelings that had come down from Revolutionary times. -But whether Southern leaders ascribed the sentiment to an inherited -tendency or regarded it as a consequence of this odious phase of the -domestic slave-trade, they did not think it beneath the dignity of -attention; for it was, doubtless, to create a sympathy for their -institution that a “Southern Commercial Convention” was held at -Knoxville in 1857. It was too late, however, to root out the convictions -of two generations; the counsels of the wise were soon to be confounded -and the fretful agitation of leaders soon to be hushed in the tempest of -war. - -No Republican electoral ticket was presented in the great political -battle of 1860 for the suffrage of Tennessee voters, and had any citizen -openly advocated the election of Mr. Lincoln he would have had to endure -insult or injury, or to abandon his home. This explains why the -successful candidates received no vote in all the State. As “Parson” -Brownlow, selecting extreme abolition and secession types, -characteristically expressed it, his people were equally opposed to the -William L. Garrisons and the William L. Yanceys of politics.[9] In this -situation the supporters of Bell, Breckenridge and Douglas were left to -contend for victory among themselves. Addresses of the time reveal not -only the emotions of individual speakers, but the excited state of -public opinion. The attitude of Constitutional Union men was vigorously -stated in a debate at Knoxville by Nathaniel G. Taylor, an elector on -the Bell and Everett ticket. “The people of East Tennessee,” said the -orator, “are determined to maintain the Union by force of arms against -any movement from the South throughout their region of country to assail -the government at Washington with violence, and that the secessionists -of the cotton States in attempting to carry out their nefarious design -to destroy the Republic would have to march over his dead body and the -dead bodies of thousands of East Tennessee mountaineers slain in -battle.”[10] - -When Yancey came up from Alabama to “precipitate” this section into -rebellion the intrepid Brownlow made a similar reply.[11] The energy or -the elegance of such utterances may be questioned, but the deeds of -loyal Tennesseeans during eventful years to follow are evidence alike of -the sincerity of the speakers and their insight into the temper of the -times. - -Except Tennessee, all the States that attempted secession did so by -means of revolutionary bodies styled conventions; this description of -them is justified both by the general powers of administration and -government which they assumed and by the fact that the legislatures in -convoking them transcended their authority, the members of every State -legislature being “bound by oath or affirmation to support” the Federal -Constitution, which forms a part of the fundamental law of each -commonwealth. Though the Legislature of Tennessee, following the example -of law-making bodies in other disloyal States, passed a “Convention -Bill,” it was promptly defeated by a majority of 13,204 in a total vote -of more than 120,000. Notwithstanding the constitutional prohibition -that “no State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or -confederation,”[12] the Legislature on May 1 authorized Governor Harris -to appoint commissioners to form a military league with the Confederate -States. Six days later the relations entered into by these agents were -ratified in a secret session, the State government thereby turning over -temporarily to the President of the Confederacy its entire military -force. These matters disposed of, the plans of disunionists were -completed by the passage on the same day of a declaration of -independence and an ordinance dissolving all Federal relations between -Tennessee and the United States. Though this measure was to be voted -upon a month later, the Legislature, as if anticipating the result, -adopted and ratified the Confederate constitution. What was so ardently -desired by secessionists was finally accomplished, and on June 24 the -Governor declared his State out of the Union, the vote being 104,019 -for, and 47,238 against, separation.[13] The Tennessee Legislature did -not assume the functions of a secession convention till after the -commencement of hostilities; but from that date the forms of law ceased -to be seriously regarded. While the disunion party scored a present -triumph, loyalist leaders like Horace Maynard, Thomas A. R. Nelson and -Andrew Johnson, at the imminent risk of injury or even of death, were -speaking and working actively against the spirit of secession. The -strong Union feeling thus excited resulted ultimately in local -insurrections and in the meeting, June 17, of a convention at -Greeneville in which a remonstrance was adopted and a committee -appointed to petition the Legislature for the separation of East -Tennessee and such counties of Middle Tennessee as were willing to -coöperate in the formation of a new commonwealth. But the presence there -during the following years of veteran Confederate armies prevented Union -men from organizing a separate government, and saved the State from the -fate of Virginia. All who were known to have had a connection, or who -were suspected of sympathy, with this movement were especially obnoxious -to the secession party, and at the hands of soldiers were subjected to -many indignities. In various ways the feeling of opposition to the -Confederacy was intensified, and it was not long before measures of -retaliation were considered. Union people were quick to perceive the -advantage which the South derived from the use of railways within the -State, and, in expectation of assistance from Federal forces in -Kentucky, five railroad bridges were burned. East Tennesseeans, however, -were destined to be sorely disappointed in the matter of aid from the -Union army; and, without effective organization or arms, were easily -captured or dispersed. Of the former, many were sent as prisoners of war -to Alabama, hundreds were crowded into loathsome jails in the State and -others hanged, with circumstances of deliberate cruelty, near the scenes -of their alleged crimes. - -These were among the outrages to which Mr. Lincoln referred in his -letter to the Federal commander. By Horace Maynard a Representative, and -Andrew Johnson a Senator, in Congress the President was kept very -accurately informed of events in the State and often importuned to -relieve their constituents. This he constantly endeavored to do, but his -intentions were effectually defeated by the inactivity of General Buell, -who cherished other plans for destroying his antagonist. More than two -years were to elapse, from the time President Lincoln urged his policy, -before Tennesseeans received any aid from Federal armies; long before -that time they had been ruthlessly punished for their patriotism, and -then their oppressors were chastised by the hand of an abler warrior -than General Buell. - -Within a month from the date of President Lincoln’s letter of January 6 -General Grant had possession of Fort Henry and, ten days later, February -16, received the surrender of Fort Donelson. Nashville, becoming unsafe, -was evacuated on February 23, 1862; the State appeared for the first -time to be slipping from the grasp of the Confederacy, and a question, -hitherto more or less academic, presented itself for practical -settlement. In the territory from which hostile armies were reluctantly -retiring there would be involved a great derangement in the -administration of local civil law from the necessary displacement there -of all officials heretofore acting in obedience to the Confederate -States. - -By other Union victories in the Spring of 1862 the same situation -confronted the Federal Government in Arkansas, in North Carolina and in -Louisiana. Indeed, this identical question arose as early as 1861 in -Virginia and Missouri, but in the former the rebel government was -abrogated by a delegate convention that restored a loyal government from -which in due time sprang the separate State of West Virginia. In -Missouri a lawfully chosen convention appointed a provisional government -in sympathy with the Union. This subject, however, will be more -conveniently discussed elsewhere. - -When General Johnston received tidings of the disaster at Donelson he -retired with his army to Murfreesboro, leaving Nashville, which he was -unable to protect, a scene of panic and dismay, first advising Governor -Harris to secure the public archives and convoke the Legislature -elsewhere. It was in these circumstances that President Lincoln, on the -same day, February 23, nominated, and the Senate, March 5, 1862, -confirmed, Andrew Johnson as military governor of Tennessee with the -rank of brigadier-general. As the commission antedates the action of the -Senate by two days the President, no doubt, consulted the leaders of -that body relative to the contemplated nomination, and received -assurance of its favorable consideration. - -Nothing in any way connected with the appointment of Senator Johnson, -who was destined to act so conspicuous a part in the important and -difficult work of reconstruction, can fail to be of interest, and any -account of the execution of his office would be incomplete without some -observations on the nature of his commission of which the following is a -copy: - - =War Department=, _March 3, 1862_. - - _To the_ =Hon. Andrew Johnson=: - - =Sir=: You are hereby appointed military governor of the State of - Tennessee, with authority to exercise and perform, within the limits - of that State, all and singular the powers, duties, and functions - pertaining to the office of military governor, including the power - to establish all necessary offices, tribunals, etc. - - =Edwin M. Stanton=, - _Secretary of War_.[14] - -Quoting the essential part of this document a recent coöperative work -has this comment: “The office [that of military governor] was new to the -laws and history of the State and country. Its powers and duties were -limited only by the will of one man, the occupant.”[15] From the -commission itself we derive our prime conception of both the nature of -the office and the functions which it comprehended. The authority of the -incumbent extended to the exercise, within the limits of Tennessee, of -all “the powers, duties, and functions pertaining to the office of -military governor.” Nothing in this language implies that the office was -of recent creation. Nor is its nature to be discovered by a perusal of -the supplemental authority contained in the President’s letter of -September 19, 1863, to Governor Johnson, for the official conduct of the -latter on his arrival in Nashville can not be seriously thought to have -been influenced by instructions received nineteen months later. It is -perfectly true, as Mr. Ira P. Jones, author of the chapter on -Reconstruction in Tennessee, asserts, that the office of military -governor had never been exercised within that State; but it is not a -fact that it was new to the laws and history of the “country,” if by -this indefinite expression he means the United States. During the war -with Mexico the American people had been made familiar with military -commissions and with military governors. Secretary Marcy prepared, June -3, 1846, for General Stephen W. Kearny the following instructions: -“Should you conquer and take possession of New Mexico and Upper -California, or considerable places in either, you will establish -temporary civil governments therein.”[16] To this direction general -rules of conduct were added, and the letter authorized the assurance -that “It is the wish and design of the United States to provide for them -[the people of New Mexico] a free government with the least possible -delay, similar to that which exists in our Territories.” By virtue of -this authority General Kearny appointed Charles Bent governor of New -Mexico. Mr. Polk in his Message of July 6, 1848, to Congress maintained -that with the termination of war his power to establish temporary civil -governments over New Mexico and California had ceased; the legality of -their previous existence he justified by the law of nations. By cession -to the United States, the government of Mexico no longer pretended to -any control over them.[17] President Polk, differing from other leaders -of his party, held that “until Congress shall act, the inhabitants will -be without any organized government.”[18] But Congress, notwithstanding -urgent appeals of the Executive, moved very deliberately in the matter -of abolishing the office of military governor. In May, 1847, Colonel -Richard B. Mason assumed the office of Governor and commander-in-chief -of the United States forces in California. Two months after ratification -of the treaty with Mexico he received notice of the fact, but no -intimation that the civil government instituted by the President was -discontinued. Without other instructions than an order to extend over -California “the revenue laws and tariff of the United States” he, as -well as his successor, General Riley, continued the existing government. - -After affirming the legality of its institution the United States -Supreme Court (Cross _vs._ Harrison, p. 193, 16 Howard) says that the -existing government did not cease as a consequence of the restoration of -peace; the President might have dissolved it, but he did not do so. -Congress could have put an end to it, but that was not done. “The right -inference from the inaction of both is, that it was meant to be -continued until it had been legislatively changed.” In fact it was so -continued until the people in convention formed a government, -subsequently recognized by Congress, when California was admitted during -the autumn of 1850 as a State. - -The authority, then, of both political departments, as well as the more -deliberate opinion of the judicial branch, of the General Government had -established a precedent with which Mr. Lincoln was thoroughly familiar; -for, by a singular coincidence, both he and Mr. Johnson were serving -together in the Thirtieth Congress, which began its first session in -December, 1847. They participated in, or were interested spectators of, -all those stirring scenes that marked the beginning of one of the last -legislative victories of slavery; so that this portion at least of -American history was not strange to either the President or the Senator -from Tennessee. - -The question whether Tennessee was within or without the Union will be -reserved for more ample discussion farther on; it is sufficient to -observe here that its territory was held by an adverse party and its -government hostile to the national authority. If the administration of -Colonel Mason and his successor in California was not regarded by -President Lincoln as a sufficient basis for his action there was still -left an undoubted foundation. The appointment was deemed an element of -strength to the Union forces operating in Tennessee, and, in this view, -the act was entirely within the power of the President as -Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy of the United States. Though its -wisdom may be questioned and its results dismissed with a sneer, it was -not a novelty nor can his admirers claim for Mr. Lincoln the merit of -its invention; and if in its origin the office had a bearing on the -extension, its present application was not wholly unconnected with the -abolition of slavery. The remaining pages of this chapter and the two -succeeding ones will be employed in tracing rapidly the operation of the -system of military governors in those States in which it was seriously -attempted to be enforced. - -The movements of contending armies had already obliterated in many -districts of Tennessee almost every trace of civil government, and when -State officials hurried away to Memphis, where Governor Harris had -reassembled the Legislature, they left behind them an uncontrolled mob -which General Forrest found it necessary to charge with his cavalry to -remove a portion of Confederate military stores that had not been -distributed among the poor or perished in the prevailing anarchy.[19] -General Grant had already, on February 22, from Fort Donelson, issued an -order that “no courts will be allowed to act under State authority, but -all cases coming within reach of the military arm will be adjudicated by -the authorities the Government has established within the State. Martial -law is therefore declared to extend over West Tennessee.” The order -added, “whenever a sufficient number of citizens return to their -allegiance to maintain law and order over the territory, the military -restriction here indicated will be removed.”[20] Union troops under -General Nelson having occupied the city on the 25th, Governor Johnson on -his arrival, March 12, 1862, from his seat in the United States Senate -was not under the necessity of employing the harsh discipline of General -Forrest to restore order in the deserted capital. For this part of his -career he was, however, severely censured by political adversaries in -Tennessee. Detached from their historical settings, indeed, his acts -could justly be described as tyrannical. But it is precisely these -figures in the back-ground that are necessary to harmonize the whole and -set before us in its proper light a truthful picture of the times. As -his professions preceded his administrative acts it is proper to -introduce this portion of the subject by quoting from a speech which he -delivered in Nashville the evening after his arrival. Five days later, -March 18, it was printed under the style of “An Appeal to the People” of -Tennessee. After some general observations on the tranquil and -prosperous existence of the State in the Union, and on the honors by -which many of her sons had been distinguished, he noticed the fact that -the very leaders of secession themselves had been the recipients of -Federal bounty and patronage; had taken oaths to support the -Constitution and yet labored to overturn Federal authority. Entering -fairly upon his theme, he continued: - - Meanwhile the State Government has disappeared. The Executive has - abdicated; the Legislature has dissolved; the Judiciary is in - abeyance. The great ship of State ... has been suddenly abandoned by - its officers and mutinous crew, and left to float at the mercy of - the winds, and to be plundered by every rover upon the deep. - -Pausing to enumerate many acts of spoliation, he resumes: - - In such a lamentable crisis the Government of the United States - could not be unmindful of its high constitutional obligation to - guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of - government, an obligation which every State has a direct and - immediate interest in having observed towards every other State.... - This obligation the national Government is now attempting to - discharge. I have been appointed, in the absence of the regular and - established State authorities, as Military Governor for the time - being, to preserve the public property of the State, to give the - protection of law actively enforced to her citizens, and, as - speedily as may be, to restore her government to the same condition - as before the existing rebellion. - -The “regular and established State authorities,” to whom Governor -Johnson refers, were, of course, none other than those officials who -administered affairs in Tennessee before the 6th of May. Of these some -had actually abandoned their offices, while others had subordinated -their functions to a power hostile to the constitution of the State. He -proceeded: - - These offices must be filled temporarily, until the State shall be - restored so far to its accustomed quiet, that the people can - peaceably assemble at the ballot-box and select agents of their own - choice.... - - I shall, therefore, as early as practicable, designate for various - positions under the State and county governments, from among my - fellow-citizens, persons of probity and intelligence, and bearing - true allegiance to the Constitution and Government of the United - States, who will execute the functions of their respective offices - until their places can be filled by the action of the people. Their - authority, when their appointment shall have been made, will be - accordingly respected and observed.... Those who through the dark - and weary night of rebellion have maintained their allegiance to the - Federal Government will be honored. The erring and misguided will be - welcomed on their return. And while it may become necessary, in - vindicating the violated majesty of the law, and in reasserting its - imperial sway, to punish intelligent and conscious treason in high - places, no merely retaliatory or vindictive policy will be - adopted.[21] - -To all who in private and unofficial capacity had assumed an attitude of -hostility to the Government amnesty was offered for all past acts and -declarations upon condition of yielding obedience to the supremacy of -the laws. This the Governor advised them to do. Though the “Appeal,” -brief, clear and characterized by the best temper, is a state paper of -decided merit, there were many classes still residing at the capital -upon whom it made little impression. The mayor and the city council were -ordered to take the oath of allegiance to the United States, and on -their refusal were imprisoned. Of the harshness of this measure it need -only be observed that the essence of government is to govern, and had -the new executive failed on this occasion to assert authority his -administration would have been wrecked at the outset. For printing -seditious matter the press was placed under restraint, and within a few -months it was found necessary to punish with unusual severity, even -ministers of the gospel. Clergymen, with a few exceptions, were not only -hostile to the Union but actually encouraged treason from their pulpits. -These offenders Governor Johnson summoned to take the oath of allegiance -or to depart from the State. They appeared before him, as commanded to, -refused compliance, but asked time for deliberation; this being granted, -to the full extent desired, and still persisting in their refusal they -were placed in confinement. That they were not proceeded against with -undue haste appears from an entry in a diary kept by one of Governor -Johnson’s biographers which fixes the date as June 28.[22] Three months -had fully elapsed since the arrival of Mr. Johnson before the ministers -were punished for their seditious utterances. To prevent interference -with his executive functions he sometimes imprisoned judges. Other -measures no less arbitrary have been the subject of much criticism. He -declared that whenever a loyal citizen was maltreated five or more -sympathizers with the Rebellion should be arrested and dealt with as the -nature of the case appeared to require. When the property of Union men -was destroyed remuneration should be made them from the property of the -disloyal. The President seems to have approved of these reprisals. -Nothing more clearly shows the demoralized condition of society in -Tennessee than the necessity of adopting measures similar to those -employed eight centuries before by the Danish and Norman conquerors of -England to protect their followers from private assassination by the -natives. With the natural leaders of the people, including bankers, -physicians and clergymen, encouraging treason, men of inferior -intelligence and station could not be expected to remain peaceful and -contented citizens, and as preachers of sedition seldom lack numerous -and sympathetic audiences the spirit of lawlessness increased. The -Governor himself was threatened with assassination in the public streets -and in public meetings, but he set such menaces at defiance and on at -least one occasion addressed an assembly with his pistol on a desk -before him. - -But the repression of the disloyal and the restoration of order by no -means included the whole of his duties. Functions not less important -remain to be noticed. To the duties of governor and general he added -those of quartermaster and judge. Though thousands of loyal people -flocked to him for arms and supplies, he proved equal to every demand, -and from their number raised an army that did gallant service in the -field. He fed, clothed and sheltered the poor without regard to the army -in which their natural protectors were serving. Thus redressing -grievances, relieving want and reinstating courts he worked with an -intelligent and tireless energy, and when the timid prudence of General -Buell would have allowed Nashville to fall into the hands of the enemy -“the courage of Governor Johnson,” said a panegyrist, “stood a bulwark -for its defence.”[23] He had been scarcely three months in office when -President Lincoln described him as “a true and valuable man, -indispensable to us in Tennessee.” His zeal, his intense fidelity to the -Union, his tremendous energy and undoubted courage peculiarly fitted him -to rule in turbulent times. At the outset the only agencies left for the -protection of life, liberty and property were force and arbitrary will; -these he did not hesitate to employ. - -The foregoing account does not notice his activity in another field. His -ultimate object, the establishment of civil authority throughout -Tennessee, was kept constantly in view. To prepare for this event he -addressed in May, 1862, large assemblies at Nashville and Murfreesboro, -and in June at Columbia and Shelbyville.[24] This work, however, was -brought suddenly to an end later in the summer by General Bragg’s raid -into Kentucky. - -From what has been related it appears, and the opinion will grow -stronger with the progress of this narrative, that in appointing a -military governor of Tennessee President Lincoln intended no more than -to revive an office already known to the people of the United States; -and though Mr. Johnson was expected ultimately to reinaugurate a loyal -government throughout the State, his office was regarded primarily as an -inexpensive means of holding territory wrested from, and assisting in -military operations against, an enemy. Indeed, it is only in this view -that his administration of the office can be regarded as a success, and -that it was so considered in the North his nomination on the ticket with -Mr. Lincoln is undoubted proof. - -Besides several colored regiments, the records for 1863 show that 25,000 -Tennesseeans were then serving in the Union army, and every succeeding -month increased their number.[25] That the political advantage to be -gained by restoring a loyal government was not the only or even the -principal purpose of the President may be fairly inferred from the -following letter: - - I am told you have at least thought of raising a negro military - force. In my opinion the country now needs no specific thing so much - as some man of your ability and position to go to this work. When I - speak of your position, I mean that of an eminent citizen of a slave - state and himself a slaveholder. The colored population is the great - available and yet un-availed of force for restoring the Union. The - bare sight of 50,000 armed and drilled black soldiers upon the banks - of the Mississippi would end the rebellion at once; and who doubts - that we can present that sight if we but take hold in earnest? If - you have been thinking of it, please do not dismiss the thought.[26] - -Besides supporting the view of the military governors taken above, this -letter also makes it evident that the pressure of events had already -convinced Mr. Lincoln that to save the Union it was necessary to possess -the untrammeled use of every national resource. - -As early as June 8, 1862, the State was included in the department of -General Halleck, who ten days later was requested by Mr. Lincoln to -report any information of value relative thereto. The thought of a -movement into East Tennessee was in the mind of the President again on -June 30, when he informed the commander that he regarded the possession -of the railroad near Cleveland fully as important as the taking of -Richmond. Halleck, concurring in this opinion, telegraphed Buell that -“the capture of East Tennessee should be the main object of the -campaign,” the department commander believing its occupation would put -an end to guerrilla warfare both in that region and Kentucky. - -The inactivity of General Rosecrans for six months after the battle of -Murfreesboro left in the interior of the State a strong Confederate -force whose presence discouraged all but the most pronounced loyalists; -these, by means of meetings and speeches, kept a latent Union feeling -alive. A convention, called by Brownlow, Maynard and others, was held at -Nashville, July 1, 1863. Delegates were in attendance from forty -counties; they took an oath of allegiance to the United States, and in a -set of resolutions pronounced the various secession laws and ordinances -void. Deeming it vitally important to choose a legislature, they invited -Governor Johnson to issue writs of election as soon as expedient; with -this request, however, he did not then think it prudent to comply. - -Other eyes were observing with interest the progress of events within -the State. General Hurlbut, writing from Memphis, August 11, 1863, -relative to the political situation in Arkansas, said he was satisfied -that Tennessee was “ready, by overwhelming majorities, to repeal the act -of secession, establish a fair system of gradual emancipation, and -tender herself back to the Union. I have discouraged [he said] any -action on this subject here until East Tennessee is delivered. When that -is done, so that her powerful voice may be heard, let Governor Johnson -call an election for members of the Legislature, and that Legislature -call a Convention, and in sixty days the work will be done.”[27] - -This desirable event was not long delayed, for by brilliant though -bloodless victories both Knoxville and Chattanooga early in the -following month were in possession of Federal armies. Then President -Lincoln wrote his letter of September 11, which, because of its great -importance, deserves to be reproduced in full: - - All Tennessee is now clear of armed insurrectionists. You need not - to be reminded that it is the nick of time for reinaugurating a - loyal State government. Not a moment should be lost. You and the - coöperating friends there can better judge of the ways and means - than can be judged by any here. I only offer a few suggestions. - The reinauguration must not be such as to give control of the - State and its representation in Congress to the enemies of the - Union, driving its friends there into political exile. The whole - struggle for Tennessee will have been profitless to both State and - nation if it so ends that Governor Johnson is put down and - Governor Harris is put up. It must not be so. You must have it - otherwise. Let the reconstruction be the work of such men only as - can be trusted for the Union. Exclude all others, and trust that - your government so organized will be recognized here as being the - one of republican form to be guaranteed to the State, and to be - protected against invasion and domestic violence. It is something - on the question of time to remember that it cannot be known who is - next to occupy the position I now hold, nor what he will do. I see - that you have declared in favor of emancipation in Tennessee, for - which may God bless you. Get emancipation into your new State - Government—Constitution—and there will be no such word as fail for - your case. The raising of colored troops, I think, will greatly - help every way.[28] - -The reference in this communication to emancipation is explained by the -fact that, in deference to the wishes of Andrew Johnson and other -Tennessee loyalists, the President in his proclamation of January 1, -1863, had not mentioned that State.[29] - -Believing that his commission as military governor did not confer upon -him powers adequate to every emergency that might arise in the important -work of restoring a loyal government Mr. Johnson, to supply this -deficiency, prepared a letter which he submitted for the approval of -President Lincoln, who amended or modified it to read as follows: - - In addition to the matters contained in the orders and instructions - given you by the Secretary of War, you are hereby authorized to - exercise such powers as may be necessary and proper to enable the - loyal people of Tennessee to present such a republican form of State - government as will entitle the State to the guaranty of the United - States therefor, and to be protected under such State government by - the United States against invasion and domestic violence, all - according to the fourth section of the fourth article of the - Constitution of the United States.[30] - -This supplemental authority is dated September 19, and the private -letter enclosing it informs Governor Johnson why his draft was altered. - -It was about this time, while the President was thus urging Governor -Johnson, that General Rosecrans, surrounded by a victorious enemy, -inquired of Mr. Lincoln whether it would not be well “to offer a general -amnesty to all officers and soldiers in the Rebellion?” In his reply -next day the President, referring first, as was his wont, to the -military situation, added, “I intend doing something like what you -suggest whenever the case shall appear ripe enough to have it accepted -in the true understanding rather than as a confession of weakness and -fear.”[31] The removal soon after of General Rosecrans from his command -and the fortunate appearance at Chattanooga of those great soldiers of -the first rank, Grant, Sherman, Thomas and Sheridan, made at Lookout -Mountain and Mission Ridge the occasion which the President so much -desired, and on December 8, 1863, he issued his famous Proclamation of -Amnesty and Reconstruction, a copy of which was transmitted with his -third annual message to Congress. The impression which its candid tone -produces on the mind of a student to-day was the impression made at the -time of its appearance upon thoughtful and enlightened men everywhere. -Nicolay and Hay in an interesting chapter of their valuable history -describe the satisfaction, and even enthusiasm, with which it was -received by the adherents of all parties in Congress. This proclamation, -around which the later controversy raged, was authorized by act of -Congress approved July 17, 1862, which, among other provisions, -empowered the President “at any time” thereafter “to extend to persons -who may have participated in the existing Rebellion in any State or part -thereof, pardon and amnesty, with such exceptions and at such time and -on such conditions as he may deem expedient for the public welfare.” The -time for the exercise of this discretion Mr. Lincoln believed had now -arrived. Like every measure conceived in his fruitful mind it had been -maturely considered and was especially fortunate in being introduced by -the concluding paragraphs of the message. The very note of sincerity -itself rings in these weighty lines. Perhaps it was the suggestion of -unuttered arguments that gave a temporary adherence to the Executive -plan, which, we are told, was put forth because “It is now desired by -some persons heretofore engaged in said rebellion to resume their -allegiance to the United States, and to reinaugurate loyal State -governments within and for their respective States.” The proclamation -informed “all persons who have, directly or by implication, participated -in the existing rebellion, except as hereinafter excepted, that a full -pardon is hereby granted to them and each of them, with restoration of -all rights of property, except as to slaves, and in property cases where -rights of third parties shall have intervened, and upon the condition -that every such person shall take and subscribe an oath, and -thenceforward keep and maintain said oath inviolate; and which oath -shall be registered for permanent preservation.” This oath bound the -subscriber thenceforth to “faithfully support, protect, and defend the -Constitution of the United States, and the union of the States -thereunder”; to “abide by and faithfully support all acts of Congress -passed during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves” unless -repealed, modified or held void by Congress, or by decision of the -Supreme Court; to support “all proclamations of the President made -during the existing rebellion having reference to slaves, so long and so -far as not modified or declared void by decision of the Supreme Court.” - -The classes excepted from the benefits of the amnesty were all persons -“who are, or shall have been, civil or diplomatic officers or agents of -the so-called Confederate Government; all who have left judicial -stations under the United States to aid the rebellion; all who are, or -shall have been, military or naval officers of said so-called -Confederate Government above the rank of colonel in the army or -lieutenant in the navy; all who left seats in the United States Congress -to aid the rebellion; all who resigned commissions in the Army or Navy -of the United States and afterward aided the rebellion; and all who have -engaged in any way in treating colored persons, or white persons in -charge of such, otherwise than lawfully as prisoners of war, and which -persons may have been found in the United States service, as soldiers, -seamen, or in any other capacity.”[32] - -The proclamation provided further that whenever, in any of the States in -rebellion, “a number of persons, not less than one tenth in number of -the votes cast in such State at the presidential election” of 1860, -“each having taken the oath aforesaid and not having since violated it, -and being a qualified voter by the election law of the State existing -immediately before the so-called act of secession, and excluding all -others, shall reëstablish a State government which shall be republican, -and in nowise contravening said oath, such shall be recognized as the -true government of the State and the State shall receive thereunder the -benefits of the Constitutional provision which declares that ‘The United -States shall guaranty to every State in this Union a republican form of -Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and, on -application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the -legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.’” - -Any provision adopted by such State relative to its freed people “which -shall recognize and declare their permanent freedom, provide for their -education, and which may yet be consistent as a temporary arrangement -with their present condition as a laboring, landless, and homeless -class, will not be objected to by the national executive.” In -constructing a loyal government in any State, it was thought not -improper to suggest that “the name of the State, the boundary, the -subdivisions, the constitution, and the general code of laws, as before -the rebellion, be maintained, subject only to the modifications made -necessary by the conditions hereinbefore stated, and such others, if -any, not contravening said conditions, and which may be deemed expedient -by those framing the new State government.” - -To avoid every occasion of misunderstanding it was expressly stated that -the proclamation “has no reference to States wherein loyal State -governments have all the while been maintained.” The President -disclaimed any authority to admit members to seats in Congress, each -House being “the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of -its own members.”[33] - -In conclusion it was observed that “while the mode presented is the best -the executive can suggest, with his present impressions, it must not be -understood that no other possible mode would be acceptable.”[34] - -To get an enrollment of those willing to take the oath prescribed in the -amnesty proclamation the President, about the middle of January, 1864, -sent an agent to Tennessee, as he had already sent one to Louisiana and -to Arkansas. About the same time Governor Johnson himself was -considering the subject of reconstruction; and on the 21st, to begin -proceedings, called a public meeting at Nashville. It was on this -occasion that he said: “Treason must be made odious, traitors must be -punished and impoverished;” slavery he pronounced dead and declared that -reconstruction must leave it out of view. The meeting, which was largely -attended, adopted resolutions recommending a constitutional convention -and pledged support of only those candidates who favored immediate and -universal emancipation. The Governor, however, was cautious, and, -January 26, 1864, issued a call for an election, on the first Saturday -of March following, for the choice of only county officers. - -The ex-Confederate and the loyalist having been placed by the amnesty -proclamation on an equal footing, some dissatisfaction was aroused among -unconditional Union men. To retain the confidence of this class and to -set at rest the hostile feeling thus excited in the State, Governor -Johnson framed the oath of allegiance more stringently than Mr. Lincoln -had done. This variance occasioned discussion and delay and brought -inquiries and protests to the President, who, to prevent confusion, -telegraphed, February 20, 1864, Warren Jordan, of Nashville, as follows: - - In county elections you had better stand by Governor Johnson’s plan; - otherwise you will have conflict and confusion. I have seen his - plan.[35] - -A week later he assured the Hon. E. H. East, Secretary of State for -Tennessee, that - - There is no conflict between the oath of amnesty in my proclamation - of eighth December, 1863, and that prescribed by Governor Johnson in - his proclamation of the twenty-sixth ultimo.[36] - -While it is perfectly true that no discrepancy existed between the -proclamation of the President and that of the military governor, the -latter required an additional test. This the communication to Mr. East -does not discuss. - -To avoid, however, any possible mischief from this source Mr. Lincoln, -March 26, issued a supplemental proclamation which explained that the -amnesty applied only to “persons who being yet at large and free from -any arrest, confinement, or duress, shall voluntarily come forward and -take the said oath, with the purpose of restoring peace and establishing -the national authority.”[37] Prisoners excluded from the amnesty offered -in the proclamation of December 8, like all other offenders, might apply -to the executive for clemency and have their applications receive due -consideration. This oath, it was made known, could be taken before any -commissioned officer of the United States, civil, military or naval, or -before any officer authorized to administer oaths, in a State or -Territory not in insurrection. Such officers were empowered to give -certificates thereon to persons by whom the oath was taken and -subscribed. The original records, after transmission to the Department -of State, were to be there deposited and to remain in the Government -archives. The Secretary of State was required to keep a register of such -oaths and upon application to issue certificates in proper cases in the -customary form. - -Meanwhile an election, the returns of which are extremely meagre, had -been held on March 5 for the choice of county officers. Though the event -was not without influence in confirming the faith of Unionists, it was -chiefly of value in attracting the attention of the disloyal to the -chances afforded by the proclamation of rehabilitating themselves in -their former political rights. The result, however, was not so favorable -as was expected by Governor Johnson or the President, and reconstruction -in Tennessee once more sank to rest. From this condition it was again -revived by the irrepressible Union men of the State. The East Tennessee -convention of 1861, by appointing a permanent committee, had kept its -organization alive. In April or May, 1864, this body called a convention -at Knoxville to discuss reconstruction. Of this gathering one element -favored the Crittenden Resolutions; the other, immediate emancipation. -Probably it was this antagonism that prevented further action. The next -we hear is that Brownlow and others signed a call for a second -convention, which was held at Nashville on September 5. In this body -forty or fifty counties were represented, some of them irregularly; that -is, by volunteer delegates. This assembly recommended the election of a -constitutional convention, the abolition of slavery in the State, and -provided for taking part in the approaching Presidential election. The -programme, however, was only partially carried out. On September 30, -Governor Johnson issued a proclamation for holding the election, at -which Union voters, so far as the unsettled condition of military -operations permitted, cast their ballots for electors of President and -Vice-President. It does not appear that in this election any attempt was -made to choose a governor, a legislature or a constitutional convention; -but that which met in July, 1863, constituted an executive committee, -composed of five members from each division of the State, which after -the Presidential election issued calls for a State convention at -Nashville, December 19, 1864. “The people meet,” said the call, “to take -such steps as wisdom may direct to restore the State of Tennessee to its -once honored status in the great national Union. - - * * * * * - -“If you cannot meet in your counties, come upon your own personal -responsibility. It is the assembling of Union men for the restoration of -their own commonwealth to life and a career of success.”[38] - -Hood’s advance upon Nashville preventing a response to this address, the -convention did not meet till January 9, 1865. The enemy had then been -dispersed. The State being free from further alarms of war, the -convention met and proposed important alterations in the State -constitution. - -The first article provided: “That slavery and involuntary servitude, -except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly -convicted, are hereby forever abolished and prohibited throughout the -State”; also that “The legislature shall make no law recognizing the -right of property in man.” The old constitution of Tennessee prohibited -the assembly from passing laws to emancipate slaves without the consent -of the owner; that prohibition was now removed. “The declaration of -independence and ordinance dissolving the federal relations between the -State of Tennessee and the United States of America,” passed by the -Legislature, May 6, 1861, was abrogated and declared “an act of treason -and usurpation, unconstitutional, null and void.” All laws, ordinances, -and resolutions of the usurped State government passed on and after the -6th day of May, 1861, providing for the issuance of State bonds; also -all notes of the Bank of Tennessee or any of its branches issued on or -after May 6, 1861, and all debts created in the name of the State by -said authority were declared unconstitutional, null and void. Future -legislatures were restrained from the redemption of said bonds. It was -further provided that “The qualification of voters and the limitation of -the elective franchise may be determined by the general assembly, which -shall first assemble under the amended constitution.” - -The convention completed its labors on January 26, 1865. The amendatory -articles were submitted, February 22, to the people, and ratified by a -vote of 21,104 to 40. The schedule provided in the event of ratification -that the loyal people of the State should, on the 4th of March next -thereafter, proceed by _general ticket_ to elect a governor and members -to the general assembly to meet in the capitol at Nashville on the first -Monday of April, 1865. - -A proclamation of Governor Johnson, issued on January 26, referred to -the respectable character of the convention and commended its wisdom in -submitting for the approval of the electors the result of its -deliberations. His executive powers had been employed to enable the -people freely to express their judgment on the grave question before -them. Provision, he declared, would be made to collect the sentiments of -loyal Tennesseeans in the army. The paper concludes with this vigorous -exhortation: “Strike down at one blow the institution of slavery, remove -the disturbing element from your midst, and by united action restore the -State to its ancient moorings again, and you may confidently expect the -speedy return of peace, happiness, and prosperity.”[39] - -About a month later, February 25, he had the happiness to congratulate -the people of Tennessee on the favorable result of the election. By -their solemn act at the ballot-box the shackles had been stricken from -the limbs of more than 275,000 bondmen. - -The convention which proposed the constitutional amendments had, in -anticipation of its ratification, nominated William G. [“Parson”] -Brownlow for Governor, and recommended a full legislative ticket. The -nominee of the convention was chosen March 4, almost without opposition, -receiving 23,352 votes against 35 scattering. Having been elected on a -general ticket the members of both the Senate and House of -Representatives received the same support as the Governor. The -Legislature met at Nashville, and in a few days thereafter Mr. Brownlow -was inaugurated. Civil administration was thus formally begun. - -That the successive steps to restoration in Tennessee may be easily -traced, the narrative has not been interrupted to relate even matters of -undoubted importance. Almost a year before the occurrences described, -the Republican national convention had assembled in the city of -Baltimore, and on June 6, 1864, unanimously nominated Andrew Johnson for -Vice-President on the ticket with Mr. Lincoln. Tidings of the fact -aroused great enthusiasm when it became known in Nashville. In -addressing an immense meeting called for that occasion Governor Johnson, -among other things, said: “While society is in this disordered state, -and we are seeking security, let us fix the foundations of our -government on principles of eternal justice, which will endure for all -time. There are those in our midst who are for perpetuating the -institution of slavery. Let me say to you, Tennesseeans, and men from -the Northern States, that slavery is dead. It was not murdered by me. I -told you long ago what the result would be if you endeavored to go out -of the Union to save slavery; and that the result would be bloodshed, -rapine, devastated fields, plundered villages and cities; and therefore -I urged you to remain in the Union. In trying to save slavery you killed -it, and lost your own freedom.”[40] - -In his letter to Hon. William Dennison, accepting the nomination, he -wrote: - - The authority of the Government is supreme, and will admit of no - rivalry. No institution can rise above it whether it be slavery or - any organized power. In our happy form of government all must be - subordinate to the will of the people, when reflected through the - Constitution and the laws made pursuant thereto—State or Federal. - This great principle lies at the foundation of every government, and - cannot be disregarded without the destruction of the government - itself. - - In accepting the nomination I might here close, but I cannot forego - the opportunity of saying to my old friends of the Democratic party - _proper_, with whom I have so long and pleasantly been associated, - that the hour has now come when that great party can justly - vindicate its devotion to true democratic policy and measures of - expediency. The war is a war of great principles. It involves the - supremacy and life of the Government itself. If the rebellion - triumphs, free government—North and South—fails. If, on the other - hand, the Government is successful, as I do not doubt, its destiny - is fixed, its basis permanent and enduring, and its career of honor - and glory just begun. In a great contest like this, for the - existence of free government, the path of duty is patriotism and - principle. Minor considerations and questions of administrative - policy should give way to the higher duty _of first preserving the - Government_, and then there will be time enough to wrangle over the - men and measures pertaining to its administration.[41] - -For reasons at which Mr. Lincoln hinted in his letter of March 26, 1863, -few men in Congress exerted in the beginning of the war so decided an -influence upon public opinion in the North as did Mr. Johnson. His -conduct as military governor in no way diminished this popularity. His -courage in that trying position no less than his devotion to the -interests of the Union won him ardent admirers in every loyal State. - -Vice-President Hamlin appears to have been the victim of an intrigue -which represented him as being no material source of strength to the -government and as scarcely loyal to the administration. This injurious -suspicion, which seems to have had no substantial basis in truth, -happened to coincide with a growing conviction that the Republican party -should strengthen itself by placing on the ticket with Lincoln some -prominent leader of the opposition. In this connection the names of -General Butler, John A. Dix, Daniel S. Dickinson and Andrew Johnson were -mentioned. The last named was charged in his administration of the -office of military governor with harshness and even with oppression. -Investigation proved these rumors to be without foundation, and Mr. -Lincoln was not displeased to find them groundless. It does not appear -that he was especially favorable to Johnson, but he regarded him as -indispensable to the Union cause in Tennessee; Johnson was a -slave-holder, was somewhat more outspoken than Butler or Dix, and a more -conspicuous representative of the large class known as War Democrats; -above all he was an able exponent of Southern Union sentiment and he -came from the very heart of the Confederacy. Perhaps no single element -of strength made him more acceptable to the majority of the convention -than this last consideration. Even these qualifications might not have -singled him out for the distinction conferred were it not for the -enthusiasm created by a remarkable speech of Horace Maynard, which -mentioned Mr. Johnson as a man who “stood in the furnace of treason.” -His administration as military governor had been distinguished for vigor -and ability, and it does not appear that the radical Republicans then -regarded his State without the Union. Some of his measures were -undoubtedly severe, but the peculiar situation in Tennessee required the -employment of methods not adapted to times of peace. Mr. Lincoln could -not, of course, show his hand in the Baltimore convention. In fact he -repeatedly declined to interfere.[42] - -On October 15, 1864, the ten electors on the McClellan ticket -presented through Mr. John Lellyett, one of their number, a protest -to the President against the proclamation published by Governor -Johnson relative to the pending election. His paper, they asserted, -contained provisions for holding elections which differed materially -from the mode prescribed by the laws of Tennessee. The proclamation, -it was alleged, would admit persons to vote who were not entitled by -the State constitution to participate in the election; by another -provision which authorized the opening of but one polling-place in -each county, many legal voters would be unable to exercise the -franchise. The unusual and impracticable test oath proposed, was -stated as a further grievance, and they complained generally of -military interference with the freedom of elections. To their -representations Mr. Lincoln replied orally that General McClellan -and his friends could manage their side of the contest in their own -way. He could manage his side of it in his way.[43] In a written -reply of the 22d, however, the President said that he perceived no -military reason for interfering in the matter, and on the same -occasion reminded the protestants that the conducting of a -Presidential election in Tennessee under the old code had become an -impossibility.[44] - -In their reply to the written communication of the President, they -asserted that an orderly meeting of General McClellan’s friends had been -broken up by Union soldiers, and a reign of terror inaugurated in -Nashville. These acts having been countenanced by Governor Johnson, they -announced the withdrawal of the McClellan electoral ticket in -Tennessee.[45] - -In these circumstances the Union electors were, of course, chosen; but -their votes, though offered, were not counted by Congress in the joint -convention of February 8, 1865, for the reason that Tennessee was on -November 8 preceding in such a state that no free election was held.[46] - ------ - -Footnote 1: - - McPherson’s Political History of the United States, p. 1. - -Footnote 2: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 389–399; “Parson” Brownlow’s Book, pp. 54, - 159, 160; Lalor’s Cyclopedia of Political Science, Political Economy - and United States History, Vol. III. p. 698. - -Footnote 3: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 112. The - edition of Nicolay and Hay is used throughout. - -Footnote 4: - - The Loyal Mountaineers of Tennessee, p. 24. - -Footnote 5: - - More correctly, 301,056. Ibid. - -Footnote 6: - - The Loyal Mountaineers of Tennessee, p. 32. - -Footnote 7: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 8: - - Thirty years before President Lincoln published his Emancipation - Proclamation Great Britain abolished slavery throughout her colonies. - Naturally this action was viewed in no friendly spirit by the slave - interest in America, for it brought the free negro to the very door of - the Southern States, and though it was regarded as a menace to the - “peculiar institution,” it was not until a positive loss was sustained - that any controversy arose with England. In October, 1841, the brig - _Creole_, of Richmond, with a cargo of 135 slaves left Hampton Roads - for New Orleans. The negroes, under Madison Washington, killed one of - the owners, took possession of the vessel and steered her into the - port of Nassau. There those slaves not expressly charged with murder - were set at liberty, and though the administration demanded their - surrender they were not given up. The experience of the _Creole_ was - not singular, several cases of a similar nature being recorded. These - facts showed the danger of navigating the Bahama channel after 1833, - and at least one reason for preferring the overland route down the - Tennessee valley was an expectation of avoiding such accidents.—(See - Wilson’s Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, Vol. I. pp. 443–444; - Lalor’s Cyclopedia of Political Science, etc., Vol. I. pp. 709–710.) - -Footnote 9: - - Brownlow’s Book, p. 52. - -Footnote 10: - - The Loyal Mountaineers of Tennessee, pp. 80–81. - -Footnote 11: - - Brownlow’s Book, p. 67. - -Footnote 12: - - Art. I. sec. 10, Constitution of the United States. - -Footnote 13: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 5. - -Footnote 14: - - Misc. Doc. No. 55, H. of R., 1 Sess. 39th Cong., p. 5. - -Footnote 15: - - Why The Solid South? p. 170. - -Footnote 16: - - Cutt’s Conquest of California and New Mexico, p. 246. - -Footnote 17: - - Statesman’s Manual, Vol. IV. p. 1742. - -Footnote 18: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 19: - - The Lost Cause, p. 209. - -Footnote 20: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, p. 763. - -Footnote 21: - - Life and Speeches of Andrew Johnson, pp. 451–456. Boston: Little, - Brown & Co. 1866. - -Footnote 22: - - Life, Speeches, and Services of Andrew Johnson, pp. 101–104. - Philadelphia: T. B. Peterson & Brothers. - -Footnote 23: - - Memorial Addresses on the Life and Character of Andrew Johnson, pp. - 76–80; Memoir by Frank Moore, pp. xxvi-xxvii in Life and Speeches of - Andrew Johnson. Boston: Little, Brown & Co. - -Footnote 24: - - Life of Andrew Johnson, pp. 98–101; Philadelphia: T. B. Peterson & - Brothers. - -Footnote 25: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 828. - -Footnote 26: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 318. - -Footnote 27: - - Abraham Lincoln, A History by Nicolay & Hay, Vol. VIII. p. 440. - -Footnote 28: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 405. - -Footnote 29: - - History of Abraham Lincoln, by Isaac N. Arnold, p. 303. - -Footnote 30: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 408. - -Footnote 31: - - Ibid., p. 419. - -Footnote 32: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 443. - -Footnote 33: - - Art. I. sec. 5, Constitution of the U. S. - -Footnote 34: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 443–444. - -Footnote 35: - - Ibid., p. 486. - -Footnote 36: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 487. - -Footnote 37: - - Ibid., pp. 504–505. - -Footnote 38: - - Misc. Doc. No. 55, p. 5, H. of R., 1 Sess. 39th Cong. - -Footnote 39: - - Misc. Doc. No. 55, p. 9, H. of R., 1 Sess. 39th Cong. - -Footnote 40: - - Life of Andrew Johnson, pp. 159–160. - -Footnote 41: - - Life of Andrew Johnson, pp. 160–161. New York: D. Appleton & Co., - 1866. - -Footnote 42: - - McClure’s Lincoln and Men of War Times, pp. 106–108; Blaine’s Twenty - Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 7; Hamlin’s Life and Times of Hannibal - Hamlin, pp. 449–489 and 591–615. - -Footnote 43: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 438–439. - -Footnote 44: - - Ibid., p. 425. - -Footnote 45: - - Ibid., p. 441. - -Footnote 46: - - For a discussion of this subject see Chapter IX. - - - - - II - LOUISIANA - - -The first movement toward reconstruction in Louisiana, as in the case of -Tennessee, was bound up with the war powers of the President, and, no -doubt, was made with some expectation of aiding his military plans. The -thought of restoring a loyal government there proceeded quite naturally -from the peculiar situation in the State. Though not so nearly unanimous -for secession as South Carolina, her people acted with energy and -promptness when they received tidings of “this last insult and outrage,” -as the election of Mr. Lincoln was sensationally styled.[47] Three days -were deemed sufficient for deliberation, and the convention, January 25, -1861, passed an ordinance of secession. Two weeks before this assembly -met at Baton Rouge, the arsenal and the forts, a public building and a -revenue cutter had been seized by State troops from New Orleans. In the -mint and the custom house of that city more than half a million dollars -was secured for the Confederate States, and in accepting these funds the -Montgomery Congress expressed its “high sense of the patriotic -liberality” of Louisiana.[48] This act of generosity, however, loses -much of its merit when it is remembered that both the coin and bullion -in the mint, as well as the customs, belonged to the Federal government. -Besides, there was then no scarcity of money in the State, for Northern -enterprise had found for her cotton and her sugar profitable markets -both at home and abroad. It was benefits of this sort, enjoyed in the -Union, that enabled Governor Moore in January, 1861, to report to his -Legislature an overflowing treasury.[49] This undoubted prosperity -served only to aggravate the war fever. Enthusiasm in New Orleans was -only less ardent and general than in Charleston. Business was almost -suspended, and by the first of June no less than 16,000 residents of -Louisiana were serving in the Confederate army.[50] - -President Lincoln’s proclamation of April 19 preceding had inaugurated a -blockade of every port within the State. The early days of July -witnessed the disappearance of Governor Moore’s boasted surplus, and -during the summer New Orleans became bankrupt;[51] her foreign commerce -was destroyed by the blockade, her credit had vanished. Though -enlistments continued without interruption, signs of financial distress -multiplied with the approach of winter. Rebellion, it was soon -discovered, was not attended with unmixed blessings; bad government had -produced its usual consequences, and when Governor Taylor, late in the -summer of 1862, undertook to raise an army for the defence of his State -he was surprised at the universal apathy; neglect and disaster had -brought disunionists to a condition little short of hostility to the -Richmond government.[52] - -Union men in southern Louisiana had not been unobservant of these signs; -permanent residents of this portion of the State had, for the most part, -maintained their loyalty to the General Government. Indeed, a decided -majority of them in the election of 1860 had voted for Bell and Douglas, -and though here, as elsewhere in the South, ardent secessionists were -found, the proceedings in the convention took the Union men by -surprise.[53] In the interval they had refrained from violence, but had -not become reconciled to oppression. - -The importance of New Orleans to their cause had not been overlooked by -Confederate authorities, and that city was held firmly in their grasp -until the fleet of Captain Farragut, toward the close of April, 1862, -steamed up in hostile array before its defences. The occupation by -General Butler’s army of this strategic position ended in southern -Louisiana the activity of the more extreme secessionists, and though -some restlessness at the presence of Federal forces was pretended by -even Union men, they had not until the surrender made any serious effort -to help themselves. Under protection of the army, however, they -commenced immediately to form Union associations for the purpose of -developing the loyal sentiment in this part of the State. Resolutions -recommending an election were passed by these organizations; newspapers -discussed the question, and in various ways it was forced upon the -attention of the President.[54] The more prudent and intelligent among -them began under encouragement of Federal troops to consider measures -for relief; the less practical commenced writing complaints to friends -in the North. - -In a private letter of July 26, 1862, to Hon. Reverdy Johnson, then in -New Orleans investigating General Butler’s relations with foreign -consuls, Mr. Lincoln, noticing a reference to the restlessness of the -people under the rule of General Phelps, asks the Maryland Senator to -pardon him for believing the complaint “a false pretense.” A way to -avert the inconveniences arising from military occupation was for the -people of Louisiana “simply to take their place in the Union upon the -old terms.”[55] Writing two days later to Cuthbert Bullett, a Southern -gentleman who appears to have enjoyed his personal esteem and -confidence, the President, after mentioning difficulties in the way of -establishing civil authority in the State, suggested a method of -avoiding them: “The people of Louisiana who wish protection to person -and property,” he wrote, “have but to reach forth their hands and take -it. Let them in good faith reinaugurate the national authority, and set -up a State government conforming thereto under the Constitution. They -know how to do it, and can have the protection of the army while doing -it. The army will be withdrawn so soon as such State government can -dispense with its presence; and the people of the State can then, upon -the old constitutional terms, govern themselves to their own -liking.”[56] If, however, Union men exerted themselves no further than -criticism of the Federal Government, it was more than intimated that -there were to be expected greater injuries than military necessity had -yet inflicted. - -The pressure of events appears even then to have been forcing the -President in the direction of emancipation. To August Belmont, of New -York, who enclosed the complaints of a New Orleans correspondent, Mr. -Lincoln, July 31, 1862, repeated in substance what had already been -written to Mr. Bullett, and added: “Those enemies must understand that -they cannot experiment for ten years trying to destroy the government, -and if they fail still come back into the Union unhurt. If they expect -in any contingency to ever have the Union as it was, I join with the -writer [Mr. Belmont’s correspondent] in saying, ‘Now is the time.’”[57] - -The appointment in August, 1862, of General George F. Shepley as -military governor may be regarded as the first act in the restoration of -a loyal government for Louisiana. His selection, though probably -intended as a private commendation of the judgment of General Butler, -who had already designated him as Mayor of New Orleans, was never -considered by that officer adequate atonement for the public censure -implied in his removal, December, 1862, from command of the Department -of the Gulf. - -Upon the Federal occupation of New Orleans and adjacent territory all -functions of the disloyal government therein immediately ceased. As -controversies were constantly arising the establishment of courts had -become a necessity. At first these questions were for the most part -adjudicated by General Butler himself, but the pressure of military and -other affairs compelled him soon to refer their settlement to civilians -or to army officers especially chosen for the purpose. This uncertain -system of justice, though immeasurably better than none, led to the -institution of courts each of which was known by the name of the officer -holding it. Accused persons were brought to trial, and judgments -executed by soldiers detailed for such duty. No formal record of -proceedings in these tribunals appears to have been kept, though -memoranda of judgments rendered were, no doubt, made by an officer who -came eventually to be designated as clerk. - -For the decision of questions relating exclusively to the force under -his command General Butler some time in June, 1862, organized a tribunal -known as the Provost Court of the Army of the United States, over which -Major Joseph M. Bell presided. Questions in no way connected with the -military, especially matters of police and the punishment of crimes, -were often submitted for its determination. Aggrieved persons, without -reflecting upon the consequence of their acts, naturally appealed for -redress to the holder of power. Thus the authority of this institution -silently extended, and by the autumn of 1862 it exercised unquestioned -jurisdiction over all criminal cases arising in the city of New -Orleans.[58] In the absence of courts for adjudicating civil questions -they, too, were referred to its consideration. All functions of -government having been suspended by the capture of the city, it became -the duty of the Federal commander, and his right by the laws of war, to -provide, among other things, for the administration of justice. - -One of the early acts of General Shepley after his appointment as -Military Governor was to establish a system of courts for the State. -Most of the former officials having fled after the surrender, he was -compelled practically to create new tribunals, and this task he greatly -simplified by reviving those institutions of justice with which the -people of Louisiana were already familiar. John S. Whittaker was -accordingly appointed Judge of the Second District Court of the parish -of Orleans. Besides possessing in civil matters the ordinary powers of a -local court the old tribunal of that name had been a court of probates -and successions. The new exercised all the powers of the old court. It -should be remembered, however, that the latter derived its authority -from the laws of Louisiana, while the former owed its existence to the -war powers of the Federal Executive. Its jurisdiction extended to civil -cases generally where the defendant resided in the parish of Orleans or -was a non-resident of the State.[59] - -Judge Hiestand was appointed to the bench of the Fourth District Court -of the parish of Orleans. Besides possessing the general authority of -other district courts in that parish it entertained appeals from -justices’ courts; indeed, these constituted a large part of its -business.[60] - -The Sixth District Court of the parish of Orleans, revived soon after -the capture of the city, is, because of the incumbent of that bench, -Judge Rufus K. Howell, of greater interest than either of the preceding. -Under a commission received from the State of Louisiana before its -attempted secession he continued to preside over that tribunal while the -disunion party ruled New Orleans, and performed his functions up to the -very hour of its surrender to the Federal authorities. Having early -taken the oath of allegiance to the national Government he was permitted -to resume his functions.[61] Like the tribunals mentioned, this court -retained and exercised all the powers that it possessed as originally -constituted. - -These courts, instituted during September and October, 1862, entered -upon the discharge of their duties about the 1st of November following. -They were the only tribunals of civil jurisdiction in Louisiana, and -that jurisdiction was limited, as against defendants resident of the -State, to citizens of the parish of Orleans. As to inhabitants beyond -the limits of that parish there was no court in which they could be -sued. Though the Federal forces held several counties in this condition, -their tenure fluctuated with the fortunes of war. A court was therefore -needed whose jurisdiction would expand with the advance, and contract -with the retreat, of the Union armies. The Provost Court was not deemed -adequate, and indeed was never designed to meet such contingencies. To -supply this deficiency a tribunal of very extensive powers, designated -as “a court of record for the State of Louisiana,” was constituted by -Executive order on October 20. Of this flexible institution Charles A. -Peabody, of New York, a friend of Secretary Seward, was made provisional -judge. Besides being empowered to select a prosecuting attorney, a -marshal and a clerk, and to make rules for the exercise of his -jurisdiction, he was authorized “to hear, try and determine all causes, -civil and criminal, including causes in law, equity, revenue and -admiralty, and particularly all such powers and jurisdiction as belong -to the District and Circuit Courts of the United States, conforming his -proceedings, so far as possible, to the course of proceedings and -practice which has been customary in the Courts of the United States and -Louisiana—his judgment to be final and conclusive.” These officers were -to be paid out of the contingent fund of the War Department, and a copy -of the Executive order, certified by the Secretary of War, was “held to -be a sufficient commission” for the Judge. - -This institution, made up as to its _personnel_ in the North, was sent -from New York with the great expedition of General Banks constituted and -organized for immediate business to Louisiana. Though Judge Peabody, -accompanied by Augustus de B. Hughes, Isaac Edward Clarke and George D. -Lamont, who had been chosen, respectively, clerk, marshal and -prosecuting attorney, arrived in New Orleans December 15, 1862, the -opening of court was delayed till the 29th of that month by a change of -administration in that Department.[62] - -In addition to the tribunals described many other courts were -established about this time; of these the Supreme Court of Louisiana is -the only one which appears to require especial mention. In former times -under the State judicial system appeals had lain to this institution, -and it was accordingly held that decisions of the courts now created -were subject to its revision. In this manner many of their judgments -were stayed and in suspense, so that the new district courts were of -little practical benefit. The necessity of a tribunal to remedy this -deficiency and adjudicate the accumulated cases of former years soon -became apparent, and in April, 1863, Mr. Peabody was appointed Chief -Justice of the State Supreme Court; associated with him on this bench -were judges chosen from among the people of Louisiana. - -Nearly a week before his appointment of Judge Peabody, Mr. Lincoln, by -the hand of Hon. John E. Bouligny, who had not left his seat in the -House of Representatives when Southern delegations withdrew from -Congress, sent to General Butler, Governor Shepley and other Federal -officers having authority under the United States in Louisiana a -communication requesting each of them to assist Mr. Bouligny in his -effort to secure “peace again upon the old terms under the Constitution -of the United States.”[63] This desirable end was to be attained by the -election of “members to the Congress of the United States particularly, -and perhaps a legislature, State officers, and United States senators -friendly to their object.” Federal officers were instructed to give the -people a chance to express their wishes at these elections. “Follow -forms of law,” wrote the President, “as far as convenient, but at all -events get the expression of the largest number of the people possible. -All see how such action will connect with and affect the proclamation of -September 22. Of course the men elected should be gentlemen of -character, willing to swear support to the Constitution, as of old, and -known to be above reasonable suspicion of duplicity.”[64] - -Loyal leaders, believing that Northern men holding office under the -General Government in Louisiana would be set up as candidates, -communicated their fears to the President, who sent to Governor Shepley -a fortnight before the election a letter of which the essential portion -is as follows: - - We do not particularly need members of Congress from there to enable - us to get along with legislation here. What we do want is the - conclusive evidence that respectable citizens of Louisiana are - willing to be members of Congress and to swear support to the - Constitution and that other respectable citizens there are willing - to vote for them and send them. To send a parcel of Northern men - here as representatives, elected, as would be understood (and - perhaps really so), at the point of the bayonet, would be disgusting - and outrageous; and were I a member of Congress here, I would vote - against admitting any such man to a seat.[65] - -The note of sincerity is unmistakable throughout, and in those -Representatives and Senators opposed to Executive policy the concluding -sentences especially must have excited strange emotions when they -re-read in after years their impassioned attacks in Congress upon that -dark spirit who, it was gravely alleged, labored with might unquestioned -to subordinate the Legislative branch of Government. - -The Union associations referred to appointed committees who waited upon -General Shepley and demanded an election. This he hesitated to call -until considerable pressure had first been exerted. The sentiments of -the President concurring with the local feeling in New Orleans, Shepley -finally yielded, and on November 14, 1862, issued a proclamation for an -election to be held December 3d following. This election, in the -language of his proclamation, was ordered “for the purpose of securing -to the loyal electors” of both the First and Second Congressional -Districts “their appropriate and lawful representation in the House of -Representatives of the United States of America, and of enabling them to -avail themselves of the benefits secured by the proclamation of the -President of the United States to the people of any State, or part of a -State, who shall on the first day of January next be in good faith -represented in the Congress of the United States, by members chosen -thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such -State have participated.”[66] - -In addition to the qualifications prescribed by the laws of Louisiana, -General Shepley required each elector to take an oath of allegiance to -the United States, and from among the old and respected citizens of the -State appointed sheriffs and commissioners of election, who performed -their duties to the entire satisfaction of both candidates and voters. -The army, for reasons given above, refrained from all manner of -interference, and no Federal office-holder was a nominee. - -For the first time in many years, it was admitted, every qualified -elector might freely cast his ballot without fear of intimidation or -violence. In a total of 2,643 votes Benjamin F. Flanders was chosen, -with little opposition, for the First, and Michael Hahn, by a safe -majority, for the Second Congressional District. A larger vote was -actually cast for Flanders than had been received by his predecessor, -and in both districts 7,760 citizens, or about half the usual number, -appeared at the polls. When it is remembered that four thousand soldiers -who enlisted in Butler’s army from this part of the State did not -participate in the contest, that many citizens from this section were -serving in the Confederate army and that not a few Union men were exiles -in the North or in Europe the vote in this election was by no means -light. - -With credentials signed by Governor Shepley, Messrs. Hahn and Flanders -appeared in Washington as claimants for seats in Congress. After a -thorough investigation of the election and several ingenious arguments -in opposition both were admitted, February 17, 1863, though not without -considerable misgiving, as Representatives for the remainder of the -term, which expired March 3 following. For their exclusion the -opposition relied mainly upon these grounds: - -_First._ The election, it was asserted, was brought about by a threat of -interference with slave property if the State was not represented in -Congress by January 1, 1863; this was a measure of coercion, and the -compliance of citizens in appearing at the polls was ascribed to selfish -motives rather than to loyal and patriotic sentiments. - -_Second._ The existence of any vacancy in a constitutional sense was at -least doubtful; and even if vacancies existed in these districts the -authority of a military governor to call an election was denied. - -_Third._ It was objected that Governor Shepley had dispensed with the -registry required by law and had empowered commissioners of election to -decide upon the qualifications of voters; finally, by requiring an oath -of allegiance to the United States, he had imposed upon electors a test -unknown to the laws of Louisiana.[67] - -While the cases of Messrs. Hahn and Flanders were pending the edict of -freedom had gone forth, for the President, as announced in his -preliminary proclamation of September 22, had declared, January 1, 1863, -“as a fit and necessary war measure,” that “all persons held as slaves -within said designated States and parts of States, are and henceforward -shall be free.”[68] Louisiana was named as one of the States in -rebellion. From the operation of this measure, however, the city of New -Orleans and thirteen parishes of the State were excepted. - -The admission, February 17, of Hahn and Flanders gave new life to the -political reorganization of the State.[69] But with this revival of -interest there was discovered among the supporters of the Federal -Government a difference of opinion as to the best course to be pursued -in the circumstances. This division of sentiment arose concerning the -wisdom of retaining slavery in those parishes not included in the -President’s proclamation. The Union associations, each appointing five -delegates, organized what they termed a Free State General Committee -with Thomas J. Durant as president. This body, holding anti-slavery -views and assuming that rebellion had destroyed the fundamental law, -took measures to elect delegates to a general convention for the purpose -of framing a new constitution prohibiting slavery. Their plan was -approved by General Shepley, who, June 12, 1863, appointed Mr. Durant -Attorney-General for the State, with power to act as commissioner of -registration.[70] He was ordered on the same day to make an enrollment -of all free white male citizens of the United States having resided six -months in the State and one month in the parish, who should each take -the oath of allegiance and register “as a voter freely and voluntarily -for the purpose of organizing a State government in Louisiana, loyal to -the Government of the United States.”[71] - -The conservative element, though less active, was by no means -indifferent to these measures, and sent to Washington a committee of -planters to consult the President. They represented in a communication -to him that they had “been delegated to seek of the General Government a -full recognition of all the rights of the State as they existed previous -to the passage of an act of secession, upon the principle of the -existence of the State constitution unimpaired, and no legal act having -transpired that could in any way deprive them of the advantages -conferred by that constitution.” They further requested him to direct -the Military Governor to order an election on the first Monday of -November following for all State and Federal officers.[72] To this -committee, composed of E. E. Malhiot, Bradish Johnson and Thomas -Cottman, Mr. Lincoln, under date of June 19, 1863, replied “that a -respectable portion of the Louisiana people desired to amend their State -constitution, and contemplated holding a State convention for that -object. This fact alone, as it seems to me, is a sufficient reason why -the General Government should not give the committal you seek to the -existing State constitution. I may add that while I do not perceive how -such committal could facilitate our military operations in Louisiana, I -really apprehend it might be so used as to embarrass them.”[73] - -It is evident, when we recall the letter of July 26, 1862, to Reverdy -Johnson, that the President, then only contemplating emancipation, had, -since his proclamation had gone forth, taken much more advanced -ground.[74] The army was still his main reliance, and the wisdom of -restoring a loyal government as well as the method of that restoration -was regarded favorably or otherwise as it appeared to facilitate or -embarrass military operations. - -Relative to an election in November he said, “There is abundant time -without any order or proclamation from me just now.” Though their -request was courteously denied, he assured the committee that the people -of Louisiana should not lack an opportunity for a fair election for both -Federal and State officers by want of anything within his power to give -them.[75] - -The political reorganization of the State was at this point interrupted -by the absence at Port Hudson of General N. P. Banks, then in command of -the Department of the Gulf. So energetic and successful was the -Confederate General Taylor that by July 10, when he received -intelligence of the fall of Port Hudson and the surrender of Vicksburg, -his mounted scouts had been pushed to within sixteen miles of New -Orleans.[76] The surrender in these strongholds of more than 40,000 men -was a crushing blow to the Richmond Government; enough troops were -disengaged by these victories to overwhelm the enemy that menaced New -Orleans, and General Taylor hurriedly concentrated his army in the -valley of the Red River to observe the movements of the Federal -commander. The Union picket line marked at this time the bounds of -Governor Shepley’s civil jurisdiction; indeed, it was not greatly -extended until the surrender of General E. Kirby Smith late in May, -1865, after the engagement at Brazos. Eastern Louisiana, with Alabama -and Mississippi, had passed a few weeks earlier under Federal control. - -The great numbers withdrawn from production in the South combined with a -rigorous enforcement of the blockade had occasioned a cotton famine in -the markets of the world. To relieve this condition an outlet was sought -for the abundant crops of the Red River country; and this fact was -probably, not without considerable influence, in determining the course -of the expedition into Texas, which was intended to accomplish a very -different though scarcely less important purpose. - -Though the vigilance of Mr. Adams, United States Minister to England, -was rewarded by the abandonment in that country of any further attempt -to build cruisers of the Alabama type, the Confederate naval agent by no -means despaired of dealing still severer blows to the commerce of the -North, and, attracted by promises which appear to have been authorized -by the ruler of France, changed his field of activity from Liverpool to -Bordeaux, where a ship-builder was engaged to construct two formidable -rams. With the attempts to get these under the Confederate flag this -essay is not concerned.[77] French interests in Mexico appeared at that -time to require the cultivation of friendly relations with what some -European States believed was destined to become a new power among the -nations of the world; hence Napoleon’s encouragement to the Confederate -representatives abroad. This situation was so seriously regarded by the -Government at Washington that even at considerable sacrifice it was -determined to plant the Union flag somewhere in Texas. To effect this -object General Banks had considered and submitted to the War Department -plans of his own; these, however, appear to have been reluctantly -abandoned because of repeated instructions from General Halleck, and the -movement toward Shreveport in the spring and early summer of 1864 was -begun. From the protracted and envenomed controversy to which it gave -rise among the officers on both sides its disastrous ending is familiar -to all.[78] - -While this joint land and naval expedition was yet in contemplation Mr. -Lincoln found time to inform the Federal commander of his opinions -respecting the establishment of a civil government in Louisiana. In his -letter of August 5, 1863, to General Banks he wrote: - - While I very well know what I would be glad for Louisiana to do, it - is quite a different thing for me to assume direction of the matter. - I would be glad for her to make a new constitution recognizing the - emancipation proclamation, and adopting emancipation in those parts - of the State to which the proclamation does not apply. And while she - is at it, I think it would not be objectionable for her to adopt - some practical system by which the two races could gradually live - themselves out of the old relation to each other, and both come out - better prepared for the new. Education for young blacks should be - included in the plan. After all, the power or element of “contract” - may be sufficient for this probationary period; and, by its - simplicity and flexibility, may be the better. - - As an anti-slavery man, I have a motive to desire emancipation which - pro-slavery men do not have; but even they have strong enough reason - to thus place themselves again under the shield of the Union; and to - thus perpetually hedge against the recurrence of the scenes through - which we are now passing. - -He expressed his approval of the registry which he supposed Mr. Durant -was making with a view to an election for a constitutional convention, -the work of which, he hoped, would reach Washington by the meeting of -Congress in December. Before concluding this letter he added: “For my -own part, I think I shall not, in any event, retract the emancipation -proclamation; nor, as executive, ever return to slavery any person who -is freed by the terms of that proclamation, or by any of the acts of -Congress.”[79] - -He again invites attention to the fact that if Louisiana should send -members to Congress their admission would depend upon the respective -Houses and not to any extent upon the wishes of the Executive. - -Copies of this communication he intended to send to Hahn, Flanders and -Durant. Three months later, when the gentleman last named informed him -that nothing had yet been done toward the enrollment, Mr. Lincoln wrote -immediately to General Banks a letter which at once reveals both the -extent of his interest in this subject and his extreme disappointment on -learning that his wishes had been but little regarded. Flanders, then in -Washington, confirmed the account of Durant. “This disappoints me -bitterly,” said the letter of November 5, 1863, and though the President -did not blame either General Banks or the Louisiana leaders for this -apparent neglect he urged them “to lose no more time.” “I wish him -[General Shepley], ...” continued the letter, “without waiting for more -territory, to go to work and give me a tangible nucleus which the -remainder of the State may rally around as fast as it can, and which I -can at once recognize and sustain as the true State government. And in -that work I wish you and all under your command to give them a hearty -sympathy and support. - -“The instruction to Governor Shepley bases the movement (and rightfully, -too) upon the loyal element. Time is important. There is danger, even -now, that the adverse element seeks insidiously to preoccupy the ground. -If a few professedly loyal men shall draw the disloyal about them, and -colorably set up a State government, repudiating the Emancipation -Proclamation and reëstablishing slavery, I cannot recognize or sustain -their work. I should fall powerless in the attempt. This Government in -such an attitude would be a house divided against itself. - -“I have said, and say again, that if a new State government, acting in -harmony with this government, and consistently with general freedom, -shall think best to adopt a reasonable temporary arrangement in relation -to the landless and homeless freed people, I do not object; but my word -is out to be for and not against them on any question of their permanent -freedom. I do not insist upon such temporary arrangement, but only say -such would not be objectionable to me.”[80] - -It should be remembered that Thomas J. Durant, who was authorized to -make the enrollment as well as to appoint “registers” to assist him, was -spokesman of the wealthy and influential class of planters, or the -conservative element whose interests opposed any disturbance of existing -conditions. He appears to have drawn for the President a somewhat gloomy -picture of the political situation in Louisiana, and finally to have -protested against the government organized by the adverse party. The -outlook there, however, was not so discouraging as represented; for as -early as October 9 Governor Shepley had renewed his order for the -registration, modifying the former one so far as to include “all loyal -citizens.” - -Interest was somewhat quickened by the announcement of certain -conservative leaders of an intention to hold a voluntary election in -conformity with the old constitution and laws of the State. On October -27, 1863, an address signed by the president and vice-president of the -Central Executive Committee was published in the papers of New Orleans. -This appeal, directed to the loyal citizens of Louisiana, begins: - - The want of civil government in our State can, by a proper effort on - your part, soon be supplied, under laws and a constitution formed - and adopted by yourselves in a time of profound peace. It is made - your duty, as well as your right, to meet at the usual places, and - cast your votes for State and parish officers, members of Congress, - and of the State Legislature. - - * * * * * - - The day, as fixed by our laws, is Monday, the 2d day of November - next, 1863. There is nothing [proceeds the address] to prevent your - meeting on the day fixed by law, and selecting your agents to carry - on the affairs of government in our own State. The military will not - interfere with you in the exercise of your civil rights and duties, - and we think we can assure you that your action in this respect will - meet the approval of the National Government. - -The failure of those citizens addressed to exercise their rights, it was -asserted, would subject “the country” to the danger of being thrown as -“vacated” territory into the hands of Congress.[81] - -The Free State Committee having been invited to coöperate, a -correspondence ensued between the rival organizations; but, on the -ground that this movement was both illegal and unjust, the Free State -men declined to participate in the election. In their reply the latter -assert that “There is no law in existence, as stated by you [The -Executive Central Committee], directing elections to be held on the -first Monday of November. - -“The constitution of 1852, as amended by the convention of 1861, was -overthrown and destroyed by the rebellion of the people of Louisiana, -and the subsequent conquest by the arms of the United States does not -restore your political institutions.”[82] - -The reply then proceeds to discuss the injustice of the movement, and -upon this subject its reasoning is entitled to more respect. As to the -status of the constitution of 1852, it is not easy to comprehend how the -secession convention, a body universally regarded as revolutionary, -could amend, in the manner attempted, the fundamental law, seeing that -this revolution was not yet crowned with success. - -Though no general election was held in response to this address, voting -took place in two parishes, and certain persons were chosen as -Representatives in Congress. Before giving an account of this election -of November 2, 1863, it may be proper to notice a petition submitted by -the free colored people of New Orleans to Governor Shepley praying to be -registered as voters so that they could “assist in establishing in the -new Convention a Civil Government” for their “beloved State of -Louisiana.” This address, prepared at a meeting on November 5, and not -without ability, recites in appropriate language the services rendered -by free colored men to both the Nation and the State. It is sufficient -to observe here that their prayer was not granted. The paper itself will -be considered in discussing the successive steps which led to the -complete enfranchisement of the race.[83] - -The preceding chapter has noticed President Lincoln’s Amnesty -Proclamation of December 8 as well as that part of the accompanying -message to Congress discussing his plan for restoring Union governments -in the insurgent States. The House had not completed its organization -for the Thirty-eighth Congress when Thaddeus Stevens, a Representative -from Pennsylvania, either from curiosity or an anxiety to oppose, as he -conceived, the policy of the President, inquired what names had been -omitted in the call of members. At a later stage of its first meeting, -December 7, 1863, he again referred to this subject by asking to have -read the credentials of persons claiming to be Representatives “from the -so-called State of Louisiana.” The acting clerk facetiously promised -compliance, and read a certificate signed by Mr. John Leonard Riddell -naming A. P. Field, Thomas Cottman and Joshua Baker as persons elected -to represent respectively the First, Second and Fifth Congressional -Districts of the State.[84] - -On a resolution “That A. P. Field is not entitled to a seat in this -House from the State of Louisiana,” reported January 29, 1864, from the -Committee of Elections, his right to admission was fully discussed. - -Under the apportionment of 1850 that State sent four, and by the census -of 1860 became entitled to five, Representatives. By an act of Congress -approved July 14, 1862, each State entitled to more than one member in -the lower House was to be divided into as many districts as it had been -allotted Representatives. - -But, said Chairman Dawes, as Louisiana had never been so divided no -person in that State had been chosen according to Federal law. The -election under which Mr. Field claimed a seat occurred in the old First -Congressional District, which, with a great portion of the city of New -Orleans, included two adjacent parishes, Placquemines and St. Bernard. -On November 1, General Shepley issued a military order forbidding the -election, and none was held in New Orleans. In the two outlying -parishes, however, under the auspices of a citizens’ committee, to which -returns were made, a few voters appeared at the polls. In the parish of -St. Bernard, the only locality in which the House had any proof that -electors participated, Mr. Field received one hundred and fifty-six -votes, and though no evidence in support of his statement had been -offered, about the same number, he alleged, had been cast for him in -Placquemines. - -The question was, proceeded Mr. Dawes, whether a gentleman with this -constituency could be in any sense considered as having been elected. -There were in his district over 10,000 qualified voters, and of these -the claimant received the support of only one hundred and fifty-six; -hence nearly ten thousand electors expressed no opinion, armed -interference having prevented 9,844 of them from indicating a -preference. There was no evidence that this majority acquiesced in what -was done by one hundred and fifty-six men in a corner of St. Bernard -parish where an election was permitted. If no other objection existed, -the State had not been districted as required by the Act of July, 1862; -this consideration of itself appeared to the Committee a reason -sufficient for his exclusion. Further, his certificate was signed by one -John Leonard Riddell, himself chosen Governor at the same time and in -the same parishes. His term, according to the laws of Louisiana, did not -commence till January 1, 1864, and it was not easy to comprehend how he -came to regard himself as Executive of the State on November 20, 1863, -when he signed the certificate presented by the claimant. Mr. Riddell, -indeed, had not then been inaugurated. - -Had not Congress failed to divide the State, the suppression of this -election would have been without justification and have deserved the -condemnation of the House. It, however, did not conform to the laws of -Louisiana, for the votes were not cast nor were they counted or -canvassed as prescribed thereby. This, in substance, was the argument of -Mr. Dawes. - -By other members attention was invited to the fact that under the same -laws and conditions an election had been held in Louisiana a year -before, and in consequence two Representatives admitted. To this -observation Mr. Stevens replied that Hahn and Flanders, the members -referred to, had been seated by the power of the House without, as he -then supposed, any law or right. Henry Winter Davis alone among all who -spoke on the question approved the action of the Military Governor on -the ground that there was no legal right to hold an election, and the -attempt of any number of persons to do so was an usurpation of sovereign -authority which was properly prevented. Other Representatives, however, -strongly condemned this act of Governor Shepley and at least one desired -the House to express as an amendment to the resolution its disapproval -of his conduct. Though not the question in debate, there could be no -mistaking upon this point the sentiments of a majority of the members. - -Mr. Field, permitted to address the House, observed that it was the -fault of the General Government that Union men in Louisiana had not been -aided by the previous administration. If they had been, the blood of -Illinois and Massachusetts patriots would not have sprinkled the soil of -his State. - -To show that some sort of government existed there he caused the clerk -to read a list of one hundred and twenty-five officers acting in those -parishes included within Federal military lines, and added that though -New Orleans since its capture paid annually in taxes, collected through -Governor Shepley, two and a half million dollars, besides a considerable -sum in internal revenue, her people were represented neither in the -local nor the national Government. - -The constitution of Louisiana, he said, required that qualified electors -should be white males who had attained the age of twenty-one years, and -been residents of the State for twelve months immediately preceding the -election. The provision was so modified by Governor Shepley that persons -of this description were allowed to vote after a residence of six -months. Mr. Field did not know whence was derived the authority to amend -constitutions. - -To secure his coöperation in establishing a loyal government Union men -met as early as September 19 in convention at New Orleans, and appointed -a committee of nine to present an address to the Military Governor -inviting his assistance. He declined, however, after a lengthy interview -to order an election for Representatives until the State had first been -divided. In fact, until instructions which he had requested, were -received from Washington he refused to order any election whatever, -though he volunteered to forward to Mr. Lincoln any communication which -they desired to address him on that subject. Besides its correspondence -with Governor Shepley, the New Orleans convention on September 21 had -sent a letter to General Banks, the Department commander, to secure if -possible his approval of their movement. - -Notice, dated October 20, was given that an election would be held, -November 2, at the usual places in the parish of St. Bernard, and the -State and Federal offices to be filled, as well as the precise places at -which voters could cast their ballots, were mentioned. Since the -military authorities had refused to assist them, and had then issued no -order against an election, loyal men thought it not improper to express -their opinions at the polls. As the Free State people considered -Louisiana out of the Union they declined to participate, and though -General Banks in obedience to instructions from the President had -subsequently ordered an election they maintained the same attitude. The -claimant’s party did not oppose this order; for if unable to restore -their State in the manner most acceptable they were willing to coöperate -in any method likely to accomplish that object. - -Precisely what number of voters would be called a constituency Mr. Field -had not been informed. In the portion of his Congressional District -included in St. Bernard and Placquemines parishes there were only 2,400 -electors, and the President’s plan required only one tenth of the number -of votes cast in 1860. Though the election of November 2 preceded the -Executive proclamation, that fact should not make it void. The electors -in New Orleans were not free to express a choice, and even if it had -been otherwise the vote in the First District must have been greatly -diminished since 1860, for he was assured by two paymasters that 7,000 -men had been recruited there for the Union army. - -Some members admitted that the national Government had not given -sufficient protection to Union men in Louisiana, and therefore should -not now take advantage of that neglect to also deprive them of -representation in Congress. These believed that if Mr. Field had -received a majority of the votes in his district any informality in the -election should be overlooked, for the right to representation in -Congress grows out of the Constitution, and regulations governing such -elections are matters of mere convenience. The fact that no State -organization existed there did not create a legal impediment, and it was -no objection that Louisiana had not been redistricted, for the -additional member was not imposed as a burden but as a right which she -was free to exercise or not; besides, the greater representation -includes the less. - -Notwithstanding these considerations, and strong, though not universal, -testimony to the claimant’s loyalty, he was denied admission, February -9, 1864, by a vote of 85 to 48.[85] His case, however, was not exactly -similar to that of Messrs. Hahn and Flanders, as stated by one -Representative, for they had received, in the circumstances, a -comparatively large vote. - -To this end came the movement of the planters designed primarily to -counteract that inaugurated by the Free State Committee, which also, as -we shall see, was soon at variance with the military authorities. -Important changes had occurred in the shifting politics of his State -before the House had taken final action in the case of Mr. Field; these -will be briefly related. - -Military necessity had led the President to issue, December 8, 1863, his -Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction proposing, though not rigidly -insisting upon, a plan for reinaugurating State governments wherever -there existed such a loyal nucleus as could effectively assist in -overthrowing the rebellion. In discussing the affairs of Tennessee that -plan has been quoted at such length as to require no further mention in -this place.[86] - -General Banks on January 8, 1864, announced his intention of ordering an -election of State officers. He was urged at this point by the Free State -Committee to allow their election to go on, but he refused to yield even -under pressure of an immense public meeting favorable to their -object.[87] Without his coöperation their plan was doomed to failure, -and when entreaties did not avail to move him they promptly inveighed -against his methods and his motives in the columns of _The National -Intelligencer_ at Washington. In a letter dated New Orleans, January 9, -1864, a correspondent writes: - - President Lincoln has started a Missouri case in Louisiana, and has - made Banks our master; and Banks is another Schofield, only worse - than he. Our mass meeting last evening was a complete success; but - its object will be defeated by Banks, who, under orders direct from - the President, declares his purpose to order an election for a - convention; thus playing into the hands of Cottman, Riddle, and - Fields, and their crew. The Union men—the true Union men—are - thunderstruck by the course of the President in this matter. - - We were not informed of the President’s orders to General Banks - until the hour of the meeting last night, and the meeting was not - informed at all. General Shepley, who is generally liked, and who - has done all he could to promote the free State cause, and to - organize a free State government, will resign, and the election - ordered by Banks will be purely at military dictation, and will be - so regarded. - -The correspondent does not know the secret springs of all these acts of -the President, but thinks he has probably been deceived by base and -interested men. “Banks,” he believes, “has the unchanged confidence of -Mr. Lincoln.” The writer concludes by asking whether it is not possible -to get the President to countermand his orders to Banks immediately, -“and let the people manage matters as they have begun to do?”[88] To -prove that no line of policy would be acceptable to the Free State -Committee Mr. Field, in his remarks before the House, read in full the -communication from which these excerpts are taken. - -To comprehend clearly the nature of the controversy which so suddenly -arose between the Free State General Committee and the Federal commander -in Louisiana it may be necessary to explain with some detail the precise -attitude of that organization relative to the question at issue between -the adverse parties. In discussing the respective merits of the State -constitutions of 1852 and 1861 the organ of the Free State men says: - - The question is altogether immaterial; for, in the conflict of arms - incident to this rebellion, the predominant ideas of the good people - of Louisiana have far preceded either constitution; and to - reorganize now the State on the slave basis, which both - constitutions and the laws passed under them recognized, has become - an utter impossibility. Free soil and free speech have grown up into - absolute necessities, directly resulting from the war, which has - converted into dust and ashes all the constitutions which Louisiana - has ever made, embodying the ideas of property in our fellow-man, - and all the baneful results of this system of African slavery. The - present war is nothing but the conflict of the ideas of slavery and - liberty.... We cannot have peace until public opinion is brought - quite up to this point. We cannot reorganize the civil government of - our city, and still less that of our State, and get rid of the - fearful incubus of martial law now pressing down our energies by its - arbitrary influence, unless we believe, give utterance to and - establish the fundamental principle of our national government: “all - men are created free and equal.” We know of no better way to effect - this than by calling a convention as soon as possible, to declare - the simple fact that Louisiana now is and will forever be a free - State.[89] - -The party favoring this method insisted that in August, 1863, when -General Shepley was in Washington, their plan in all its parts was -adopted in a Cabinet meeting, and that a special order issued from the -War Department directing the Military Governor to carry it into -execution. The movement for reorganizing the State would thus be placed -under control of the steadfast opponents of slavery. They further -claimed that Mr. Lincoln then preferred the calling of a convention to -an election of State officers under the old constitution. His letter of -August 5, 1863, to General Banks certainly leaves no doubt as to his -sentiments at that time, for he expressed his approval of the enrollment -being taken by Durant with a view to an election for a constitutional -convention, the mature work of which, he thought, should reach -Washington by the meeting of Congress. The impossibility of so -expediting registration outside of New Orleans as to be ready for an -election at that early date was explained to the President by the Free -State Committee. - -Mr. B. F. Flanders returning from Washington in October, 1863, reported -the President as saying, in reply to an objection that enough territory -and population were not under protection of the Union army to justify an -election, that so great was the necessity for immediate action that he -would recognize and sustain a State government organized by any part of -the population of which the National forces then had control, and that -he wished Flanders on his return to Louisiana to say so.[90] - -The registration under Governor Shepley, though frequently interrupted, -had proceeded, and the Free State Committee, to insure the success of -their object, conferred with him for the purpose of holding, about -January 25, 1864, an election for delegates to a State convention which, -as already observed, intended to frame a new constitution abolishing -slavery everywhere throughout the State. The announcement, then, on -January 8, 1864, by General Banks of his intention to order an election -of State officers under the old constitution was regarded by them as a -decision for their adversaries. Their objections to the proclamation -itself will be noticed in the proper place. It provided not only for an -election of State officers on February 22 following, but also for the -choice of delegates to a convention to be held in April for a revision -of the constitution. The paramount objection of the Free State men was -that the election of State officers would, under the course of General -Banks, precede that for delegates to the convention, the point at which -they desired to begin the work of reëstablishing a civil government for -the State. - -To Thomas Cottman, who accompanied Mr. Field to Washington claiming a -seat in Congress as Representative from the Second Louisiana District, -Mr. Lincoln, on December 15, wrote: - - You were so kind as to say this morning that you desire to return to - Louisiana, and to be guided by my wishes, to some extent, in the - part you may take in bringing that State to resume her rightful - relation to the General Government. - - My wishes are in a general way expressed, as well as I can express - them, in the proclamation issued on the eighth of the present month, - and in that part of the annual message which relates to that - proclamation. It there appears that I deem the sustaining of the - Emancipation Proclamation, where it applies, as indispensable; and I - add here that I would esteem it fortunate if the people of Louisiana - should themselves place the remainder of the State upon the same - footing.[91] - -Though this letter expressed as one of Mr. Lincoln’s strongest wishes a -hope that all Union men in Louisiana would “eschew cliquism,” he was -destined to be disappointed, for at this very time letters from General -Banks, dated December 6 and 16, informed him that Governor Shepley, Mr. -Durant and others had given him to understand that they were charged -exclusively with the work of reconstruction in Louisiana and hence he -had not felt authorized to interfere. Other officers had set up claims -to jurisdiction conflicting and interfering with his own powers of -military administration. Annoyed that a misunderstanding was delaying -work which he had been urging for a year, the President, on the 24th of -December, wrote General Banks as follows: - - I have all the while intended you to be master, as well in regard to - reorganizing a State government for Louisiana, as in regard to the - military matters of the department; and hence my letters on - reconstruction have nearly, if not quite, all been addressed to you. - My error has been that it did not occur to me that Governor Shepley - or any one else would set up a claim to act independently of you; - and hence I said nothing expressly upon the point. - - Language has not been guarded at a point where no danger was thought - of. I now tell you that in every dispute with whomsoever, you are - master. - - Governor Shepley was appointed to assist the commander of the - department, and not to thwart him or act independently of him. - Instructions have been given directly to him, merely to spare you - detail labor, and not to supersede your authority. This, in its - liability to be misconstrued, it now seems was an error in us. But - it is past. I now distinctly tell you that you are master of all, - and that I wish you to take the case as you find it, and give us a - free State reorganization of Louisiana in the shortest possible - time. What I say here is to have a reasonable construction. I do not - mean that you are to withdraw from Texas, or abandon any other - military measure which you may deem important. Nor do I mean that - you are to throw away available work already done for - reconstruction; nor that war is to be made upon Governor Shepley, or - upon any one else, unless it be found that they will not coöperate - with you, in which case, and in all cases, you are master while you - remain in command of the department.[92] - -This letter making General Banks “master” of the situation in Louisiana -the President concluded by thanking him for his successful and valuable -operations in Texas. But before receiving this extensive authority and -the undoubted assurance of Mr. Lincoln’s confidence the commander, on -December 30, submitted to the President a plan of reconstruction based -upon the Proclamation and the Message of the 8th of that month. For -evident reasons this communication deserves to be reproduced almost -entire: - - I would suggest [says General Banks], as the only speedy and certain - method of accomplishing your object, that an election be ordered, of - a State government, under the constitution and laws of Louisiana, - except so much thereof as recognizes and relates to slavery, which - should be declared by the authority calling the election, and in the - order authorizing it, inoperative and void. The registration of - voters to be made in conformity with your Proclamation, and all - measures hitherto taken with reference to State organization, not - inconsistent with the Proclamation, may be made available. A - convention of the people for the revision of the constitution may be - ordered as soon as the government is organized, and the election of - members might take place on the same or a subsequent day with the - general election. The people of Louisiana will accept such a - proposition with favor. They will prefer it to any arrangement which - leaves the subject to them for an affirmative or negative vote. - Strange as this may appear, it is the fact. Of course a government - organized upon the basis of immediate and universal freedom, with - the general consent of the people, followed by the adaptation of - commercial and industrial interests to this order of things, and - supported by the army and navy, the influence of the civil officers - of the Government, and the Administration at Washington, could not - fail by any possible chance to obtain an absolute and permanent - recognition of the principle of freedom upon which it would be - based. Any other result would be impossible. The same influence - would secure with the same certainty the selection of proper men in - the election of officers. - - Let me assure you that this course will be far more acceptable to - the citizens of Louisiana than the submission of the question of - slavery to the chances of an election. Their self-respect, their - _amour propre_ will be appeased if they are not required to vote for - or against it. Offer them a government without slavery and they will - gladly accept it as a necessity resulting from the war. On all other - points, sufficient guarantees of right results can be secured; but - the great question, that of immediate emancipation, will be covered - _ab initio_, by a conceded and absolute prohibition of slavery. - - Upon this plan a government can be established whenever you wish—in - thirty or sixty days; a government that will be satisfactory to the - South and the North; to the South, because it relieves them from any - action in regard to an institution which cannot be restored, and - which they cannot condemn; and to the North, because it places the - interests of liberty beyond all possible accident or chance of - failure. The result is certain.[93] - -Upon receiving this communication the President, who cherished no plan -of restoration to which exact conformity was indispensable, expressed, -January 13, 1864, in a letter to General Banks his gratitude for the -zeal and confidence manifested by him on the question of reinaugurating -a free State government in Louisiana. He hoped, because of the authority -contained in the letter of December 24, that the Department Commander -had already commenced work. “Whether you shall have done so or not,” -continues the letter, “please, on receiving this, proceed with all -possible despatch, using your own absolute discretion in all matters -which may not carry you away from the conditions stated in your letters -to me, nor from those of the message and proclamation of December 8. -Frame orders, and fix times and places for this and that, according to -your own judgment.”[94] - -This letter repeats the idea of subordination to General Banks of all -officials in his department holding authority from the President, and -stated that the bearer of the communication, Collector Dennison, of New -Orleans, understood the views of the commander and was willing to assist -in carrying them out. Before Mr. Dennison arrived in New Orleans, -however, General Banks had already, in his proclamation of January 11, -1864, fixed a date for the election. This action was determined, said -the Department Commander, upon ample assurance “that more than a tenth -of the population desire the earliest possible restoration of Louisiana -to the Union”; hence he invited “the loyal citizens of the State -qualified to vote in public affairs ... to assemble in the election -precincts designated by law, ... on the 22d of February, 1864, to cast -their votes for the election of State officers herein named, _viz._ -Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, -Attorney-General, Superintendent of Public Instruction and Auditor of -Public Accounts—who shall, when elected, for the time being, and until -others are appointed by competent authority, constitute the civil -government of the State, under the constitution and laws of Louisiana, -except so much of said constitution and laws as recognize, regulate or -relate to slavery, which being inconsistent with the present condition -of public affairs, and plainly inapplicable to any class of persons now -existing within its limits, must be suspended, and they are therefore -and hereby declared to be inoperative and void. This proceeding is not -intended to ignore the right of property existing prior to the -rebellion, nor to preclude the claim for compensation of loyal citizens -for losses sustained by enlistment or other authorized acts of -Government.”[95] - -The qualifications of voters in this election were to be determined by -the oath of allegiance prescribed by the President’s proclamation -together with the condition annexed to the elective franchise by the -constitution of Louisiana. Officers elected were to be duly installed on -the 4th of March. - -So much of the registration effected under direction of Governor Shepley -and the several Union Associations as was not inconsistent with the -proclamation and other orders of the President was approved. The -proclamation further announced that arrangements would be made for the -early election of members of Congress for the State, and, that the -organic law might be made to conform to the will of the people and -harmonize with the spirit of the age, an election of delegates to a -convention for the revision of the constitution would be held on the -first Monday of April following. - -This proclamation declared, among other things, that - - The fundamental law of the State is martial law.... The Government - is subject to the law of necessity, and must consult the condition - of things, rather than the preferences of men, and if so be that its - purposes are just and its measures wise, it has the right to demand - that questions of personal interest and opinion shall be subordinate - to the public good. When the national existence is at stake, and the - liberties of the people in peril, faction is treason. - - The methods herein proposed submit the whole question of government - directly to the people—first, by the election of executive officers, - faithful to the Union, to be followed by a loyal representation in - both Houses of Congress; and then by a convention which will confirm - the action of the people, and recognize the principles of freedom in - the organic law. This is the wish of the President.[96] - -On February 13, nine days before the election, General Banks issued an -order relative to the qualifications of electors. It provided, in -addition to the declarations on that subject in his proclamation, that -Union voters expelled from their homes by the public enemy might cast -their ballots for State officers in the precincts where they temporarily -resided and that qualified electors enlisted in the army or navy could -vote in those precincts in which they might be found on election day. If -without the State, then commissioners would be appointed to receive -their ballots wherever stationed, returns to be made to General -Shepley.[97] - -For governor three candidates were nominated—B. F. Flanders, a -representative of the Free State Committee; Michael Hahn, the choice of -those who approved the measures of General Banks, and J. Q. A. Fellows, -a pro-slavery conservative who favored “the Constitution and the Union -with the preservation of the rights of all inviolate.” The friends of -Hahn would deny to persons of African descent the privileges of -citizenship, whereas the supporters of Flanders generally would extend -to them such rights and immunities.[98] - -On Washington’s birthday, as announced in the proclamation of General -Banks, an election was held in seventeen parishes, Hahn receiving 6,183, -Fellows 2,996 and Flanders 2,232 votes, a total of 11,411, of which 107 -were cast by Louisiana soldiers stationed at Pensacola, Florida.[99] - -Writing February 25 to the President General Banks says: - - The election of the 22d of February was conducted with great spirit - and propriety. No complaint is heard from any quarter, so far as I - know, of unfairness or undue influence on the part of the officers - of the Government. At some of the strictly military posts the entire - vote of the Louisiana men was for Mr. Flanders, at others for Mr. - Hahn, according to the inclination of the voters. Every voter - accepted the oath prescribed by your proclamation of the 8th of - December.... The ordinary vote of the State has been less than forty - thousand. The proportion given on the 22d of February is nearly - equal to the territory covered by our arms.[100] - -The friends of the Free State General Committee in a protest pronounced -the result of the election “the registration of a military edict,” and -“worthy of no respect from the representatives and Executive of the -nation.” To the question whether this election had in the meaning of the -President reëstablished a State government they promptly answered in the -negative, for the commanding general recognized the Louisiana -constitution of 1852 and ordered an election under it in which the votes -of the people had nothing to do with reëstablishing government; his -proclamation, by recognizing the existence of the old constitution, made -the reëstablishment beforehand for them. The Governor and -Lieutenant-Governor, together with the other executive officers chosen, -did not, they argued, constitute a State government; for all the -constitutions of Louisiana, including that of 1852, described the -government as consisting of three departments: executive, legislative -and judicial. - -Though not avowed, the reason of Banks’ failure to order an election for -members of the Legislature was plain, for there was not, they claimed, -within the Union lines a sufficient number of parishes to elect a -majority of that body, and less than a majority was, by the -constitution, not a quorum to do business; so that no officer elected -could be legally paid, for that could be done by only a legal -appropriation. The same constitution, they said further, provided that -Justices of the Supreme and District Courts, as well as justices of the -peace, should be elected by the people. The present incumbents had been -simply appointed by General Shepley. Should Mr. Hahn under pretence of -being civil governor undertake to appoint judicial officers, the act -would be a mere usurpation. - -Not only, they declared, had no State government been established by -this election, but still further, the proclamation of the President had -not in the matter of electors been complied with; for Article XII. of -the constitution of 1852 says: “No soldier, seaman, or marine in the -army or navy of the United States ... shall be entitled to vote at any -election in this State.” Yet, continued the protestants, it was a -notorious fact that the general commanding permitted soldiers recruited -in Louisiana, and otherwise qualified, to vote, and that many availed -themselves of the privilege. Again, they went on to say, the Legislature -by act of March 20, 1856, provided for the appointment in New Orleans of -a register of voters whose office should be closed three days before an -election, and no one registered during that period. Now prior to the -late election, the register having closed his office according to law, -orders were at once given to two other officers, recorders of the city, -who had no such powers or functions by law, to register voters, which -they did night and day, and persons so registered were allowed to vote. - -Referring to the declared intention of General Banks to order an -election of delegates to a constitutional convention, and by a -subsequent order fix the basis of representation, the number of -delegates and the details of the election, they said: “This will put the -whole matter under military control, and the experience of the last -election shows that only such a convention can be had as the -overshadowing influence of the military authority will permit. Under an -election thus ordered, and a constitution thus established, a republican -form of government cannot be formed. It is simply a fraud to call it the -reëstablishment of a State government. In these circumstances, the only -course left to the truly loyal citizens of Louisiana is, to protest -against the recognition of this pretended Government, and to appeal to -the calm judgment of the nation to procure such action from Congress as -will forbid military commanders to usurp the powers which belong to -Congress alone, or to the loyal people of Louisiana.”[101] - -But neither the protest nor the criticism of Free State men availed to -arrest the march of events, and in the presence of a vast multitude -Michael Hahn, who had received a majority of all the votes cast, was -inaugurated Governor amidst great enthusiasm on March 4. To the oath -prescribed in the amnesty and reconstruction proclamation of December 8, -1863, given above, was added the following: - - And I do further solemnly swear, that I am qualified according to - the constitution of the State to hold the office to which I have - been elected, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge - and perform all the duties incumbent on me as Governor of the State - of Louisiana, according to the best of my abilities and - understanding, agreeably to the Constitution and Laws of the United - States, and in support of and according to the constitution and laws - of this State, so far as they are consistent with the necessary - military occupation of the State by the troops of the United States - for the suppression of the rebellion, and the full restoration of - the authority of the United States.[102] - -This language clearly indicates the legal theory upon which General -Banks was proceeding, and citizens understood that Mr. Hahn represented -a popular power entirely subordinate to the armed occupation of the -State. - -On March 13, 1864, the President wrote the following private letter to -Governor Hahn: - - I congratulate you on having fixed your name in history as the first - free-state governor of Louisiana. Now you are about to have a - convention, which, among other things, will probably define the - elective franchise. I barely suggest for your private consideration - whether some of the colored people may not be let in—as, for - instance, the very intelligent, and especially those who have fought - gallantly in our ranks. They would probably help, in some trying - time to come, to keep the jewel of liberty within the family of - freedom. But this is only a suggestion, not to the public, but to - you alone.[103] - -Speaking of this personal note Mr. Blaine says: “It was perhaps the -earliest proposition from any authentic source to endow the negro with -the right of suffrage, and was an indirect but most effective answer to -those who subsequently attempted to use Mr. Lincoln’s name in support of -policies which his intimate friends instinctively knew would be -abhorrent to his unerring sense of justice.”[104] - -At the suggestion of General Banks, the President two days later -invested Mr. Hahn until further order “with the powers exercised -hitherto by the military governor of Louisiana.”[105] - -From the sentiments of the Free State party it requires little insight -into human affairs to foretell that in some manner they would soon be -found in opposition. Their candidate, Mr. B. F. Flanders, who received -fewer votes than either of his competitors, was a prominent official in -the Treasury Department, and from this vantage ground, without, so far -as appears, rebuke from Secretary Chase, began to stir up in Congress a -feeling of hostility to the new government in Louisiana. Precisely why -Mr. Lincoln decided to take into his own hands the entire subject of -reconstruction may be collected without difficulty from what has already -been said; but that this determination was confirmed by his knowledge of -an alliance between the Free State leaders and the “Radicals” in -Congress there can be little doubt. - -The Department Commander in a general order gave notice on March 11 that -an election would be held on the 28th of that month for the choice of -delegates to a State convention to meet in New Orleans “for the revision -and amendment of the constitution of Louisiana.”[106] Five days later, -March 16, Governor Hahn, in a proclamation to the sheriffs and other -officers concerned, authorized the election and commanded them to give -due notice thereof to the qualified voters of the State and to make -prompt returns to the Secretary of State in New Orleans.[107] - -Pursuant to these notices the election was held on the 28th, and -resulted in the choice of ninety-seven members, two of whom were -rejected because of irregular returns. The entire State was entitled to -150 delegates. The parish of Orleans was represented by sixty-three -members, leaving to the country parishes but thirty-two. Of the vote, -which was exceedingly light, no return appears to have been published. -Because of their recent defeat no nominations were made by the Radicals, -and this fact, together with heavy rains on election day, was assigned -by Governor Hahn in a letter to the President as an explanation of the -meagre vote. The Parish of Ascension, which in 1860 had a population of -3,940 whites, elected her delegates by 61 votes; Placquemines, which by -the same census had 2,529 white inhabitants, cast 246, while the single -delegate from Madison was chosen by only twenty-eight electors.[108] - -General Banks informed a committee of Congress that all that section of -the State as far up as Point Coupée voted; some men from the Red River -cast their ballots at Vidalia. In his statement he declared that “The -city of New Orleans is really the State of Louisiana”; yet at that time -it contained less than half the population of the State.[109] - -The constitutional convention, which assembled April 6, 1864, was -organized on the 7th with E. H. Durell as president, and after a session -of more than two and a half months adjourned July 25. A proclamation of -the Governor appointed the 5th of September as the time for taking a -vote on the work of the convention. The result was 6,836 for the -adoption, and 1,556 for the rejection of the constitution. Besides these -there were a number of electors who did not vote on either side of the -question.[110] - -Of the work of the convention General Banks spoke as follows: - - In a State which held 331,726 slaves, one half of its entire - population in 1860, more than three fourths of whom had been - specially excepted from the Proclamation of Emancipation, and were - still held _de jure_ in bondage, the convention declared by a - majority of all the votes to which the State would have been - entitled if every delegate had been present from every district in - the State:— - - Instantaneous, universal, uncompensated, unconditional emancipation - of slaves! - - It prohibited forever the recognition of property in man! - - It decreed the education of all the children, without distinction of - race or color! - - It directs all men, white or black, to be enrolled as soldiers for - the public defence! - - It makes all men equal before the law! - - It compels, by its regenerating spirit, the ultimate recognition of - all the rights which national authority can confer upon an oppressed - race! - - It wisely recognizes for the first time in constitutional history, - the interest of daily labor as an element of power entitled to the - protection of the State.[111] - -At the same election, that of September 5, the following persons were -chosen Representatives in Congress: M. F. Bonzano, A. P. Field, W. D. -Mann, T. M. Wells and R. W. Taliaferro. A Legislature was elected at the -same time, the members of which were almost entirely in favor of a free -State, and by this body seven electors of President and Vice-President -were appointed. On October 10th two United States Senators were -elected—R. King Cutler for the unexpired term ending March 4, 1867, and -Charles Smith for the vacancy created by the resignation of Judah P. -Benjamin, and ending March 4, 1865.[112] - -It is matter of familiar history that the State government thus -organized was never recognized by Congress. The question was presented -to that body December 5, 1864, at the opening of the second session of -the Thirty-eighth Congress, when the claimants above named appeared in -Washington applying for admission to seats, and again in January and -February, 1865, upon consideration of a joint resolution declaring -certain States not entitled to representation in the Electoral College. -As in the case of Tennessee, however, the vote offered by Louisiana was -not counted. - -The agency of the President in setting up this civil government, and the -successive steps in its accomplishment have been related with some -degree of minuteness, so that the nature of the controversy between the -Executive and the Legislative branches of the Government may be better -understood. Whether Mr. Lincoln exceeded his constitutional authority -will be considered when an account has been presented of the result of -his efforts to restore civil government in the States where Federal -authority had been overthrown. - ------ - -Footnote 47: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 427. - -Footnote 48: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 4n. - -Footnote 49: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 25; Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 428. - -Footnote 50: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 432. - -Footnote 51: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 52: - - Taylor’s Destruction and Reconstruction, pp. 102–103. - -Footnote 53: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 1. - -Footnote 54: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 589. - -Footnote 55: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II., pp. 214–215; Ann. - Cycl., 1862, p. 650. - -Footnote 56: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II., p. 216. - -Footnote 57: - - Ibid., pp. 217–218. - -Footnote 58: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 586. - -Footnote 59: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 586. - -Footnote 60: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 61: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 586. - -Footnote 62: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 587; Ibid., pp. 770–776. Scott’s Reconstruction - During the Civil War, pp. 325–326, 328–331, 376. - -Footnote 63: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 247. - -Footnote 64: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 65: - - Ibid., p. 255. - -Footnote 66: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 835. - -Footnote 67: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 831–837, 1030–1036. - -Footnote 68: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 228–229. - -Footnote 69: - - Blaine’s Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 39; Nicolay and Hay’s - Lincoln, Vol. VIII. p. 419. - -Footnote 70: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 589. - -Footnote 71: - - N. & H., Vol. VIII. p. 420. - -Footnote 72: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 590; Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. - II. p. 536. - -Footnote 73: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 356. - -Footnote 74: - - Ibid., pp. 214–215. - -Footnote 75: - - Ibid., p. 356. - -Footnote 76: - - Taylor’s Destruction and Reconstruction, ch. x; also the general - history of military operations in the Red River country. - -Footnote 77: - - Bulloch’s Secret Service of the Confederate States in Europe, Vol. II. - chs. i and ii. - -Footnote 78: - - N. & H., Vol. VIII. pp. 285–286; Conduct of the War, Vol. II. pp. - 1–401 (_passim_). - -Footnote 79: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 380. - -Footnote 80: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 436. - -Footnote 81: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 591. - -Footnote 82: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 83: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 591–592. - -Footnote 84: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 5–6. - -Footnote 85: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 411–415, 543–547. - -Footnote 86: - - See pp. 24–28 _ante_. - -Footnote 87: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 592–593. - -Footnote 88: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 543. - -Footnote 89: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 590. - -Footnote 90: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 591. - -Footnote 91: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 458–459. - -Footnote 92: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 465–466. - -Footnote 93: - - N. & H., Vol. VIII. pp. 428–430. - -Footnote 94: - - Ibid., p. 469. - -Footnote 95: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 592. - -Footnote 96: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 592–593. - -Footnote 97: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 476. - -Footnote 98: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 99: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 476. - -Footnote 100: - - N. & H., Vol. VIII. pp. 432–433. - -Footnote 101: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 593–594. - -Footnote 102: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 477. - -Footnote 103: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 496. - -Footnote 104: - - Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 40. - -Footnote 105: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 498. - -Footnote 106: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 478. - -Footnote 107: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 108: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, pp. 478–479. - -Footnote 109: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 110: - - Ibid., p. 479. - -Footnote 111: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 479. - -Footnote 112: - - Ibid. - - - - - III - ARKANSAS - - -The people of northern Arkansas were strongly attached to the Union, and -until December 20, 1860, when a commissioner from Alabama addressed its -Legislature, no secession movement took place within the State. Her -geographical position classed her with the Western, her productions -bound up her interests with the Southern, States.[113] As late as -January 5, 1861, resolutions opposing separate action were adopted -almost unanimously by the largest meeting ever held at Van Buren. Mr. -Lincoln’s election was not then deemed a sufficient cause to dissolve -the Union. Citizens of every party favored all honorable efforts for its -preservation, and demonstrations to the contrary were regarded as the -work of only an extreme and inconsiderable faction.[114] So rapid, -however, was the succession of events that scarcely two weeks had -elapsed when she exhibited signs of resting uneasily in the Union; for -on January 16 a bill submitting to popular vote the question of holding -a convention passed the Legislature.[115] At the election of delegates -to this assembly 23,626 votes were cast for the Union, against 17,927 -for the secession, candidates. Though this convention, which assembled -March 4, was organized by the choice of Union officers, the proposal to -hold it had been carried by a majority of 11,586 in the election of -February 18. While secession was strongly urged, a conditional ordinance -was defeated by a vote of 39 to 35.[116] At Van Buren and Fort Smith -salutes of thirty-nine guns were fired in honor of the loyal members. -The inaugural of President Lincoln, received two days after organizing, -produced a somewhat unfavorable impression. On the 17th an ordinance, -reported by a self-constituted committee of seven secessionists and -seven coöperationists, was unanimously adopted.[117] This provided for -an election on the first Monday of August, when the qualified voters in -the State could cast their ballots either for “secession” or -“coöperation.” The result, though not wholly satisfactory to either -party, afforded time for deliberation. - -Tidings of the fall of Sumter, together with the President’s -proclamation and a requisition for troops from the Secretary of War, -interrupted the brief interval of repose following the adjournment of -the convention. In these circumstances the State was compelled to make a -choice of sides. Governor Rector’s reply, April 22, to this requisition -shows him to have been ardently in favor of disunion; the president of -the convention, concurring in this sentiment, issued a call for that -body to reassemble May 6, when an ordinance of secession was promptly -passed with but one dissenting vote.[118] By a resolution the convention -authorized the Governor to call out, if necessary, 60,000 men, and -ordered the issue of $2,000,000 in bonds. Another ordinance confiscated -debts due to persons in non-slaveholding States.[119] - -The first military movement, after the ordinance of secession had been -carried, aimed to secure Federal property within the State, and their -value to the South singled out for seizure the arsenals at Fort Smith -and Little Rock. The latter city on February 5 was thrown into a great -turmoil of confusion and excitement by the unexpected arrival of a body -of troops from Helena with the avowed purpose of taking the arsenal; -more soldiers arrived during that and the succeeding day until about 400 -had assembled. Though the Governor, in response to their inquiry, -informed the city council that this force was not there by his order, -the troops believed they were acting under his command; at any rate they -came to take the arsenal and were not to be diverted from their object. -To prevent a collision, which must have followed a refusal of the -commanding officer to surrender to a body of men disavowed by their -Governor, the latter was easily persuaded to assume the responsibility -of the movement and he consented to demand its surrender in the name of -the State. This demand Captain Totten asked until three o’clock the next -day to consider; then he made known his readiness to evacuate the -arsenal, which about noon of the following day was delivered to the -State authorities.[120] - -The delegates of Arkansas on May 18 took their seats in the Confederate -Congress.[121] The convention, it will be observed, assumed at the -outset the functions of a law-making body, and, because of further -extending its authority by the appointment of a Military Board, soon -came into conflict with both the Governor and the Legislature. When the -convention empowered the former to call out, if necessary, 60,000 men it -divided the State into two districts, an eastern and a western. General -Bradley was elected to the command of the former and General Pearce, -late of the United States Army, to that of the latter division. Before -General McCulloch, stationed in the Indian Territory, could assume any -offensive operations the Federal General, Lyon, in pursuit of Jackson, -approached the southern boundary of Missouri; upon this the Military -Board called out ten regiments for defence. On June 21 it despatched to -Richmond a messenger who proposed to transfer to the Confederate -Government all the State troops with their arms making, however, a -condition precedent: they were to be employed for the protection of -Arkansas; but as the Secretary of State could make no promise as to -their future disposition the transfer was not then effected.[122] On -July 4 a second effort was made by a member of the Military Board who -visited General Hardee, with whom an arrangement was completed by which -a vote should be taken among the troops. If a majority of each company -consented, those so consenting were to be turned over as a company. If a -majority declined, the company was to be disbanded altogether. One -entire company was thus mustered out, and from various motives two or -three hundred soldiers returned home. This was from the eastern -division. The western was not so easily disposed of. The Military Board -after the battle of Springfield directed General Pearce to turn over his -force to Hardee, who became angry when the agent proposed to submit the -question of transfer, and refused to allow it to be done; this -insubordinate conduct he followed up by writing an abusive letter to the -Board. Pearce then separated his troops from McCulloch’s command and -marched them back to Arkansas, where they were informally disbanded and -sent home. Fearing such a result, the Board had ordered General Pearce -to do nothing further in the matter, but their despatches arrived too -late.[123] - -Governor Rector’s account shows Arkansas troops, claimed to be 22,000 in -number, to have been at that time in a state of complete -demoralization.[124] The Germans and the Irish, as well as their -descendants, showing little inclination to enlist, the Governor ascribed -their indifference to a want of opportunity for promotion in the -service. If this was not the cause, then, he thought, authority should -be given to draft a regiment of each race.[125] - -More than a third of the voting population was in the field, and as late -as October they had received no pay except Arkansas war bonds, the -worthlessness of which occasioned much murmuring. This discontent was -heightened somewhat by the poor equipment of the regiments, many -soldiers being without blankets or shoes.[126] There were other symptoms -of unrest within the State. On the charge of attempted insurrection two -negro men and a girl were hanged in Monroe County. - -All this occasioned much uneasiness, but the chief cause of alarm was -the Union sentiment known to exist in the State. In October twenty-seven -persons were brought to Little Rock as members of a secret Union -organization in Van Buren County and placed in jail to await a civil -trial. Many others also were taken about this time, and it was estimated -that the “Peace and Constitutional Society” numbered 1,700 members in -Arkansas.[127] - -The activity of Federal armies in the West excited so much apprehension -that Governor Rector on the 18th of February, by proclamation, called -into immediate service every man in the State subject to military -duty.[128] A Confederate force under Price was driven into Arkansas by -General Curtis on the same day, and within a week the commandant at -Pocahontas issued an appeal to every man “to turn out promptly, shoulder -his musket, and drive the vandals from the State.” The Richmond -Government being unable to assist Arkansas, she was forced to rely upon -her own resources and such aid as might be obtained from Missouri, the -Indian Territory and Texas.[129] - -Disaster and a conviction of neglect led the Governor in May, in an -address to the people, to express his indignation and threaten to secede -from secession. He said: - - If the arteries of the Confederate heart do not permeate beyond the - east bank of the Mississippi, let southern Missourians, Arkansians, - Texans and the great West know it and prepare for the future. - Arkansas lost, abandoned, subjugated is not Arkansas as she entered - the Confederate Government. Nor will she remain Arkansas, a - Confederate State, desolated as a wilderness. Her children, fleeing - from the wrath to come, will build them a new ark, and launch it on - new waters, seeking a haven somewhere of equality, safety and - rest.[130] - -After the battle of Pea Ridge General Curtis moved to White River, and -on May 1 occupied Batesville, where he witnessed many demonstrations of -attachment to the Union. Judges of courts, clergymen and other leading -citizens came forward and voluntarily took the oath of allegiance to the -United States. A threatened advance of the Union forces upon Little Rock -created the greatest excitement there, and the Governor by proclamation -ordered the militia to repair immediately to its defence; but not -finding himself sufficiently supported he fled.[131] The concentration -at Corinth of all available Confederate strength was the cause of the -weakness of Arkansas at this time. Ten regiments had also been withdrawn -from the army of General Curtis to reënforce the Federal troops in -Mississippi. This left him in no condition to march upon the State -capital, and for the time it was saved. Twelve thousand poorly equipped -men had assembled there in response to the appeal of Governor Rector. - -After the occupation of Helena by Federal troops Mr. Lincoln appointed -John S. Phelps, of Missouri, military governor.[132] On August 19, 1862, -he left St. Louis for Helena; but as the contemplated movement was not -then made his office was of little importance. From the Union refugees -at that point two regiments of Arkansas men were organized. The fall of -Vicksburg in July, 1863, however, enabled the Union army to assume -offensive operations, and the summer had not greatly advanced before a -strong column was moving on Little Rock, the capture of which, September -10, 1863, was a fatal blow to Confederate authority throughout the -State. - -Amidst all its distresses the northern section of Arkansas had -maintained its loyalty. Recent reverses to Confederate arms encouraged -desertion from their ranks, Union sympathizers became active, and -movements begun by them were joined by numbers who now regarded the -Confederate cause as lost. Many, however, fearing a restoration of that -authority, hesitated to identify themselves with the more pronounced -loyalists. A newspaper favorable to the General Government was -established at the capital. Meetings were held, and resolutions pledging -unconditional support of the Union cause adopted. Citizens, both white -and black, were organized, and by December, 1863, eight regiments of -Arkansas troops had enlisted in the Federal service.[133] - -A still more encouraging symptom was the return of eminent persons who -now came forward to advocate the Union cause. Prominent among these was -Brigadier-General E. W. Gantt, of the Confederate army, recently a -prisoner of war and pardoned under the Amnesty Proclamation of the -President. Toward the close of 1863 he thus describes the feeling of the -people: - - The Union sentiment is manifesting itself on all sides and by every - indication—in Union meetings—in desertions from the Confederate - army—in taking the oath of allegiance unsolicited—in organizing for - home defence, and enlisting in the Federal army. Old flags that have - been hid in the crevices of rocks, and been worshipped by our - mountain people as holy relics, are flung to the breeze, and - followed to the Union army with an enthusiasm that beggars all - description. The little county of Perry, that votes only about 600, - and which has been turned wrong side out in search of conscripts by - Hindman and his fellow-murderers and oppressors, with their retinue - of salaried gentlemen and negro boys, sent down a company of - ninety-four men. Where they came from, and how they kept their old - flag during these three years of terror, persecution and plunder, I - can’t tell. But they were the proudest-looking set of men I ever - saw, and full of fight.[134] - -The retreat of General Banks from the Red River country changed greatly -the aspect of Federal affairs in Arkansas, for it allowed all the -Confederate forces in the vicinity to concentrate against the small army -of General Steele, compelling him to act on the defensive at Little -Rock. The State coming once more to a considerable extent under -Confederate control, loyalists became scarce and gradually lost energy -and hope. - -Local reverses, however, were not allowed to interrupt the comprehensive -policy of the President, and early in 1864 preparations were made to -reorganize the State government. This movement, like those in Tennessee -and Louisiana, was based upon the Amnesty and Reconstruction -Proclamation of December 8, 1863. Even before this step had been taken -the President was already moulding the diverse elements into a power -that would ultimately undermine Confederate influence in the State. In -the preceding summer, July 31, 1863, he had written General S. A. -Hurlbut: - - I understand that Senator Sebastian, of Arkansas, thinks of offering - to resume his place in the Senate. Of course the Senate, and not I, - would decide whether to admit or reject him. Still I should feel - great interest in the question. It may be so presented as to be one - of the very greatest national importance; and it may be otherwise so - presented as to be of no more than temporary personal consequence to - him. - - The emancipation proclamation applies to Arkansas.... I think I - shall not retract or repudiate it. Those who shall have tasted - actual freedom I believe can never be slaves or quasi-slaves again. - For the rest, I believe some plan substantially being gradual - emancipation would be better for both white and black. The Missouri - plan, recently adopted, I do not object to on account of the time - for ending the institution; but I am sorry the beginning should have - been postponed for seven years, leaving all that time to agitate for - the repeal of the whole thing. It should begin at once, giving at - least the new-born a vested interest in freedom which could not be - taken away. If Senator Sebastian could come with something of this - sort from Arkansas, I, at least, should take great interest in his - case; and I believe a single individual will have scarcely done the - world so great a service. See him, if you can, and read this to him; - but charge him to not make it public for the present.[135] - -Union officers in the West were urged by Mr. Lincoln in October, 1862, -to assist and encourage repentant rebel communities to elect both State -officers and members of Congress.[136] As this involved a recognition of -existing governments it need scarcely be observed that the march of -events forced the President later to occupy somewhat different ground; -nor is it more necessary to add, that to his main purpose, to undermine -secession and restore the Union, he adhered inflexibly. With this -fundamental object all his acts harmonize. - -At the time of her secession, W. K. Sebastian represented Arkansas in -the United States Senate and abandoned his seat; he was now ready to -assist in restoring his State to her old status. Of these evidences of -disintegration in Confederate interests within the State the President -was very exactly informed, and it was because of his conviction that -many persons hitherto supporting that cause were either wavering in -their allegiance or had become hostile to secession that he wrote, -January 5, 1864, to General Steele: - - I wish to afford the people of Arkansas an opportunity of taking the - oath prescribed in the proclamation of December 8, 1863, preparatory - to reorganizing a State Government there. Accordingly I send you by - General Kimball some blank books and other blanks, the manner of - using which will, in the main, be suggested by an inspection of - them; and General Kimball will add some verbal explanations. - - Please make a trial of the matter immediately at such points as you - may think likely to give success. I suppose Helena and Little Rock - are two of them. Detail any officer you may see fit to take charge - of the subject at each point; and which officer, it may be assumed, - will have authority to administer the oath. These books, of course, - are intended to be permanent records. Report to me on the - subject.[137] - -A week had scarcely elapsed when Mr. Lincoln approved the suggestions of -General Banks relative to reinaugurating a civil government for -Louisiana, and, doubtless, he knew no reason why similar work might not -be going on simultaneously in Arkansas; therefore he repeated to General -Steele what in substance he had already communicated to the Federal -commander of the Department of the Gulf. His instructions, dated January -20, 1864, and quoted below, are self-explanatory, and in no important -particular differ from the Louisiana Plan: - - Sundry citizens of the State of Arkansas petition me that an - election may be held in that State, at which to elect a governor - thereof; ... that it be assumed at said election and thenceforward - that the constitution and laws of the State, as before the - rebellion, are in full force, except that the constitution is so - modified as to declare that “there shall be neither slavery nor - involuntary servitude, except in the punishment for crime whereof - the party shall have been duly convicted; but the General Assembly - may make such provision for the free people as shall recognize and - declare their permanent freedom, provide for their education, and - which may yet be consistent, as a temporary arrangement, with their - present condition as a laboring, landless, and homeless class;” and - also except that all now existing laws in relation to slaves are - inoperative and void; that said election to be held on the - twenty-eighth day of March next at all the usual voting places of - the State, or all such as voters may attend for that purpose; that - the voters attending at each place at 8 o’clock in the morning of - said day, may choose judges and clerks of election for that place; - that all persons qualified by said constitution and laws, and taking - the oath prescribed in the President’s proclamation of December the - 8th, 1863, either before or at the election, and none others, may be - voters, provided that persons having the qualifications aforesaid, - and being in the volunteer military service of the United States, - may vote once wherever they may be at voting places; that each set - of judges and clerks may make return directly to you on or before - the eleventh day of April next; that in all other respects said - election may be conducted according to said modified constitution - and laws; that on receipt of said returns, you count said votes, and - that if the number shall reach or exceed five thousand four hundred - and six, you canvass said votes and ascertain who shall thereby - appear to have been elected governor; and that on the eighteenth day - of April next, the person so appearing to have been elected, and - appearing before you at Little Rock to have, by you, administered to - him an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and - said modified constitution of the State of Arkansas, and actually - taking said oath, be, by you, declared qualified, and be enjoined to - immediately enter upon the duties of the office of governor of said - State; and that you thereupon declare the constitution of the State - of Arkansas to have been modified and amended as aforesaid by the - action of the people as aforesaid. - - You will please order an election immediately, and perform the other - parts assigned you, with necessary incidentals, all according to the - foregoing.[138] - -By discussion and organization the elements opposed to the Richmond -Government aroused so much enthusiasm that Unionists anticipated the -wishes of the President by meeting, January 8, 1864, in convention at -Little Rock. This assembly, composed of forty-four delegates -representing, as they claimed, twenty-two of the fifty-four counties in -the State, was made up of members elected at various mass meetings by -very meagre votes. This at least was an objection then urged by those -who were adverse to the purposes of the convention. They further stated -that many of the counties represented were without the Federal military -lines. It was admitted that if these counties lay beyond Union lines -neither were they occupied by Confederate forces, and that generally the -delegates were gentlemen of character and patriotism.[139] - -In a published address the convention stated frankly: - - We found after remaining at Little Rock about a week, under a - temporary organization, that delegates were present from twenty-two - counties, elected by the people, and that six other counties had - held elections, and that their representatives were looked for - daily. We then organized the Convention permanently, and determined - that while we could not properly claim to be the people of Arkansas - in Convention assembled, with full and final authority to adopt a - constitution, yet, being the representatives, by election, of a - considerable portion of the State, and understanding, as we - believed, the sentiment of nearly all our citizens who desire the - immediate benefits of a government under the authority of the United - States, we also determined to present a constitution and plan of - organization, which, if adopted by them, becomes at once their act - as effectually as if every county in the State had been represented - in the Convention.[140] - -An amended constitution was adopted by this convention on January 22. By -it the act of secession was declared null and void; slavery was -abolished immediately and unconditionally, and the Confederate debt -wholly repudiated.[141] These important changes in the fundamental law -of the State indicate the sentiments of the delegates. Isaac Murphy was -appointed Provisional Governor; C. C. Bliss, Lieutenant-Governor and R. -T. J. White, Secretary of State. These officers were inaugurated on the -same day that the convention adopted the constitution; this by its -schedule was to be submitted to a popular vote at an election to be held -March 14, when State officers and Representatives in Congress would also -be chosen.[142] - -Ignorant that the movement to restore a civil government had proceeded -so far, Mr. Lincoln had sent his instructions to General Steele. As -these had been carefully considered it was feared the work of the -convention would differ in some essential particular from the plan -outlined for the Federal commander. To prevent such a consequence the -President wrote General Steele again on January 27 as follows: - - I have addressed a letter to you and put it in the hands of Mr. - Gantt and other Arkansas gentlemen, containing a program for an - election in that State. This letter will be handed you by some of - these gentlemen. Since writing it, I see that a Convention in - Arkansas having the same general object, has taken some action, - which I am afraid may clash somewhat with my program. I therefore - can do no better than to ask you to see Mr. Gantt immediately on his - return, and with him do what you and he may deem necessary to - harmonize the two plans into one, and then put it through with all - possible vigor. Be sure to retain the free-State Constitutional - provision in some unquestionable form and you and he can fix the - rest. The points I have made in the program have been well - considered. Take hold with an honest heart and a strong hand. Do not - let any questionable man control or influence you.[143] - -The President’s interest in the proceedings of the convention and his -anxiety about the outcome of its deliberations appear in a letter to -General Steele written three days after the above.[144] So favorable -were his impressions of the progress reported that he believed the best -his subordinate could do “would be to help them on their own plan”; of -this, however, General Steele, who was on the ground, was to be the -judge. To Governor Murphy he telegraphed, February 6, that his order -concerning an election was made in ignorance of any action which the -convention might take; also that his subsequent communication to General -Steele directed that officer to assist, not to hinder, the -delegates.[145] General Thayer also was informed that the apparent -conflict between the President and the convention was altogether -accidental.[146] On February 17, Mr. Lincoln explained the situation -more fully to William M. Fishback: - - When I fixed a plan for an election in Arkansas I did it in - ignorance that your convention was doing the same work. Since I - learned the latter fact I have been constantly trying to yield my - plan to them. I have sent two letters to General Steele, and three - or four despatches to you and others, saying that he, General - Steele, must be master, but that it will probably be best for him to - merely help the convention on its own plan. Some single mind must be - master, else there will be no agreement in anything, and General - Steele, commanding the military and being on the ground, is the best - man to be that master. Even now citizens are telegraphing me to - postpone the election to a later day than either that fixed by the - convention or by me. This discord must be silenced.[147] - -The President evidently had learned something from his recent experience -with his friends and subordinates in Louisiana. General Steele from his -headquarters at Little Rock issued on February 29 the following address -to the people of Arkansas: - - The convention of your citizens, held at Little Rock during the last - month [says this proclamation], has adopted a constitution and - submitted it to you for your approval or rejection. That - constitution is based upon the principles of freedom, and it is for - you now to say, by your voluntary and unbiased action, whether it - shall be your fundamental law. While it may have defects, in the - main it is in accordance with the views of that portion of the - people who have been resisting the fratricidal attempts which have - been made during the last three years. The convention has fixed the - 14th day of March next on which to decide this great question, and - the General commanding is only following the instructions of the - Government when he says to you that every facility will be offered - for the expression of your sentiments, uninfluenced by any - considerations save those which affect your own interests and those - of your posterity.... The election will be held and the return be - made in accordance with the schedule adopted by the convention, and - no interference from any quarter will be allowed to prevent the free - expression of the loyal men of the State on that day.[148] - -The election pursuant to this notice began March 14, 1864, the polls -remaining open for three days. For the constitution 12,177, and against -it 226, votes were cast.[149] Isaac Murphy, against whom there was no -opposing candidate, was chosen Governor by 12,430 votes cast by the -citizens of more than forty counties. As early as March 18 the President -appears to have received from the Governor-elect some favorable -tidings,[150] and on April 27, when more complete returns had reached -him from the same source, he expressed in a telegram his gratification -at the large vote, more than double that required by the Louisiana Plan, -and also at the intelligence that the State government, including the -Legislature, was organized and in working order.[151] - -Besides a Governor five other officers of the executive and several -members of the judicial branch of government together with many county -officials were chosen.[152] At the same time three Representatives in -Congress, T. M. Jacks, A. A. C. Rogers and J. M. Johnson, were elected -from the First, Second and Third Districts respectively. The -Legislature, composed of twenty-three Senators and fifty-nine members of -Assembly, met on the 11th of April, and during the session, which ended -June 1 succeeding, appointed William Fishback and Elisha Baxter United -States Senators to fill vacancies caused by the secession of the late -incumbents, R. W. Johnson and William K. Sebastian. After investigation -by a committee of Congress, however, they were declared not entitled to -seats; but as each possessed such a title to membership as to justify -inquiry they were paid mileage. This consideration they were denied -when, without new action, they subsequently presented themselves at a -special session of the Senate; on that occasion they were accompanied by -William D. Snow, who had been chosen to succeed Fishback. It was agreed, -March 9, 1865, to postpone till the next session of Congress -consideration of the credentials of Mr. Snow. The House, without -admitting as Representatives the three claimants for seats, had -consented to allow them mileage. Arkansas, unlike Louisiana and -Tennessee, did not participate in the Presidential election of 1864, -because of a feeling that its electoral vote would not be received even -if offered. This course appears to have been adopted on the suggestion -of their representatives, who returned with such a conviction from a -sojourn in Washington.[153] - -A succeeding chapter, in tracing the origin and progress of the -controversy between the Executive and Legislative branches of -Government, will describe more fully the attitude of Congress toward Mr. -Lincoln’s efforts at reconstruction and afford an opportunity for -discussing both the nature of the conventions by which civil government -had been restored in Tennessee, Louisiana and Arkansas, and the -constitutionality of the various Executive acts by which this -reëstablishment was assisted. - ------ - -Footnote 113: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 22. - -Footnote 114: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 115: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 4. - -Footnote 116: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 22. - -Footnote 117: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 118: - - Ibid., p. 23. - -Footnote 119: - - Ibid., pp. 23–24. - -Footnote 120: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 24. - -Footnote 121: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 122: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 24. - -Footnote 123: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 124: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 125: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 25. - -Footnote 126: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 127: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 128: - - Ibid., 1862, p. 11. - -Footnote 129: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, p. 11. - -Footnote 130: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 131: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 132: - - N. & H., Vol. VI. p. 346. - -Footnote 133: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 15. - -Footnote 134: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, p. 15. - -Footnote 135: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 379. - -Footnote 136: - - Ibid., p. 247. - -Footnote 137: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 467. - -Footnote 138: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 472–473. - -Footnote 139: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 29; Hough’s American Constitutions, Vol. II. p. - 81. - -Footnote 140: - - Quoted in N. & H., Vol. VIII. p. 414. - -Footnote 141: - - Hough’s Amer. Cons., Vol. II. p. 81. - -Footnote 142: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 29. - -Footnote 143: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 475. - -Footnote 144: - - Ibid., p. 476. - -Footnote 145: - - Ibid., p. 479. - -Footnote 146: - - Ibid., p. 482. - -Footnote 147: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 483–484. - -Footnote 148: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, pp. 29–30. - -Footnote 149: - - Ibid., p. 30. - -Footnote 150: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 501. - -Footnote 151: - - Ibid., p. 515. - -Footnote 152: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 30. - -Footnote 153: - - See remarks of Senator Pomeroy, February 2, 1865, Congressional Globe, - Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 555. - - - - - IV - VIRGINIA - - -The Federal Government, as already observed, was constrained at an early -stage of the Civil War to define its attitude toward loyal citizens of -the seceding States. The earliest indications of the policy adopted may -be discerned in the case of Virginia, which presents the only instance -of a people in any of the insurrectionary States organizing open -resistance to revolution. All departments of government in that -Commonwealth having gone over to rebellion, the loyal minority were left -without any organization for the conduct of domestic affairs. In these -circumstances they called a convention which by an original act of -sovereignty reconstituted the government. The progress of the conflict -was attended in that State by consequences not elsewhere observed, and -it is chiefly because of this fact that a slight departure from exact -chronological order is believed to be justified. The principles which -guided the Administration will be easily comprehended by considering -their application to the novel and somewhat embarrassing questions that -arose before rebellion was finally crushed within the borders of that -once glorious Commonwealth. - -“The Convention of Virginia” which, by authority of the Legislature, -assembled at Richmond, February 13, 1861, passed on April 17 following -an ordinance of secession from the United States.[154] Though the -injunction of secrecy was never removed from this proceeding, the tally, -discovered soon after among the private papers of a member, shows that -88 delegates favored and 55 opposed the measure; one was excused from -voting, eight were either absent or silent.[155] This strong opposition -is explained in part by the physical characteristics of the State. - -The principal chain of the Alleghanies formed in the western portion of -the Old Dominion a lofty range which parts the streams finding their way -into the Ohio and the Potomac from those that reach the lower waters of -Chesapeake Bay or the sounds of North Carolina. The country southeast of -this ridge, including the Shenandoah Valley, the Piedmont district, the -middle division and the tide-water region, contained about three fourths -of the white inhabitants, and something less than three fourths of the -area, of Virginia. In this section were found many large tobacco -plantations cultivated almost exclusively by negroes. Indeed, it was in -the light soil of the tide-water counties of Virginia that English -settlers in America first attempted, nearly two and one half centuries -before, the memorable experiment of African slave labor. Soon after -1808, when their importation was prohibited by act of Congress, slaves -were bred in Virginia to supply the demand of Southern markets, and by -1860 the bondmen in that Commonwealth had become almost two thirds as -numerous as the master race.[156] It is sufficiently accurate to say -that the triangular district bounded on the north by the winding course -of the Potomac, by the parallel of 36° 31′ on the south and stretching -from the Atlantic to the crest of the Alleghany mountains, comprised all -that part of “the good old commonwealth” which was then either -historically important or interesting. This prolific soil was the -birthplace of many of America’s most illustrious sons; its inhabitants -for the most part were proud to trace their descent from the earliest -settlers along the James; many were wealthy, and all had long been -distinguished for their hospitality. - -Beyond this favored region the country, which slopes gradually down to -the upper Potomac and the Ohio, is marked by a succession of parallel -ranges separated by fertile valleys; but like the large tract which -encircled the Adirondacks and a similar one in northern Pennsylvania, -the Virginian wilderness remained untouched by the ceaseless tide of -immigration which at the close of the Revolution swept westward from the -Atlantic seaboard. For this uninviting region the second Federal census -indicates less than two inhabitants to the square mile; by 1810 pioneers -from the line of the Ohio river encroached on its silent forests. At the -next census, however, a portion was still unoccupied, but in the -succeeding decennial period it received from various points, chiefly -from Pennsylvania, Ohio and New England, many enterprising and thrifty -settlers. The sixth census, that of 1840, represents the entire tract as -sparsely inhabited.[157] Its abundant resources, then but little -developed, subsequently gave rise to a great variety of profitable -industries, and it advanced rapidly in population. Extensive -plantations, however, were few; the number of slaves, owing somewhat to -the facility for escape, had always been small, and in the ten years -preceding the outbreak of hostilities had actually diminished by upwards -of two thousand.[158] Though it then contained nearly one fourth of the -whites, it included no more than one thirtieth of the negroes in the -State. Their labor, too, except in other than agricultural occupations, -afforded little remuneration. In consequence of its productions as well -as its location both the interests and sympathies of the people were -with the adjoining States of Ohio and Pennsylvania. - -But, apart from geographical considerations, northwestern Virginia had a -grievance of long standing: for years its inhabitants had complained -that they were not fairly represented in the Legislature, and the -immunity from taxation enjoyed by their fellow-citizens east of the -mountains was a discrimination too gross to escape attention. The slave -oligarchy, they declared, possessed and wielded for its own advantage -the political power of the State. The question of its dismemberment had -been discussed as early as 1829–30, when the mountain sons of Virginia -were on the verge of revolution. The East then yielded a pittance of -power, which, though far short of the demands of justice, reconciled -western Virginians for the time. In 1850 they were again on the point of -insurrection. On this occasion adequate representation was conceded in -the lower though withheld in the upper chamber of the General Assembly, -the dominant party thus retaining control of that body as well as the -benefits of a constitutional provision by which slaves under the age of -twelve years were exempt from taxation, and of those liable to -assessment none could be valued at more than three hundred dollars even -if worth in the market a thousand dollars or upwards.[159] Moreover, -much of the public revenue was expended upon internal improvements for -the eastern section of the State. The Shenandoah Valley, at one time -showing signs of discontent, was bound by the construction of railways, -in social as well as in commercial life, more firmly to Richmond. In -short, the Alleghanies formed a barrier almost completely cutting off -intercourse between the two divisions. Their relations were well -expressed by Governor Pierpont, who told Senator Wade that there was no -communication whatever between the people except the furnishing a few -members to the Legislature and a few inmates of the penitentiary.[160] -Their different interests tended to alienate the sections; the hand of -nature had traced the line of separation. - -Now, however, that a crisis was impending, the Richmond authorities, to -harmonize every element within their Commonwealth, were willing to -forego this privilege; to share the burdens of State administration, to -meet State liabilities, and generally to place themselves on a footing -of equality with their fellow-citizens along the Ohio. This concession, -by a majority of 50,000, was actually extorted in an election from the -prudence or the fears of disunionists whose magnanimity was duly -emphasized by Governor Letcher in an appeal to the people of the -northwest.[161] The latter refused, notwithstanding, to acquiesce in the -action of the secession convention which, so far as it was able to do -so, carried their State, as a political organization, out of the Union. - -It may be affirmed generally that the professional politicians and large -property owners of this region were disloyal;[162] State officials with -surprising unanimity were ardent advocates of secession and active in -committing their Commonwealth to its support. An overwhelming proportion -of the plain people, however, were devotedly attached to the Union and -determined on its preservation. Therefore when the Richmond State -government attempted to execute its laws in these parts it encountered -the most spirited resistance. Especially was this true in the Pan Handle -counties, where opposition was promptly organized. - -Probably the first consultation upon the grave questions that had arisen -was held at the Court House in Wellsburgh, Brooke County, where a large -number of citizens from that and the adjacent county of Hancock -assembled to hear the report of Mr. Campbell Tarr, their delegate to -Richmond. From Harrison came Hon. John S. Carlile, who, like Mr. Tarr, -narrowly escaped with his life from that city, where he had represented -his county in the convention. They reported the proceedings of that body -and urged immediate preparation to resist. As a result of this -discussion a committee of four was appointed to procure arms and -ammunition in Washington. _En route_ thither they had an interview at -Harrisburg with Governor Curtin, who not only expressed sympathy with -their object, but promised assistance if necessary. On arriving at the -national capital they called upon Hon. Edwin M. Stanton, who was a -native of Steubenville, Ohio, and a warm personal friend of each member -of the committee. They were immediately presented to Mr. Cameron, -Secretary of War, who, on learning the purpose of their visit, -manifested some hesitation as to his legal right to comply with their -request. Upon this Mr. Stanton declared with emphasis that “the law of -_necessity_ gives the right,” and added, “let them have arms and -ammunition; we will look for the book law afterwards.”[163] Two thousand -rifles with suitable ammunition were then furnished, and as security for -their proper use Mr. Stanton tendered his own name. From Wellsburgh, -where they were temporarily kept in expectation of a rebel attack, these -arms were sent for distribution to Wheeling. - -United States troops from Ohio and Indiana together with local -volunteers soon drove the Confederate forces from this region, and -subsequently, though often menaced, it was almost exempt from the -ravages of war.[164] Thus encouraged, Union men resolved to form a -political organization coextensive with Virginia or to establish a -separate and distinct State. Preliminary movements toward that end were -promptly inaugurated, and, April 22, 1861, five days after the passage -of the ordinance, nearly 1,200 citizens of Clarksburgh denounced in a -public meeting the action of the secession convention and recommended -the people of northwestern Virginia to assemble on May 13 at Wheeling. -On the 4th a Union mass meeting had been held at Kingwood, near the -northern border. The separation of western from eastern Virginia was -declared by this body to be essential to the maintenance of their -liberties. They also resolved to elect a Representative to Congress. On -the following day there convened at Wheeling another assemblage, which -considered the question of separating from that portion of the State in -rebellion. About the same time other gatherings were held in different -localities. - -There were thousands of eager and earnest patriots in the city of -Wheeling on May 13, when nearly four hundred delegates, mostly appointed -by primary meetings, and representing twenty-six counties, assembled to -deliberate on the situation. The best method of organizing opposition to -treason was the question: how to inaugurate a government which the -Federal authorities would recognize and protect?[165] On this important -subject there is said to have been considerable diversity of opinion; -the decision finally reached was based upon a suggestion by one of the -members that since Governor Letcher and other State officers, by -adhering to the pretended ordinance of secession, had forfeited their -powers, and the existing constitution made no provision for such an -emergency, the only way was to ask the people, the source of all -political power, to send delegates to a convention authorized to supply -their places with loyal men. This proposal was presented to the meeting -and adopted with great unanimity.[166] A General State Committee, -empowered to appoint sub-committees in all counties where practicable, -was then named, and a stirring address put forth. It announced their -purpose and urged all loyal citizens to elect representatives to a -second convention. Copies of this appeal were sent to influential -citizens throughout the State, and it was agreed after a session of -three days to choose on May 26 delegates to the proposed convention. - -This election having been held at the time appointed, representatives -from nearly forty counties assembled at Wheeling on June 11. The -convention, numbering 98 members, organized by selecting for its -president Hon Arthur I. Boreman. Before proceeding to business the -following oath was administered to the delegation from each county: “We -solemnly declare that we will support the Constitution of the United -States and the laws made in pursuance thereof, as the supreme law of the -land, anything in the Ordinance of the Convention that assembled in -Richmond on the 13th day of February last to the contrary -notwithstanding, so help us God.”[167] The State government was -reconstituted on the 13th by an ordinance declaring vacant all places, -whether legislative, executive or judicial, whose incumbents had -espoused the cause of secession. This class, as already observed, -included nearly every official in Virginia. These vacancies the -convention supplied by the appointment of loyal men. In the constitution -they made an important alteration which prescribed the number of -delegates necessary to constitute a quorum in the General Assembly. All -State, county and town officials were required to take an oath of -allegiance which pledged support of both the Federal Constitution and -the restored government of Virginia. On June 17 a declaration of -independence was adopted without one dissenting voice; it denounced the -usurpation of the Richmond convention, which had assumed to place the -resources of Virginia at the disposal of the Confederate Government, to -which power it repudiated allegiance. Resolutions expressing a -determination never to submit to the ordinance of secession, but to -maintain the rights of Virginia in the Union, were then passed. All -persons in arms against the national Government were commanded to -disband and to return to their allegiance. Though the members seriously -endeavored to reorganize their government, it was with an express -declaration that a division of the Commonwealth was a paramount object -of their labors, and they decided, June 20, by a unanimous vote in favor -of ultimate separation. - -Under an ordinance previously adopted Hon. Francis H. Pierpont was -chosen Governor on the same day; a lieutenant-governor, an -attorney-general and an executive council of five were also appointed. -Other administrative offices were subsequently filled. The new -incumbents were to exercise their functions for six months or until -successors should be elected and qualified. The convention on June 25, -subject in an emergency to be reassembled by the Governor and Council, -then adjourned to August 6, 1861. - -Before concluding this session the convention directed all members -willing to swear fealty to the Union, who were elected to the assembly -on May 23 preceding, to meet on the 1st of July at Wheeling. At the time -of their election these representatives were destined for Richmond. In -addition to those regularly chosen under the old law of the -Commonwealth, others pursuant to an ordinance of the convention were -elected to fill vacancies. All were to qualify themselves by taking an -oath or affirmation of allegiance to the United States and to the -reorganized government of Virginia. These members, chiefly from the -western counties, were to compose the law-making body, which was -invested with all the powers and duties pertaining to the General -Assembly. - -The new Governor was inaugurated on June 20, and, after taking the oath -of office, said: “We have been driven into the position we occupy to-day -by the usurpers at the South, who have inaugurated this war upon the -soil of Virginia, and have made it the great Crimea of this contest. We, -representing the loyal citizens of Virginia, have been bound to assume -the position we have assumed to-day for the protection of ourselves, our -wives, our children, and our property. We, I repeat, have been driven to -assume this position; and now we are but recurring to the great -fundamental principle of our fathers, that to the loyal people of a -State belongs the law-making power of that State. The loyal people are -entitled to the government and governmental authority of the State. And, -fellow-citizens, it is the assumption of that authority upon which we -are now about to enter.”[168] - -“It was not the object of the Wheeling convention,” he declared on a -later occasion, “to set up any new government in the State, or separate, -or other government than the one under which they had always -lived.”[169] - -From these utterances his hearers must have concluded that the -reorganized government was not for a part but for the whole of Virginia. -Indeed, it was to the discernment of Mr. Pierpont that Virginia -loyalists were chiefly indebted for a legal solution of the intricate -problem that confronted them. While Carlile and others were urging a -counter-revolution, Mr. Pierpont was carefully studying the provisions -of the Federal Constitution. The clause of that instrument which -guarantees a republican form of government was designed, he believed, to -meet just such an emergency as had arisen. Though this conservative -suggestion was not at first received with much favor, it continued -gradually to win adherents until its propriety was universally -recognized.[170] By thus proceeding along constitutional lines a State -government in all its branches was soon established in every county not -occupied by an armed foe. - -The Legislature of the restored State assembled, July 2, at Wheeling and -assumed the full exercise of its powers. Two United States Senators, -Waitman T. Willey, whose fidelity many considered doubtful, and John S. -Carlile, an able, eloquent and then a trusted leader, were elected, July -9; the former to fill the vacancy occasioned by the withdrawal of James -M. Mason, the latter to succeed Robert M. T. Hunter, who also had -abdicated his seat in Congress. Both were admitted, though not without a -vigorous protest from the minority, to seats at the first session of the -Thirty-seventh Congress, which met on July 4, 1861. - -Their certificates were presented, July 13, by Andrew Johnson. Senator -Bayard entered a protest. Their admission, he said, would be a -recognition of an organization that was not the regular government of -the Commonwealth. Mr. Letcher was still Governor of Virginia, his term -not having expired. The Senate had no authority to create a new State -out of a part of an existing one. He then moved to refer their -credentials to the Committee on the Judiciary. His colleague, Mr. -Saulsbury, objected, that Mason and Hunter were not expelled until July -11, whereas the claimants were appointed two days previously, at a time -when no vacancies had occurred. To this Senator Johnson replied that the -vacancies did in fact exist at the time of their election, July 9, and -that the expulsion of Mason and Hunter was not merely a declaration that -vacancies existed, but their seats were regarded as filled, and the -occupants expelled from the floor of the Senate. - -Mr. Bayard denied that, even if Mason and Hunter were guilty of the -alleged crimes, there was any power in either the Governor or -Legislature to terminate their appointments; they might die, they could -be removed by expulsion, but vacancies could not be anticipated by the -Legislature of Virginia. The name of Mr. Pierpont could convey no -authority to their credentials. On the question of reference five -Senators voted in the affirmative, thirty-five in the negative. The oath -was therefore administered and they took their seats, July 13, at the -special session which began on the 4th.[171] - -A resolution was passed by the House of Delegates of the reorganized -government instructing the Senators and requesting their Representatives -in Congress to vote the necessary appropriation of men and money for a -vigorous prosecution of the war, and to oppose all compromise. A stay -law was also enacted by the Legislature, and a bill passed which -authorized the Governor to organize a patrol in such counties as might -require it; two hundred thousand dollars were appropriated for military -purposes. - -On August 6, 1861, the Wheeling convention reassembled. Hitherto in all -its proceedings relative to a reorganization there had been great -unanimity, but when the delegates returned they were conscious of a -strong popular sentiment in favor of erecting a new State, a subject -that had been introduced, though not much discussed, before adjournment. -This determination among their constituents seriously troubled many of -the members. Political aspirations had been awakened; many of them had -enjoyed the benefits of the humbler offices under the mother State; the -Union forces, it was confidently expected, would soon crush the -insurrection in Virginia, and the reorganized government, with -themselves at its head, would be acquiesced in by their recent -oppressors. To their ambition this hope was far more flattering than the -prospect of administering the affairs of a comparatively small State on -the western frontier of the Old Dominion. Then, too, the idea of -dismemberment was certain to wound Virginia State pride. Moreover, the -movement to form an independent commonwealth, when the reorganized -government itself had been scarcely recognized, would look premature. -Sentiments of this nature had begun to possess the minds of many -delegates about the time of their return. - -In compliance with what appeared to be a popular demand, however, these -considerations were disregarded, and the convention by a vote of 50 to -28 passed an ordinance authorizing the formation out of the Commonwealth -of Virginia of a new State to be called Kanawha, which was to embrace -thirty-nine counties between the Alleghanies and the Ohio, provided the -people thereof, at an election to be held on October 24, should express -themselves in favor of such a measure; on certain prescribed conditions -other contiguous counties could be annexed. At the election which was to -decide this important question delegates to a constitutional convention -were also to be chosen, and, if separation was approved by the people, -these representatives were to assemble at Wheeling on November 26 and -organize themselves into a convention. Any constitution which they might -adopt was to be submitted to the qualified electors of the counties -concerned. The new commonwealth was to assume a just proportion of -Virginia’s public debt as it existed prior to January 1, 1861; private -rights derived from her laws were to be valid under the proposed State, -and were to be determined by the laws then existing in Virginia.[172] - -The convention, as previously noted, reassembled on August 6. Three days -later one A. F. Ritchie, a member from Marion County, forwarded to -Attorney-General Bates at Washington a letter which requested and -received an immediate reply. Mr. Ritchie published the response, of -which this is the important part: - - The formation of a new State out of Western Virginia is an original, - independent act of _revolution_. I do not deny the power of - revolution (I do not call it right, for it is never prescribed; it - exists in force only, and has and can have no law but the will of - the revolutionists). Any attempt to carry it out involves a plain - breach of _both the constitutions_—of Virginia and of the Nation. - And hence it is plain that you cannot take such a course without - weakening, if not destroying, your claims upon the sympathy and - support of the General Government, and without disconcerting the - plan already adopted by both Virginia and the General Government for - the reorganization of the revolted States and the restoration of the - integrity of the Union. - - That plan I understand to be this: When a State, by its perverted - functionaries, has declared itself out of the Union, we avail - ourselves of all the sound and loyal elements of the State—all who - own allegiance to and claim protection of the Constitution—to form a - State government as nearly as may be upon the former model, and - claiming to be the very State which has been in part overthrown by - the successful rebellion. In this way we establish a constitutional - nucleus around which all the shattered elements of the commonwealth - may meet and combine, and thus restore the old State in its original - integrity. - - This, I verily thought, was the plan adopted at Wheeling, and - recognized and acted upon by the General Government here. Your - convention annulled the revolutionary proceedings at Richmond, both - in the Convention and the General Assembly, and your new Governor - formally demanded of the President the fulfillment of the - constitutional guaranty in favor of Virginia—Virginia as known to - our fathers and to us. The President admitted the obligation, and - promised his best efforts to fulfill it. And the Senate admitted - your Senators, not as representing a new and nameless State, now for - the first time heard of in our history, but as representing “the - good old commonwealth.” - - Must all this be undone, and a new and hazardous experiment be - ventured upon, at the moment when dangers and difficulties are - thickening around us? I hope not.... I had rejoiced in the movement - in Western Virginia, as a legal, constitutional, and safe refuge - from revolution and anarchy; as at once an example and fit - instrument for the restoration of all the revolted States. - - I have not time now to discuss the subject in its various bearings. - What I have written is written with a running pen and will need your - charitable criticism. - - If I had time to think, I could give persuasive reasons for - declining the attempt to create a new State at this perilous time. - At another time I might be willing to go fully into the question, - but now I can say no more.[173] - -Mr. Ritchie, who had opposed a dismemberment of the old Commonwealth, -was anxious, no doubt, to justify his vote by the endorsement of an -eminent public character, and it is not improbable that before finally -determining his action in so important a matter he was desirous of the -opinion of some member of the Administration. Mr. Bates’s communication -is dated the 12th; the convention did not adjourn till the 25th of -August. At any time prior to January 1, 1862, it was subject to be -reassembled by its president or by the Governor. - -The election of October 24, by a vote of 18,408 to 781, decided in favor -of a division of the Commonwealth.[174] At the same time fifty-three -delegates, representing forty-one counties, were chosen to frame a -constitution for the proposed State. Of this convention John Hall was -elected president and Ellery R. Hall secretary. The task before it, by -no means an easy one, was to draft a fundamental law that would secure -the approval of the people of western Virginia, of the Legislature of -the restored State and of Congress. After a session of nearly three -months it adjourned, February 18, 1862. Commissioners to convoke this -body, should its work be recognized by Congress, had first been -appointed. On December 3 preceding the name of the new State was changed -to West Virginia. - -In the convention were many members who desired silence on the subject -of slavery; others saw clearly that to ignore the cause of their present -troubles would ensure a rejection of their work by Congress. This -element felt assured that the temper of the national Legislature would -not indulge the slave power by giving it two additional Senators besides -an increase of strength in the Electoral College. There was also a -sentiment which desired a postponement of the disturbing question until -all others had first been determined. The friends of gradual -emancipation were warned by leading Republicans in Congress that the -constitution would not be recognized without a satisfactory provision on -this subject. The “peculiar institution,” however, still possessed -influence enough to defeat such a purpose, and the convention adjourned -without inserting any expression concerning slavery. Still, the friends -of emancipation did not despair. Mr. Parker, one of these, caused to be -printed in Ohio instructions to their assemblymen to make the following -provision a part of their constitution if the speedy admission of the -new State into the Union should appear to require it: “All children born -of slave mothers in this State, after the constitution goes into -operation, shall be free, males at the age of twenty-eight years, and -females at the age of eighteen years, and the children of such females -to be free at birth.”[175] - -This unauthorized action of Mr. Parker, in connection with appeals -through the newspapers, was not without effect. At their county-seat the -citizens of Upshur passed, among other resolutions, the following: “That -we, the citizens of Upshur County, do endorse and accept the policy -recommended by the present Chief Magistrate of the United States, -(Abraham Lincoln) in his message of the 6th of March, 1862, to Congress, -in regard to the emancipation of the slaves of the border States, as the -policy that should be adopted by the people of West Virginia; and we do -now pledge ourselves to advocate, defend and carry out the said policy, -as the most promotive of our liberty, safety and prosperity in the -Union.”[176] Another resolution, adopted on this occasion, declared that -the meeting expected the convention would have given the people an -opportunity of expressing their sentiments on slavery in the proposed -State. The convention, they complained, did not reflect the popular -will. - -The Union men and the loyal press of other counties followed the example -of Upshur by approving the measure or copying the “Instructions.” Thus -at the time of voting on the constitution an informal poll on slavery -was obtained in twenty counties. - -A faction in the convention proposed to annex the Shenandoah Valley with -its large negro population; the success of such a plan, it was well -understood, would ensure a rejection of the new State by Congress. To -anticipate somewhat the events presently to be narrated it may be -remarked at this point that the adversaries of the measure in Washington -employed precisely the same tactics to defeat the movement for erecting -an independent State. - -The new establishment under Pierpont was regarded as representing the -old Commonwealth. On December 2, 1861, the reorganized Legislature again -assembled. The Governor recommended a repeal of the stay laws and -confiscation of the property of secessionists. He congratulated the -people that they had contributed their full quota, about 6,000 men, to -the Union army. - -The adversaries of slavery endeavored to obtain the consent of the -restored Legislature to the condition that the gradual emancipation -clause should become a part of the constitution as soon as ratified by -the people. If Congress at its present session would give its consent -and admit the new State on the same condition, the people, they -declared, could be trusted to ratify afterward. - -An election held April 3, 1862, gave, including the soldiers’ vote, -28,321 for and 572 against the constitution, no returns being received -from ten counties.[177] The vote for gradual emancipation, where an -expression was had, was almost equal to that given for the constitution, -both being nearly unanimous. The former received 6,052 for and 610 -against it. How far this informal expression of opinion influenced -Congress will presently be noticed. - -At an extra session of the Legislature, convoked by Governor Pierpont, -an act, in almost the identical language of that assenting to the -formation of Kentucky, was passed, May 13, 1862, giving consent to the -erection within the jurisdiction of Virginia of a new State to include -forty-eight named counties; the second section of this act provided that -Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederic counties could be annexed whenever a -majority of their votes, at an election to be held for that purpose, -should ratify the constitution. The act, together with a certified -original of the constitution, was to be transmitted to their Senators -and Representatives in Washington, who were requested to use their -endeavors to obtain the consent of Congress to the admission of West -Virginia into the Union. - -On June 23, 1862, Mr. Wade, from the Committee on Territories, reported -to the United States Senate a bill for the admission of West Virginia -into the Union, and three days later requested its consideration. It -stipulated, among other things, that “the convention thereinafter -provided for shall, in the constitution to be framed by it, make -provision that from and after the fourth day of July, 1863, the children -of all slaves born within the limits of the State shall be free”; it -also allotted to the new Commonwealth as many Representatives in -Congress as her population would justify under the apportionment then -existing. - -Charles Sumner observed that the former was the imposition of a -condition which proposed to recognize the existence of slavery during -that generation. “Short as life may be,” he declared, “it is too long -for slavery.” By the admission of West Virginia a new slave State would -be added; he moved, therefore, to substitute for this requirement the -Jeffersonian interdict that “within the limits of said State there shall -be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in -punishment of crime whereof the party shall be duly convicted.” - -Mr. Hale justly remarked that after consenting to the admission of so -many States with pro-slavery constitutions it would be a singular fact -if the first that ever applied with a provision for prospective -emancipation should be rejected. - -Senator Collamer believed that if West Virginia was to enter on a -footing of perfect equality with other members of the Union she should, -like them, have the right to regulate domestic questions, including -slavery, in her own way. The condition imposed by the bill denied her -that right. - -Mr. Wade disliked the proposition as it stood, because it was very -objectionable to him “to say that a man born on the 4th day of July, -1863, shall be free, and one born the day before shall be forever a -slave.” “I should much prefer,” he added, “to have it graduated so that -all born after the adoption of this constitution shall be free, and that -all between certain ages shall be free at a certain period.” At this -point Sumner’s amendment was lost by a vote of 24 to 11. - -Mr. Carlile, of Virginia, who was foremost in organizing resistance to -secession, had from the beginning assumed the appearance of a friend, -but, after giving direction to the movement for separation, acted as an -adversary to the new State; he opposed all conditions on its admission -and expressed a preference that it be permitted to enter on the -constitution submitted by its people. He would never “consent to have -the organic law of a State framed for its people by the Congress of the -United States.” There were 47,000 voters in the counties to be embraced -within the proposed State; of that number only about 19,000 had voted on -the constitution. At the last moment he delivered with his usual -eloquence a strong argument against admission. An amendment which he -submitted would have the effect certainly to postpone, perhaps -altogether to defeat, the measure in the Senate. Failing to secure its -adoption, he urged a postponement till December following; this motion, -however, was voted down. - -So surprised were his associates at this unexpected opposition that they -inquired pointedly why these belated arguments had not been presented to -the Committee on Territories when the measure was before them. Mr. Wade, -its chairman, was especially severe in his condemnation of Carlile’s -extraordinary course, for it was the reasoning of the Virginia Senator -that had won their support; he had searched the precedents and submitted -cheerfully to all the labors imposed by the Committee. Now by his -opposition he brought everything to a stand-still. - -His colleague, Mr. Willey, who had been converted in a rather advanced -stage of the movement, declared that it was not the desire to be free -from that part of the Commonwealth in rebellion that was responsible for -the present attitude of western Virginia; the insurrection only -precipitated the attempt to settle a controversy which was older than -he. To enforce his remarks he added that great numbers of her citizens -had determined to fix their abodes elsewhere unless West Virginia became -an independent State. During this discussion the Senate had before it -the constitution framed by the convention which met November 26, 1861, -in the city of Wheeling. - -After a vigorous address by Benjamin F. Wade, who had recently -investigated the subject, and whose ardor had been aroused by a -deputation of West Virginians then in Washington, the bill by a vote of -23 to 17 passed the Senate, July 14, 1862.[178] - -By Mr. Brown, of Virginia, a similar measure had already been introduced -into the House on June 25. It was read twice and referred to the -Committee on Territories.[179] When called up on July 16 succeeding it -was agreed to postpone consideration of the bill until the regular -session in December,[180] and on the 9th of that month, when -Representative Bingham asked that it be put on its passage, discussion -of the subject was resumed. - -Representative Conway said that if the application of West Virginia came -in the proper manner he would be happy to vote for its admission; he -regretted, however, that at the beginning of the rebellion a territorial -government had not been organized there; Congress could then have passed -an enabling act, and the State could be received in a manner to admit of -no dispute. The question turned, he declared, on whether the State of -Virginia, of which a Mr. Pierpont was Governor, was the lawful State. -This he denied. A number of persons without authority met at Wheeling -and organized a government. This establishment the President had -recognized; one branch of Congress by admitting its Senators had also -conceded its legality. These precedents, however, should not be binding -on the House. Neither mobs nor mass-meetings, he asserted, make laws -under our system, and such bodies had no authority to appoint Mr. -Pierpont. - -The President intended, Mr. Conway believed, to form similar -organizations in all the seceded States. “A policy seems about to be -inaugurated,” he added, “looking to an assumption of State powers by a -few individuals, wherever a military or other encampment can be effected -in any of the rebellious districts. The utter and flagrant -unconstitutionality of this scheme—I may say, its radically -revolutionary character—ought to expose it to the reprobation of every -loyal citizen and every member of this House. It aims at an utter -subversion of our constitutional system. Its effect would be to -consolidate all the powers of the Government in the hands of the -Executive. With the admission of this new State, the President will have -substantially _created_ four Senators—two for Virginia and two for West -Virginia.” In referring to an extension of this system he declared that -the President and a few friends could exercise Federal authority in all -those States. “The true policy of this Government, therefore, with -regard to the seceded States, is to hold them as common territory -wherever and whenever our arms are extended over them. This obviates the -terrible dangers which I have alluded to, and is in harmony with the -highest considerations of public utility, as well as with sound legal -principles.”[181] - -Mr. Conway directed his criticisms against the President because he -believed the Executive was first to recognize the new government. The -action of the Senate was based upon this precedent, it being assumed -that recognition was an Executive function. - -Mr. Brown, who introduced the bill at the preceding session, related -concisely the essential facts already placed before the reader. He -reminded Representative Conway that, though a State could not commit -treason, or any other crime, the officials of government could do so; -that the legislative powers, being incapable of annihilation, returned -to the people; that the spontaneous assembly at Wheeling merely -organized and proposed a plan by which regular elections were to be held -to fill vacancies caused by the withdrawal of disloyal representatives. -A day was fixed, and wherever throughout the State loyal citizens chose -to hold an election they could do so. The body thus elected assumed the -legislative functions of the people. - -In answer to an inquiry he replied that about five counties outside of -West Virginia were represented in the Legislature which consented to the -erection of the new State, and all the counties in the State were -expressly invited to send representatives to the General Assembly. If -they were loyal they should have coöperated; if not, they should have no -voice in either the State Legislature or Congress. He referred in his -remarks to a telegram which he had that morning received from Wheeling. -It contained a resolution passed by the Assembly asking the House of -Representatives to approve the bill for the admission of West Virginia, -which had been favorably acted upon by the Senate at the preceding -session. - -“It has been asserted,” he said in conclusion, “and understood in some -quarters, that the organization of the government at Wheeling was for -the purpose of forming a new State. I am prepared to say that when the -convention originally met in Wheeling, although there were a few -radicals there who wanted to form a new State without reinstating the -old State of Virginia, we voted them down, and commenced the exercise of -our original rights as freemen to build up the loyal government of -Virginia; and although we designed eventually to ask for this -separation, and it was what we anxiously desired, yet we determined to -be a law-abiding people, and ask for what we desired through the forms -of law.”[182] - -Representative Colfax in giving the reasons which should govern his vote -stated that the restored government had been recognized by the Senate, -by the President as well as other executive officers, and that the -House, by admitting Mr. Segar, elected pursuant to a proclamation of -Governor Pierpont, had also recognized the reorganized State. Even the -political party in opposition voted for that member’s admission. He also -remarked that the new State came knocking at the door for admission with -the tiara of freedom on her brow.[183] - -Mr. Olin, who opposed the bill at the preceding session, said: “I shall -vote for it now with reluctance. I shall vote for it mainly upon the -ground that the General Government, whether wisely or unwisely I will -not undertake to say, has encouraged this movement to create a division -of the State of Virginia.”[184] The people of West Virginia, with their -experience of the evils which slavery brought on them, should not have -permitted that institution to exist for an hour in their new government. -For this deficiency, however, the bill provided a partial remedy. - -Crittenden observed that it was the party applying for admission that -gave its consent to a division of the State.[185] To this objection -Representative Blair replied that there were counties outside of West -Virginia which had assented to dismemberment. Other members, who had -hitherto been hostile, now consented to support the measure from a -conviction that it would weaken rebellion. - -Representative Dawes said that the primary elections which sent -delegates to the Wheeling convention discussed not a reorganization of -the Virginia government, but the formation of an independent State in -western Virginia. To accomplish that, he said, the only way was to -restore the government of the entire Commonwealth. That government then -had two things to do: to set up a new State within itself and secondly -to give its consent thereto. This suggestion, he understood, emanated -from Washington.[186] - -In reference to the admission, Thaddeus Stevens said: - - I do not desire to be understood as being deluded by the idea that - we are admitting this State in pursuance of any provisions of the - Constitution. I find no such provision that justifies it, and the - argument in favor of the constitutionality of it is one got up by - those who either honestly entertain, I think, an erroneous opinion, - or who desire to justify, by a forced construction, an act which - they have predetermined to do. - - * * * * * - - Now, to say that the Legislature which called this seceding - convention was not the Legislature of Virginia, is asserting that - the Legislature chosen by a vast majority of the people of a State - is not the Legislature of that State. That is a doctrine which I can - never assent to. I admit that the Legislature were disloyal, but - they were still the disloyal and traitorous Legislature of the State - of Virginia; and the State, as a mere State, was bound by their - acts. Not so individuals. They are responsible to the General - Government, and are responsible whether the State decrees treason or - not. That being the Legislature of Virginia, Governor Letcher, - elected by a majority of the votes of the people, is the Governor of - Virginia—a traitor in rebellion, but a traitorous governor of a - traitorous State. Now, then, how has that State ever given its - consent to this division? A highly respectable but very small number - of the citizens of Virginia—the people of West Virginia—assembled - together, disapproved of the acts of the State of Virginia, and with - the utmost self-complacency called themselves Virginia. - - * * * * * - - I hold that none of the States now in rebellion are entitled to the - protection of the Constitution, and I am grieved when I hear those - high in authority sometimes talking of the constitutional - difficulties about enforcing measures against this belligerent - power, and the next moment disregarding every vestige and semblance - of the Constitution by acts which alone are arbitrary. I hope I do - not differ with the Executive in the views which I advocate. But I - see the Executive one day saying “you shall not take the property of - rebels to pay the debts which the rebels have brought upon the - Northern States.” Why? Because the Constitution is in the way. And - the next day I see him appointing a military governor of Virginia, a - military governor of Tennessee, and some other places. Where does he - find anything in the Constitution to warrant that? - - If he must look there alone for authority, then all these acts are - flagrant usurpations, deserving the condemnation of the community. - He must agree with me or else his acts are as absurd as they are - unlawful; for I see him here and there ordering elections for - members of Congress wherever he finds a little collection of three - or four consecutive plantations in the rebel States, in order that - men may be sent in here to control the proceedings of this Congress, - just as we sanctioned the election held by a few people at a little - watering place at Fortress Monroe, by which we have here the very - respectable and estimable member from that locality with us. It was - upon the same principle. - - ... I say, then, that we may admit West Virginia as a new State, not - by virtue of any provision of the Constitution, but under our - absolute power which the laws of war give us in the circumstances in - which we are placed. I shall vote for this bill upon that theory, - and upon that alone; for I will not stultify myself by supposing - that we have any warrant in the Constitution for this proceeding. - -The Union, he declared, could never be restored as it was. His consent -would never be given to restore it with a constitutional provision -protecting slavery. An additional reason for giving his vote in favor of -the bill was that there was a provision which would make West Virginia a -free State.[187] - -“No right of persons, no right of property,” said Mr. Noell, “no social -or domestic affairs, could be regulated or controlled by the people of -western Virginia, under the circumstances in which they were placed, -without recognizing the ordinance of secession, and acting as a State -within the Southern Confederacy.”[188] This showed both the necessity of -reorganizing the government of Virginia and the recognition by Federal -authorities of the establishment so constituted. - -Mr. Segar declared that eleven of the forty-eight counties to comprise -the new State had not participated in its establishment, being -represented neither in the reorganized Legislature nor the Wheeling -convention; three others were unrepresented both in the House of -Delegates and the conventions; ten cast no vote on the constitution and -three had interests, social and commercial, which bound them up with the -East. Then, too, the people of West Virginia made a fundamental law -recognizing slavery; an anti-slavery constitution was to be imposed on -them as a condition of admission.[189] - -An able argument by Representative Bingham, of Ohio, who had charge of -the bill, concluded the debate on December 10, 1862, when it passed by -96 yeas to 55 nays.[190] - -With the President rested the fate of this important measure; if he -vetoed it there would, probably, not be found a two thirds majority in -its support. Many members, as will be seen from the preceding abridgment -of the debates, yielded only a reluctant support. - -On December 23, 1862, Mr. Lincoln sent to his constitutional advisers -the following note: - - =Gentlemen of the Cabinet=: - - A bill for an act entitled “An act for the admission of the State of - West Virginia into the Union and for other purposes” has passed the - House of Representatives and the Senate, and has been duly presented - to me for my action. - - I respectfully ask of each of you an opinion in writing on the - following questions, to wit: - - 1st. Is the said act constitutional? - - 2d. Is the said act expedient?[191] - -To this request six members of the Cabinet responded by submitting their -written opinions. Three—Seward, Stanton and Chase—answered both -questions in the affirmative. Bates, Blair and Welles replied in the -negative; the remaining place in the Cabinet was vacant owing to the -resignation of Caleb B. Smith, Secretary of the Interior, who had been -raised to the Bench in Indiana. His successor had not yet been -appointed. - -Upon the constitutional point Mr. Seward said: “It seems to me that the -political body which has given consent in this case is really and -incontestably the State of Virginia. So long as the United States do not -recognize the secession, departure, or separation of one of the States, -that State must be deemed as existing and having a constitutional place -within the Union, whatever may be at any moment exactly its -revolutionary condition. A State thus situated cannot be deemed to be -divided into two or more States merely by any revolutionary proceeding -which may have occurred, because there cannot be, constitutionally, two -or more States of Virginia.... The newly organized State of Virginia is -therefore, at this moment, by the express consent of the United States, -invested with all the rights of the State of Virginia, and charged with -all the powers, privileges, and dignity of that State. If the United -States allow to that organization any of these rights, powers, and -privileges, it must be allowed to possess and enjoy them all. If it be a -State competent to be represented in Congress and bound to pay taxes, it -is a State competent to give the required consent of the State to the -formation and erection of the new State of West Virginia within the -jurisdiction of Virginia.” - -“Upon the question of expediency,” he wrote, “I am determined by two -considerations. First. The people of Western Virginia will be safer from -molestation for their loyalty, because better able to protect and defend -themselves as a new and separate State than they would be if left to -demoralizing uncertainty upon the question whether, in the progress of -the war, they may not be again reabsorbed in the State of Virginia, and -subjected to severities as a punishment for their present devotion to -the Union. The first duty of the United States is protection to loyalty -wherever it is found. Second. I am of opinion that the harmony and peace -of the Union will be promoted by allowing the new State to be formed and -erected, which will assume jurisdiction over that part of the valley of -the Ohio which lies on the south side of the Ohio River, displacing, in -a constitutional and lawful manner, the jurisdiction heretofore -exercised there by a political power concentrated at the head of the -James River.”[192] - -Mr. Chase, in discussing the constitutional question, said in part: “The -Madison Papers clearly show that the consent of the Legislature of the -original State was the only consent required to the erection and -formation of a new State within its jurisdiction. That consent having -been given, the consent of the new State, if required, is proved by her -application for admission.... The Legislature of Virginia, it may be -admitted, did not contain many members from the eastern counties; it -contained, however, representatives from all counties whose inhabitants -were not either rebels themselves, or dominated by greater numbers of -rebels. It was the only Legislature of the State known to the Union. If -its consent was not valid, no consent could be. If its consent was not -valid, the Constitution, as to the people of West Virginia, has been so -suspended by the rebellion that a most important right under it is -utterly lost.” - -Relative to the question of expediency, he writes: “The act is almost -universally regarded as of vital importance to their welfare by the -loyal people most immediately interested, and it has received the -sanction of large majorities in both Houses of Congress. These facts -afford strong presumptions of expediency.... It may be said, indeed, -that the admission of West Virginia will draw after it the necessity of -admitting other States under the consent of extemporized legislatures -assuming to act for whole States, though really representing no -important part of their territory. I think this necessity imaginary. -There is no such legislature, nor is there likely to be. No such -legislature, if extemporized, is likely to receive the recognition of -Congress or the Executive.”[193] - -Mr. Stanton responded more briefly than either Secretary Seward or -Secretary Chase, observing, among other things: “I have been unable to -perceive any point on which the act of Congress conflicts with the -Constitution. By the erection of the new State, the geographical -boundary heretofore existing between the free and slave States will be -broken, and the advantage of this upon every point of consideration -surpasses all objections which have occurred to me on the question of -expediency. Many prophetic dangers and evils might be specified, but it -is safe to suppose that those who come after us will be as wise as -ourselves, and if what we deem evils be really such, they will be -avoided. The present good is real and substantial, the future may safely -be left in the care of those whose duty and interest may be involved in -any possible future measures of legislation.”[194] - -One or two excerpts from the opinion of Mr. Welles will indicate the -course of his argument in the negative: “Under existing necessities, an -organization of the loyal citizens, or of a portion of them, has been -recognized, and its Senators and Representatives admitted to seats in -Congress. Yet we cannot close our eyes to the fact that the fragment of -the State which, in the revolutionary tumult, has instituted the new -organization, is not possessed of the records, archives, symbols, -traditions, or capital of the Commonwealth. Though calling itself the -State of Virginia, it does not assume the debts and obligations -contracted prior to the existing difficulties. Is this organization, -then, really and in point of fact anything else than a provisional -government for the State? It is composed almost entirely of those loyal -citizens who reside beyond the mountains, and within the prescribed -limits of the proposed new State. In this revolutionary period, there -being no contestants, we are compelled to recognize the organization as -Virginia. Whether that would be the case, and how the question would be -met and disposed of, were the insurrection this day abandoned, need not -now be discussed. Were Virginia, or those parts of it not included in -the proposed new State, invaded and held in temporary subjection by a -foreign enemy instead of the insurgents, the fragment of territory and -population which should successfully repel the enemy and adhere to the -Union would doubtless, during such temporary subjection, be recognized, -and properly recognized, as Virginia. When, however, this loyal fragment -goes farther, and not only declares itself to be Virginia, but proceeds -by its own act to detach itself permanently and forever from the -Commonwealth, and to erect itself into a new State within the -jurisdiction of the State of Virginia, the question arises whether this -proceeding is regular, legal, right, and, in honest good faith, -conformable to, and within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.... -Congress may admit new States into the Union; but any attempt to -dismember or divide a State by any forced or unauthorized assumption -would be an inexpedient exercise of doubtful power to the injury of such -State. Were there no question of doubtful constitutionality in the -movement, the time selected for the division of the State is most -inopportune. It is a period of civil commotion, when unity and concerted -action on the part of all loyal citizens and authorities should be -directed to a restoration of the Union, and all tendency towards -disintegration and demoralization avoided.”[195] - -Mr. Blair, likewise in the negative, added little of importance to what -Secretary Welles had adduced on that side. - -The first and rather hastily formed opinion of Attorney-General Bates -has already been given together with an account of the circumstances -attending its publication; upon longer reflection he did not greatly -change the ground of his original convictions and in an elaborate -discussion still reasoned in the negative.[196] - -Between these evenly balanced and conflicting opinions of his advisers -Mr. Lincoln argued as follows: - - The consent of the legislature of Virginia is constitutionally - necessary to the bill for the admission of West Virginia becoming a - law. A body claiming to be such legislature has given its consent. - We cannot well deny that it is such, unless we do so upon the - outside knowledge that the body was chosen at elections in which a - majority of the qualified voters of Virginia did not participate. - But it is a universal practice in the popular elections in all these - States to give no legal consideration whatever to those who do not - choose to vote, as against the effect of the votes of those who do - choose to vote. Hence it is not the qualified voters, but the - qualified voters who choose to vote that constitute the political - power of the State. Much less than to non-voters should any - consideration be given to those who did not vote in this case, - because it is also matter of outside knowledge that they were not - merely neglectful of their rights under and duty to this government, - but were also engaged in open rebellion against it. Doubtless among - these non-voters were some Union men whose voices were smothered by - the more numerous secessionists; but we know too little of their - number to assign them any appreciable value. Can this government - stand, if it indulges constitutional constructions by which men in - open rebellion against it are to be accounted, man for man, the - equals of those who maintain their loyalty to it? Are they to be - accounted even better citizens, and more worthy of consideration, - than those who merely neglect to vote? If so, their treason against - the Constitution enhances their constitutional value. Without - braving these absurd conclusions, we cannot deny that the body which - consents to the admission of West Virginia is the legislature of - Virginia. I do not think the plural form of the words “legislatures” - and “States” in the phrase of the Constitution “without the consent - of the legislatures of the States concerned,” etc., has any - reference to the new State concerned. That plural form sprang from - the contemplation of two or more old States contributing to form a - new one. The idea that the new State was in danger of being admitted - without its own consent was not provided against, because it was not - thought of, as I conceive. It is said, the devil takes care of his - own. Much more should a good spirit—the spirit of the Constitution - and the Union—take care of its own. I think it cannot do less and - live. - - But is the admission into the Union of West Virginia expedient? - This, in my general view, is more a question for Congress than for - the Executive. Still I do not evade it. More than on anything else, - it depends on whether the admission or rejection of the new State - would, under all the circumstances, tend the more strongly to the - restoration of the national authority throughout the Union. That - which helps most in this direction is the most expedient at this - time. Doubtless those in remaining Virginia would return to the - Union, so to speak, less reluctantly without the division of the old - State than with it; but I think we could not save as much in this - quarter by rejecting the new State, as we should lose by it in West - Virginia. We can scarcely dispense with the aid of West Virginia in - this struggle; much less can we afford to have her against us, in - Congress and in the field. Her brave and good men regard her - admission into the Union as a matter of life and death. They have - been true to the Union under very severe trials. We have so acted as - to justify their hopes, and we cannot fully retain their confidence - and coöperation if we seem to break faith with them. In fact, they - could not do so much for us, if they would. Again, the admission of - the new State turns that much slave soil, to free, and thus is a - certain and irrevocable encroachment upon the cause of the - rebellion. The division of a State is dreaded as a precedent. But a - measure made expedient by a war is no precedent for times of peace. - It is said that the admission of West Virginia is secession, and - tolerated only because it is our secession. Well, if we call it by - that name, there is still difference enough between secession - against the Constitution and secession in favor of the Constitution. - I believe the admission of West Virginia into the Union is - expedient.[197] - -The bill passed by the House on the 10th was approved by the President -on the 31st of December, 1862; after naming the forty-eight counties to -constitute the new State the act declares, among other things, that -since the convention framed the constitution for West Virginia its -people had expressed a wish to change section seven of the eleventh -article by inserting the following in its place, _viz._: “The children -of slaves born within the limits of this State after the fourth day of -July, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, shall be free; and that all -slaves within the said State who shall, at the time aforesaid, be under -the age of ten years, shall be free when they arrive at the age of -twenty-one years; and all slaves over ten and under twenty-one years, -shall be free when they arrive at the age of twenty-five years; and no -slave shall be permitted to come into the State for permanent residence -therein.”[198] - -The constitution thus amended was unanimously ratified by the -convention, which on a summons of the commissioners reassembled February -18, 1863, and also by the people, to whom it was submitted at an -election held on May 26 following.[199] President Lincoln on April 20 -issued a proclamation declaring that the prescribed conditions having -been complied with, the constitution would go into force in sixty days -from that date; the formation of the new State was complete and it -became a member of the Union on the 20th of June, 1863.[200] - -Daniel Webster, in an address delivered thirteen years before, at the -laying of the corner-stone of an addition to the Federal Capitol, had -asked: “And ye men of Western Virginia, ... what benefit do you propose -to yourself by disunion? If you ‘secede,’ what do you ‘secede’ from, and -what do you ‘accede’ to? Do you look for the current of the Ohio to -change, and to bring you and your commerce to the tide-waters of the -eastern rivers? What man in his senses can suppose that you would remain -part and parcel of Virginia a month after Virginia should have ceased to -be part and parcel of the Union?”[201] The remarkable prediction of the -great orator was fulfilled; his inspired vision had pierced the future. -The Old Dominion had separated forever along the line of the -Alleghanies. - -Before relating the subsequent history of the restored government, it is -proper to notice a few important events in the early career of the new -Commonwealth. On January 31, 1863, an act passed the General Assembly of -Virginia giving consent to the transfer of Berkeley County to the State -of West Virginia. The preamble of this act affirms that its people -desired to be annexed to the proposed State. The question of transfer, -however, was to be decided by a majority of voters at an election to be -held on the fourth Thursday of May. If, however, the polls could not be -safely opened on that day, the Governor was empowered to postpone the -election by proclamation. The commissioners who superintended the -polling were to certify the results to the Executive. On February 4 -succeeding another act made it lawful for voters in certain districts -including twenty-three counties to declare, at a general election to be -held on the fourth Thursday of May, whether these specified counties -should be annexed to West Virginia. The consent of the Legislature of -that State was, of course, made a condition of the transfer, after which -the jurisdiction of Virginia over such counties was to cease. - -West Virginia statutes of August 5 and November 2, 1863, in words, admit -Berkeley and Jefferson counties, and they have ever since been under her -jurisdiction. When admitted into the Union it was with a provision in -her constitution that she might acquire additional territory; therefore -Congress gave its consent in advance and it was not afterwards -withdrawn. In brief, West Virginia accepted the transfer and it was -authorized by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia.[202] - -State officers were elected on May 28, when the following unconditional -Union candidates, receiving a vote of about 30,000, were chosen without -opposition: Arthur I. Boreman, Governor; J. E. Boyers, Secretary of -State; Campbell Tarr, Treasurer; Samuel Crane, Auditor; A. B. Caldwell, -Attorney-General; also three judges of a court of appeals. - -The inauguration of the new State, which was marked by imposing -ceremonies, took place at Wheeling, the capital, on June 20, 1863. Mr. -Pierpont, the retiring executive of reorganized Virginia, briefly -addressed the assembled citizens and urged them not to forsake the flag; -he then introduced his successor, whom he pronounced “true as steel.” -Governor Boreman in his short speech said that the only terms of peace -were that the rebels should lay down their arms and submit to the -regularly constituted authority of the United States. - -The Legislature of West Virginia convened on the same day. Waitman T. -Willey and P. G. Van Winkle were elected United States Senators.[203] In -his first message Governor Boreman recommended to the General Assembly -the immediate passage of laws effectually to extirpate slavery, and also -the enactment of a law that no man should be permitted to vote or to -hold office until he had taken the oath of allegiance. - -In the Presidential election of 1864, the first held since the adoption -of the Constitution in which any State deliberately neglected to appoint -electors, 33,680 votes were polled in West Virginia; of this number the -Union ticket received 23,223 and the McClellan electors 10,457.[204] -Elections had also been held in Louisiana and Tennessee by authority of -the governments established there under Mr. Lincoln’s plan of -reconstruction; the Republican majority in Congress, however, denied the -validity of the organizations in the two States last named and refused -to count the votes which they presented. This question will be fully -considered when we come to trace the development of the Congressional -plan. At the regular State election Governor Boreman was chosen without -opposition, receiving 19,098 votes. With the subsequent history of the -new Commonwealth the subject of reconstruction is not much concerned. - -By the formation of an independent Commonwealth the counties beyond the -Alleghanies were withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the restored -government, which after the inaugural ceremonies at Wheeling selected -for its capital the city of Alexandria, where it continued till May 25, -1865, to exercise its functions in those parts of the Old Dominion -within the lines of the Union army. A State government was promptly -organized by the election of a legislature and of executive officers. In -this establishment the loyal eastern counties participated. Mr. Pierpont -was elected Governor for the term of three years beginning January 1, -1864. A Lieutenant-Governor, a Secretary of State, a Treasurer, an -Auditor, an Adjutant-General and an Attorney-General were also chosen. - -The Governor in his message to the Assembly mentioned slavery as doomed, -and recommended the calling of a convention so to amend the State -constitution as to abolish the institution forever. In compliance with -this suggestion the Legislature, on December 21, 1863, passed an act -directing a convention to be held at Alexandria on the 13th of February -succeeding to amend the constitution and prohibit slavery in the -counties of Accomac, Northampton, Princess Ann, Elizabeth City and York -(including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth). These with Berkeley -County had been excepted from the operation of the Emancipation -Proclamation. - -None but loyal citizens who had not assisted the insurgents since -January 1, 1863, were allowed to take part, and those whose right to -vote might be challenged were required to swear support of the -Constitution and to declare that they had not in any way given aid or -comfort to the enemy. - -The convention, consisting of sixteen members, assembled in the new -capital at the appointed time and remained in session till April 11 -following, when a constitution was adopted.[205] Various amendments, -relating chiefly to the regulation of the elective franchise and to the -abolition of slavery, were discussed and agreed upon. The work of this -miniature convention was ordered to be proclaimed without a submission -to the people. It was not, however, recognized by Congress, though the -civil government which authorized its formation was permitted to -continue under it, provisionally only, and in all respects subject to -the paramount authority of the United States at any time to abolish, -modify, or supersede. - -Though the bill for the admission of West Virginia passed both Houses, -yet Congress was by no means unanimous in giving its consent to that -measure. In the debates, of which a synopsis has been given, the -hostility of Thaddeus Stevens and other influential members is scarcely -concealed. This opposition to executive policy slowly gathered strength, -and by 1863 had become formidable enough to defeat the admission of -Representatives from the Alexandria government. The Senators, however, -remained, Lemuel J. Bowden till his death, January 2, 1864, when his -successor was refused admission, and John S. Carlile till the expiration -of his term in 1865. - -On the assembling of the 38th Congress, which commenced its first -session December 7, 1863, Joseph E. Segar, Lucius H. Chandler and -Benjamin M. Kitchen appeared as Representatives from Virginia. On May 17 -succeeding Mr. Dawes from the Committee of Elections reported a -resolution to the effect that Joseph E. Segar, from the First District -of Virginia, was not entitled to a seat in that Congress. The case of -Mr. Chandler, regarded as precisely similar, was considered at the same -time. - -The district which Mr. Segar claimed to represent was composed of twenty -counties; of these, Chairman Dawes asserted, only four participated in -the election. Polling places were not opened in any other part of the -district, the Confederate authorities being in possession of the -remaining counties. As there could be no free exercise of the franchise -in this situation Mr. Segar, it was contended, was not properly chosen, -and, therefore, was not entitled to a seat. The vote cast, though not -accurately ascertained, was estimated at 1,677, of which the claimant -received 1,300. Because of his loyalty and the sacrifices he had made, -the Committee regretted the necessity of deciding against him. - -Mr. Segar, speaking in his own behalf, reminded the House that in a -preceding election, when he received 559 out of 1,018 votes polled in -three counties, he was admitted after a delay of seven or eight weeks; -but when he was sent by a larger constituency and came as the choice of -four counties he was informed that he had no right to a seat, and some -of his colleagues who favored his admission in 1862 voted to exclude -him. The Committee’s report, he asserted, admitted the existence of such -a State as Virginia. He asked Chairman Dawes a rather embarrassing -question when he inquired how a State could have two Senators and no -Representative in Congress. In conclusion he pronounced restored State -organization and gradual accretion to be the best method of -reconstruction. - -Concerning the title of Mr. Chandler, from the Second Congressional -District, Chairman Dawes stated that of the 779 votes polled in the -election 778 were cast for the claimant. For the same reason as in the -case of Mr. Segar only a small part of that District was free to -participate in the election, and nearly all the votes were polled in the -city of Norfolk. The committee reported against his admission on the -same ground taken in Mr. Segar’s case. - -Chandler, who was permitted to state his case to the House, cited a -resolution introduced by his former school-mate, Owen Lovejoy, the -well-known abolitionist, authorizing the names of the three Virginia -claimants to be enrolled as Representatives. That resolution, however, -was tabled and their credentials referred to the Committee of Elections. - -In 1860 the Union vote in his District was only 6,712; of that number -2,900, he said, were in Norfolk and Portsmouth; the latter city had cast -more votes against secession than the remainder of his District. Great -numbers of loyal men, however, left there at the beginning of the war. -Electors being under no obligation to vote may allow an election to go -by default when one citizen could return a member to Congress. -Territorially restored Virginia was larger than Delaware and possessed -twice the area of Rhode Island. - -The case of Benjamin M. Kitchen, on which the Committee had previously -made an adverse report, differed from those of the other two claimants -in that he had received nearly all of his vote in Berkeley County, which -possessed a sort of wandering character, for it was somewhat uncertain -whether it was under the jurisdiction of the new or the old State. What -action was taken on the Committee’s report does not appear, but it may -be inferred from a facetious remark of one member who observed that, -like Segar and Chandler, Kitchen had been privileged to retire to -private life. The two former were refused admission by the decided vote -of 94 to 23. - -Besides endeavoring to win back the wavering, Governor Pierpont was -occupied in taking measures for the relief of the distressed. In the -vicinity of Norfolk and Portsmouth there was a large number of destitute -persons whose natural supporters were still following the declining -fortunes of the Confederacy or had been killed in its service. While it -was universally agreed that their necessities should be relieved, the -military and civil authorities were in conflict as to the mode of -providing for them. The President in his efforts to establish amicable -relations between the officers of the army and those of the State -invoked the assistance of the Governor. As the restored Commonwealth -could not be consistently recognized while its capital was in a state of -blockade the President by proclamation, September 24, 1863, declared -that the interdiction of trade with the port of Alexandria had ceased. - -General Butler with headquarters at Fortress Monroe took command of the -Department of Virginia and North Carolina November 2, 1863. His -predecessors, he asserted, had endeavored to recruit a regiment of -Virginians; but after several months of energetic trial their efforts -were abandoned. As eastern Virginia claimed to be a loyal and fully -organized State, Butler renewed the attempt, whereupon Governor Pierpont -protested vigorously. One and a half companies were all the recruits -that the Commonwealth would furnish, and these, Butler asserts, were -employed to defend lighthouses and protect Union inhabitants from -outrages at the hands of their disloyal neighbors.[206] This experience, -it may be supposed, did not tend to raise the Alexandria government in -the esteem of the Department Commander. We find accordingly that -differences soon sprang up between the civil and military authorities. -An attempt to regulate the liquor traffic in Norfolk and vicinity was -the occasion of an open rupture. Civil officers continued to collect the -payments imposed by law on those engaged in the business; the military -power, to keep the traffic under better control, undertook to give to a -few firms a monopoly of the importation. In this situation many small -retailers refused to pay their licenses and were indicted in the local -courts. To foil this purpose, General Shepley issued, June 22, 1864, an -order providing that “on the day of the ensuing municipal election in -the city of Norfolk a poll will be opened at the several places of -voting, and separate ballot-boxes will be kept open during the hours of -voting, in which voters may deposit their ballots, ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ upon -the following question: Those in favor of continuing the present form of -municipal government during the existence of military occupation will -vote ‘yes.’ Those opposed to it will vote ‘no.’” - -Governor Pierpont resented this action and promptly issued a -proclamation protesting against it as a revolutionary proceeding in -violation of the Federal Constitution, adding, “No loyal citizen, -therefore, is expected to vote on the proposed question.” In a vigorous -pamphlet discussing the “abuses of military power” he repeated his -criticism. - -Butler at this point took up the cudgels for his subordinate and in a -general order, dated June 30, 1864, discussed the incident at some -length. Pierpont was alluded to as “a person who calls himself -Governor,” and as one “pretending to be the head of the restored -government of Virginia, which government is unrecognized by the -Congress, laws, and Constitution of the United States.” The order -further recited that as the loyal citizens of Norfolk had voted against -the further trial of the experiment of municipal government “therefore -it is ordered that all attempts to exercise civil office and power, -under any supposed city election, within the city of Norfolk and its -environs, must cease, and the persons pretending to be elected to civil -offices at the late election, and those heretofore elected to municipal -offices since the rebellion, must no longer attempt to exercise such -functions; and upon any pretense or attempt so to do, the military -commandant at Norfolk will see to it that persons so acting are stayed -and quieted.” - -A memorial to Mr. Lincoln enlisted his sympathy and secured for Pierpont -the assistance of Attorney-General Bates, who on July 11 wrote the -President a long official letter setting forth his sense of the serious -military encroachment by General Butler upon civil law and the authority -of Mr. Pierpont as Governor of Virginia. The Department Commander -replied in a communication of forty pages in sharp criticism of the -Alexandria government, which he characterized as a “useless, expensive, -and inefficient thing, unrecognized by Congress, unknown to the -Constitution of the United States, and of such character that there is -no command in the Decalogue against worshiping it, being the likeness of -nothing in the heavens above, the earth beneath, or the waters under the -earth.” - -The Attorney-General, who was accused of a design to create a conflict -between the civil and the military power, also came in for a share of -rather violent criticism. In this altercation each party accused the -other of being assisted by only secessionists and traitors.[207] - -It was relative to this controversy that Mr. Lincoln, December 21, 1864, -addressed to General Butler the following communication: - - On the 9th of August last, I began to write you a letter, the - enclosed being a copy of so much as I then wrote. So far as it goes - it embraces the views I then entertained and still entertain. - - A little relaxation of the complaints made to me on the subject, - occurring about that time, the letter was not finished and sent. I - now learn, correctly I suppose, that you have ordered an election, - similar to the one mentioned, to take place on the eastern shore of - Virginia. Let this be suspended at least until conference with me - and obtaining my approval. - - [Inclosure.] - - - =Executive Mansion, Washington=, _August 9, 1864_. - - _Major-General Butler_: - - Your paper of the —— about Norfolk matters, is received, as also was - your other, on the same general subject, dated, I believe, some time - in February last. This subject has caused considerable trouble, - forcing me to give a good deal of time and reflection to it. I - regret that crimination and recrimination are mingled in it. I - surely need not to assure you that I have no doubt of your loyalty - and devoted patriotism; and I must tell you that I have no less - confidence in those of Governor Pierpont and the Attorney-General. - The former—at first as the loyal governor of all Virginia, including - that which is now West Virginia, in organizing and furnishing - troops, and in all other proper matters—was as earnest, honest, and - efficient to the extent of his means as any other loyal governor. - - The inauguration of West Virginia as a new State left to him, as he - assumed, the remainder of the old State; and the insignificance of - the parts which are outside of the rebel lines, and consequently - within his reach, certainly gives a somewhat farcical air to his - dominion, and I suppose he, as well as I, has considered that it can - be useful for little else than as a nucleus to add to. The - Attorney-General needs only to be known to be relieved from all - question as to loyalty and thorough devotion to the national cause, - constantly restraining as he does my tendency to clemency for rebels - and rebel sympathizers. But he is the law-officer of the Government, - and a believer in the virtue of adhering to law. - - Coming to the question itself, the military occupancy of Norfolk is - a necessity with us. If you, as department commander, find the - cleansing of the city necessary to prevent pestilence in your army; - street-lights and a fire department necessary to prevent - assassinations and incendiarism among your men and stores; wharfage - necessary to land and ship men and supplies; a large pauperism, - badly conducted at a needlessly large expense to the government; and - find that all these things, or any of them, are not reasonably well - attended to by the civil government, you rightfully may and must - take them into your own hands. But you should do so on your own - avowed judgment of a military necessity, and not seem to admit that - there is no such necessity by taking a vote of the people on the - question. - - Nothing justifies the suspending of the civil by the military - authority but military necessity; and of the existence of that - necessity, the military commander, and not a popular vote, is to - decide. And whatever is not within such necessity should be left - undisturbed. - - In your paper of February you fairly notified me that you - contemplated taking a popular vote, and, if fault there be, it was - my fault that I did not object then, which I probably should have - done had I studied the subject as closely as I have since done. I - now think you would better place whatever you feel is necessary to - be done on this distinct ground of military necessity, openly - discarding all reliance for what you do on any election. I also - think you should so keep accounts as to show every item of money - received and how expended. - - The course here indicated does not touch the case when the military - commander, finding no friendly civil government existing, may, under - sanction or direction of the President, give assistance to the - people to inaugurate one.[208] - -On the same general subject the President one week later wrote General -Butler this brief note: - - I think you will find that the provost-marshal on the eastern shore - has, as by your authority, issued an order, not for a meeting, but - for an election. The order, printed in due form, was shown to me, - but as I did not retain it, I cannot give you a copy. If the people, - on their own motion, wish to hold a peaceful meeting, I suppose you - need not hinder them.[209] - -It has elsewhere been observed that a Legislature representing what -remained of the restored government was chosen at the time of Mr. -Pierpont’s election. This body, however, was but the merest shadow of -the Assembly of that once proud Commonwealth. Seven Delegates responded -to the roll call when the House convened in December, 1863. They -adjourned from day to day and on the 9th of that month organized with -eight members in the popular branch. Precisely how many Senators -composed the upper House does not appear in any notice of their -proceedings accessible to the writer; the aggregate number in both -chambers, however, is said not to have exceeded 16.[210] This estimate -is probably correct; for in the election, February 4, 1864, of a -Secretary of State and a Treasurer the total vote on joint ballot was -only 14.[211] - -It is probable that neither Mr. Lincoln nor Governor Pierpont regarded -this organization as anything more than a nucleus around which the loyal -elements might rally. Both Congress and the military authorities, -however, treated it with scant courtesy. It is not matter of surprise, -therefore, that memorials were presented to the United States Senate -petitioning for the substitution of a military for this feeble civil -government. To offset this movement remonstrances from citizens of -Alexandria and from citizens of Loudoun County were offered, January 17, -1865, by Senator Willey, of West Virginia. All the memorials of both -classes were referred to the Committee on Territories. - -By Mr. Willey credentials of Hon. Joseph Segar, Senator-elect from -Virginia, were presented, February 17, 1865, to supply the vacancy -caused by the death of Lemuel J. Bowden. Mr. Willey moved that the -credentials be read and placed on the files, and that the oath of office -be administered to Mr. Segar. The credentials were read and immediately -after Mr. Sumner moved that the papers be referred to the Committee on -the Judiciary. Senator Willey opposed the reference. The credentials, he -believed, were proper on their face; they came to the Senate in due form -under the seal of the State of Virginia. Mr. Segar was the accredited -successor of Mr. Bowden, who died while a member of Congress. If Mr. -Bowden was entitled to a seat his successor was likewise entitled if his -credentials were regular and correct. - -Mr. Cowan also opposed the reference because he did not think it wise to -abandon the policy hitherto pursued in dealing with loyal minorities in -the rebellious States. He would be sorry, he said, if these States were -repulsed when they were desirous to do all they could to achieve the -very end for which the present tremendous struggle was taking place. -When Mr. Bowden came to take his seat no such objection was made. A -question by Senator Hale developed the fact, however, that Mr. Bowden -presented himself before the vote was taken on the admission of West -Virginia. - -Trumbull believed that a reference of the credentials, just as in the -Arkansas case, would bring up the question. Senator Howard, who favored -a reference, thought that the entire question of the right of Virginia -to be represented in Congress should be gone into. He would thank the -committee for a concise account of all the proceedings connected with -the election of Mr. Segar and his colleague. He asked whether a State -like Virginia, in armed rebellion, could have Senators on that floor. - -Mr. Saulsbury pointed out the change that had come over the judgment of -the Senate. When Messrs. Willey and Carlile appeared there was, he said, -but a corporal’s guard who opposed their right to seats, because -Virginia was in rebellion, and it was then held by the minority that -Senators should represent the sovereignty of their States. Those who -were then most zealous for the admission of the gentlemen claiming to -represent Virginia had become most vehement in their opposition to the -admission of Mr. Segar. - -Senator McDougall believed that to refer the proposition to the -committee would be to bury it, and no resurrection, he said, had been -proclaimed for any such thing. He had his impressions and was as well -prepared to discuss the question then as at any time. Virginia, -according to his understanding of the philosophy of the Constitution, -was a State of the Union. He believed the Senator-elect, by reason of -his credentials, could take the oath, though that was not conclusive of -his right to a seat in the Senate. - -Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts, believed that Congress because of its -action for three years was bound to recognize the existence of both the -Governor and Legislature of Virginia. He was disposed, however, to -support the motion of his colleague, Charles Sumner, as well as the -amendment thereto which authorized the committee to inquire into the -election, returns and qualifications in the case of the claimant. -Certain parts of Virginia, exempted by the President’s proclamation, -were not in rebellion. Every square mile additional over which Federal -authority was restored came by the terms of that proclamation into the -same condition. - -Mr. Willey asserted that the Legislature sneeringly referred to as “the -Common Council of Alexandria” represented 216,000 loyal people. He -believed that county after county, as fast as they were relieved from -the power of the rebellion, would come to the support of the loyal -nucleus at Alexandria. It would place the Senate, he said, in a singular -position to repulse the claimant while his State was represented by -another Senator [Carlile]. - -Senator Sherman stated that Mr. Segar’s credentials purported to show -that he had been elected a member of the Senate on the 8th of December -and that they bore date of December 12, 1864. Therefore he had slept for -sixty or seventy days on his right to a seat which would, at any rate, -expire on the 4th of March. The succeeding Congress, he said, would have -ample time to decide the question, for, no doubt, at that time a -gentleman claiming to be a Senator from Virginia would present himself. -Then it could be deliberately determined. His motion to lay the -credentials on the table prevailed by a vote of 29 to 13.[212] When this -action was taken Carlile was among the eight absentees. - -Pursuant to a proclamation of the President the Senate assembled at noon -of March 4 in executive session. Five days later the question of -admitting Senators from Virginia came again before the Senate on -presentation by Mr. Doolittle of the credentials of Hon. John C. -Underwood as Senator-elect from that State for six years from the 4th of -March. His credentials were read and after some discussion it was agreed -to postpone their consideration as well as those of Mr. Segar until the -following session. Henderson and Doolittle spoke in favor of the early -recognition by Congress of the local governments in those States which -had been brought partly under Federal power. The account of Virginian -affairs will be resumed in the final chapter. - ------ - -Footnote 154: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 7. - -Footnote 155: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 7n. - -Footnote 156: - - Eighth Census, pp. 516–522. - -Footnote 157: - - Density maps in Tenth Census (Population), pp. xii-xiii, xiv-xv, - xvi-xvii. - -Footnote 158: - - Blair in Appendix to Globe, pp. 327–331, 2 Sess. 37th Cong.; Eighth - Census, pp. 516–522; Seventh Census, pp. 242–261. - -Footnote 159: - - Parker, The Formation of West Virginia, p. 125. - -Footnote 160: - - Globe, 2 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 3038. - -Footnote 161: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, pp. 743–744. - -Footnote 162: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 36. - -Footnote 163: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 42. - -Footnote 164: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, pp. 742–743. - -Footnote 165: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 43. - -Footnote 166: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 167: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 743; The Formation of West Virginia, p. 45, gives - the oath in a form slightly different. - -Footnote 168: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 743. - -Footnote 169: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, p. 801. - -Footnote 170: - - Mr. A. W. Campbell in The Wheeling Daily Intelligencer, April 14, - 1897. - -Footnote 171: - - Globe, 1 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 103–109. - -Footnote 172: - - The Formation of West Virginia, pp. 47–48. - -Footnote 173: - - The Formation of West Virginia, pp. 48–50; also Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. - 745. - -Footnote 174: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 57. - -Footnote 175: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 79. - -Footnote 176: - - Ibid., p. 93. - -Footnote 177: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 96, says 16,981 for and 441 against - the constitution. The Annual Cyclopædia for 1862, p. 801, gives the - vote as 18,862 in favor of, and 514 against, the constitution. Poore’s - Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1977, is the authority for the - statement in the text. - -Footnote 178: - - Globe, Part III., 2 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 864; Part IV., pp. 2941–2942, - 3034–3039, 3134–3135, 3307–3320. - -Footnote 179: - - Globe, 2 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 2933. - -Footnote 180: - - Ibid., p. 3397. - -Footnote 181: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 37–38. - -Footnote 182: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 38–39, 41–42. - -Footnote 183: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 43–45. - -Footnote 184: - - Ibid., p. 46. - -Footnote 185: - - Ibid., pp. 46–47. - -Footnote 186: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 48. - -Footnote 187: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 50–51. - -Footnote 188: - - Ibid., p. 35. - -Footnote 189: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 54–55. - -Footnote 190: - - Ibid., p. 59. - -Footnote 191: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 283. - -Footnote 192: - - Quoted in N. & H., Vol. VI. pp. 300–301. - -Footnote 193: - - Quoted in N. & H., Vol. VI. pp. 302–303. - -Footnote 194: - - Ibid., p. 304. - -Footnote 195: - - Quoted in N. & H., Vol. VI. pp. 304–306. - -Footnote 196: - - See pp. 105–106 _ante_. - -Footnote 197: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 285–287. - -Footnote 198: - - The Formation of West Virginia, p. 152. - -Footnote 199: - - Ibid., pp. 192–193. - -Footnote 200: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 326. - -Footnote 201: - - Webster’s Works, Vol. II. pp. 607–608. - -Footnote 202: - - By a joint resolution, approved March 10, 1866, Congress agreed that - both counties formed a part of West Virginia. The parent State, - however, by an act of December 5, 1865, had already repealed both the - statutes of January 31 and February 4, 1863, as well as section two of - the act of May 13, 1862; and on December 11, 1866, a bill in equity - was filed in the Supreme Court of the United States in which it was - contended that it was not the intention of that State to consent to - the annexation of Berkeley and Jefferson counties except upon the - performance of certain conditions; the state of the county on election - day was such as not to permit the opening of all the polls in Berkeley - and Jefferson, nor indeed at any considerable part of the usual - election places. The voters did not have adequate notice. In short, a - great majority of them were then and now, December, 1866, opposed to - annexation. Other irregularities are alleged in the complaint of - Virginia. A decision, however, has been rendered by the Supreme Court - of the United States in favor of the new Commonwealth. [See Virginia - vs. West Virginia, 11 Wall., p. 39; also Transcripts of Records, - Supreme Court U. S., Vol. 152, December Term, 1870.] - -Footnote 203: - - Notwithstanding the new State had been organized by a law which passed - both Houses of Congress, and was approved by the President, Mr. Davis, - of Kentucky, when the members-elect presented themselves before the - Senate, opposed their admission on the ground that there was legally - and constitutionally no such State in existence as West Virginia. On - his motion to administer the customary oath thirty-six Senators voted - in the affirmative, five in the negative. [Globe, 1 Sess. 38th Cong., - pp. 1–3.] - -Footnote 204: - - A History of Presidential Elections, Stanwood, pp. 246–247. Edition of - 1884. - -Footnote 205: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 809. - -Footnote 206: - - Butler’s Book, p. 618. - -Footnote 207: - - N. & H., Abraham Lincoln, A History, Vol. IX. pp. 439–442. - -Footnote 208: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 619–621. - -Footnote 209: - - Ibid., p. 623. - -Footnote 210: - - Why The Solid South? p. 222. - -Footnote 211: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, p. 810. - -Footnote 212: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 845–849. - - - - - V - ANTI-SLAVERY LEGISLATION - - -The efforts of Union minorities in Tennessee, in Louisiana and in -Arkansas to establish governments in harmony with the Constitution and -laws of the United States, and the agency of President Lincoln in -effecting that result, have been somewhat particularly described in the -preceding pages. The principal events which marked the progress of -secession in those States, the military successes which brought Federal -authorities to consider the restoration of loyal governments within -their borders, and the operation of those causes which ultimately -overthrew rebellion have been more rapidly sketched. To trace the -successive steps which led to the emancipation of slaves in the seceding -States a somewhat more ample narrative will be required. This subject is -not only of intrinsic interest but its culmination in the proclamation -of September 22, 1862, marks the introduction into the President’s plan -of restoration of an element hitherto left out of account. - -In December, 1859, when John Brown, for his rash though courageous -attempt to liberate slaves, was hanged by the authorities of Virginia a -great majority of even Northern people looked on with indifference or -with approval. The inhabitants of the free States, however, were rather -law-abiding than pitiless and came in time to revere the memory of that -stern old Puritan. Ideas in those times matured with amazing rapidity, -and fourteen months had scarcely elapsed when James B. McKean, a -Representative from New York, introduced into Congress, three days -before the Confederate government was organized, the following -resolution: - - Whereas the “Gulf States” have assumed to secede from the Union, and - it is deemed important to prevent the “border slave States” from - following their example; and whereas it is believed that those who - are inflexibly opposed to any measure of compromise or concession - that involves, or may involve, a sacrifice of principle or the - extension of slavery, would nevertheless cheerfully concur in any - lawful measure for the emancipation of slaves: Therefore, - - _Resolved_, That the select committee of five be instructed to - inquire whether, by the consent of the people, or of the State - governments, or by compensating the slaveholders, it be practicable - for the General Government to procure the emancipation of the slaves - in some, or all, of the “border States”; and if so, to report a bill - for that purpose.[213] - -Mr. Burnett, of Kentucky, desiring to discuss the proposition, it was -laid on the table and received no further consideration. Whether Mr. -Lincoln had much reflected upon the principle of this resolution or the -reasoning in its preamble, he had not become on March 4 a convert to its -essential idea, for in his inaugural address he was content, in -expressing his sentiments on the institution of slavery, to re-affirm a -declaration which he had formerly made. “I have no purpose,” said he, -“directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in -the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, -and I have no inclination to do so.”[214] Even if the occasion had not -demanded the language of conciliation we might easily credit this solemn -assurance. Indeed, for an entire year after this announcement he -refrained in his public utterances from taking any attitude hostile to -the continuance of slavery. The influences which forced him to adopt -other opinions may be briefly related. - -On May 22, 1861, General Butler arrived at Fortress Monroe and at once -took command of the Department of Virginia; next day he sent a -reconnoitering party to Hampton, and in the terror and confusion -occasioned by the presence of Yankee soldiers three slaves of Colonel -Mallory, a Confederate officer, effected their escape; during the -afternoon they remained in concealment and at night reached the Union -pickets. The following morning they were brought before the Federal -commander, whom they informed of their master’s purpose to employ them -in military operations in North Carolina. On the next day Major John B. -Cary, also of the Confederate army, and a former delegate with Butler in -the Baltimore Convention, came to the fort with a flag of truce, and as -a representative of Colonel Mallory demanded the surrender of these -runaways pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Constitution under -which the Union commander claimed to act. With characteristic readiness -came the reply that the Fugitive Slave Law could not be invoked in this -case; Virginia assumed to be a foreign State and she must count it among -the disadvantages of her position if, so far at least, she was taken at -her word. These negroes further informed General Butler or his officers -that if they were not returned others would come next day. On the 26th -eight slaves were before him awaiting an audience; one squad of -forty-seven came early on the 27th and another lot of a dozen arrived -during the same day. Then they came by twenties, thirties and forties -both to Fortress Monroe and Newport News.[215] - -Thus arose an important question on which the Government had yet -developed no policy. As the acts for the rendition of fugitive slaves -were not repealed till June, 1864, the views of individual commanders -temporarily prevailed. Without precedent or instructions General -McDowell by an order entirely excluded them from his lines. Caprice, -too, entered into a settlement of the problem, and even a whimsical -solution was sometimes attempted. A felicitous invention for determining -these controversies between master and bondman is ascribed to the -colonel of a Massachusetts regiment. Both the claimant and the claimed -were put outside his tent for a trial of speed; the negro, proving the -fleeter, was never heard of again.[216] An institution which had -practically determined both the foreign and domestic policy of the -United States for an entire generation was suddenly become the sport of -a subordinate officer of volunteers! The wise should have heeded these -signs. - -While the Federal commander in Virginia was exchanging arguments with -Confederate officers, General McClellan at his headquarters in -Cincinnati was considering a proclamation which on May 26 he issued to -the Union men of western Virginia. This document, among other things, -says: “All your rights shall be religiously respected, notwithstanding -all that has been said by the traitors to induce you to believe our -advent among you will be signalized by an interference with your slaves. -Understand one thing clearly: not only will we abstain from all such -interference, but we will, on the contrary, _with an iron hand crush any -attempt at insurrection on their part_.”[217] - -Scarcely less explicit in its announcement concerning slavery was -General Patterson’s proclamation of June 3, 1861, to troops of the -Department of Pennsylvania. “You must bear in mind,” says its concluding -paragraph, that “you are going for the good of the whole country, and -that, while it is your duty to punish sedition, you must protect the -loyal, _and, should the occasion offer, at once suppress servile -insurrection_.”[218] - -Butler’s interview with Major Cary had been promptly communicated to the -War Department, whose chief, Mr. Cameron, expressed in his reply of May -30 approval of the General’s action. The Secretary, however, endeavored -to distinguish between interference with slave property and the -surrender of negroes that came voluntarily within Federal lines. The -commander was further directed to “employ such persons in the services -to which they may be best adapted, keeping an account of the labor by -them performed, of the value of it, and the expenses of their -maintenance,”[219] the question of their final disposition to be -reserved for future determination. - -In defence of his attitude toward masters of fugitives who had been -employed in the batteries or on the fortifications of the enemy, -international law supplied General Butler with an analogy that he -skillfully applied to the novel conditions which had arisen. Articles of -assistance in military operations cannot in time of war be imported by -neutrals into an enemy’s country, and the attempt to introduce such -goods renders them liable to seizure as lawful prize. It did not greatly -embarrass this versatile lawyer that the term _contraband_ applies -exclusively to relations between a belligerent and a neutral, or that -the decision of a prize court might be necessary to determine whether a -particular article had been so designated. No doubt he believed firmly -in the doctrine that the wants of war are contraband of war. In his -correspondence with General Scott he had observed that “as a military -question, it would seem to be a measure of necessity” to deprive -disloyal masters of the services of their slaves, and this, on the -pretext that they were contraband of war, he proceeded to do by refusing -to surrender any negroes coming inside his lines.[220] This method of -settling the difficulty was what Secretary Cameron had approved. But -this phase presented the question in its extreme simplicity. A refusal -to return the slaves of Confederate officers or of Confederate -sympathizers was one thing; similar treatment of loyal slaveholders -would not be so readily overlooked by authority. Though such cases were -more likely to occur in Maryland, Kentucky or Missouri, that fact did -not prevent the subject from assuming very great importance even in -Virginia. Whole families escaped from their masters, and General Butler -soon had on his hands negroes from three months to almost fourscore -years of age. - -Attorney-General Bates, writing July 23, 1861, to United States Marshal -J. L. McDowell, of Kansas, who had asked whether he should give his -official service in executing the fugitive slave law, said in response -to the inquiry: - - It is the President’s constitutional duty to “take care that the - laws be faithfully executed.” That means all the laws. He has no - right to discriminate, no right to execute the laws he likes, and - leave unexecuted those he dislikes. And of course you and I, his - subordinates, can have no wider latitude of discretion than he has. - Missouri is a State in the Union. The insurrectionary disorders in - Missouri are but individual crimes, and do not change the legal - status of the State, nor change its rights and obligations as a - member of the Union. - - A refusal by a ministerial officer to execute any law which properly - belongs to his office, is an official misdemeanor, of which I have - no doubt the President would take notice.[221] - -The Attorney-General in this instance merely amplified a suggestion -contained in the inaugural. - -Toward the close of July, 1861, the number of “contrabands” had -increased to nine hundred, and the Union commander again requested -instructions.[222] Secretary Cameron’s reply on the 8th of August -following merely authorized, what General Butler had all along been -doing, employing them at such labor as they were adapted to and keeping -a complete record, so that when peace was restored the essential facts -of each case could easily be ascertained.[223] His tact in dealing with -this question appears from an act of Congress approved August 6 in which -his extension of meaning to the word _contraband_ is adopted. This -declared that if persons held to labor or service were employed in -hostility to the United States, the right to their services should be -forfeited and such persons be discharged therefrom.[224] - -Exclusion of fugitive slaves from the quarters and camps of troops -serving in the Department of Washington was provided by a general order -of July 17, 1861, and a few weeks later, August 10, the departure by -railway of negroes from the District of Columbia was prevented unless -evidence of freedom could be adduced.[225] - -Far more important, however, than these prudent regulations of the -Adjutant-General was the celebrated proclamation of Fremont, dated St. -Louis, August 31, 1861, which declared martial law throughout the entire -State of Missouri and expressed a purpose both to confiscate the -property and free the negroes of all persons in the State who should -take up arms against the United States or who were shown to have taken -an active part with their enemy in the field.[226] The President, in a -communication of September 2 following, wrote General Fremont expressing -anxiety concerning the effects of this proclamation: “I think there is -great danger,” said Mr. Lincoln, “that the closing paragraph, in -relation to the confiscation of property and the liberating slaves of -traitorous owners, will alarm our Southern Union friends and turn them -against us; perhaps ruin our rather fair prospect for Kentucky.[227] - -“Allow me therefore to ask that you will, as of your own motion, modify -that paragraph so as to conform to the first and fourth sections of the -act of Congress entitled, ‘An act to confiscate property used for -insurrectionary purposes,’ approved August 6, 1861, and a copy of which -act I herewith send you. - -“This letter is written in a spirit of caution, and not of -censure.”[228] - -Though General Fremont had acted wholly on his own responsibility he -refused so to modify that portion of his proclamation relative to -emancipating slaves as to conform to the act of Congress referred to, -and in a letter requested the President “openly to direct” him “to make -the correction.” Referring to this part of his communication Mr. Lincoln -replied on the 11th: “Your answer, just received, expresses the -preference on your part that I should make an open order for the -modification, which I very cheerfully do. It is therefore ordered that -the said clause of said proclamation be so modified, held, and -construed, as to conform to, and not to transcend, the provisions on the -same subject contained in the act of Congress” approved August 6, -1861.[229] - -As late as October 14 the War Department was guided by the principles -developed in its correspondence with Butler, the instructions of that -date to General T. W. Sherman being based upon this policy.[230] A month -later inhabitants of the eastern shore of Virginia were informed by -General Dix that “special directions have been given not to interfere -with the condition of any person held to domestic service;” to prevent -any such occurrence slaves were not permitted to come within his -lines.[231] - -Besides those who favored military emancipation, a large class seriously -expected that the war would not only preserve the integrity of the -Union, but in some way result in a general liberation of slaves. This -feeling, manifested in various ways, was rapidly gathering strength, and -as early as November 8 found enthusiastic expression at a public meeting -of two thousand citizens held in Cooper Institute, New York city. This -assembly, which convened at the suggestion of Mr. Lincoln, was presided -over by Hon. George Bancroft and attended by many distinguished persons -of both the nation and the State. Besides the remarks of its illustrious -chairman addresses were made by William Cullen Bryant, General Ambrose -Burnside, Professor Francis Lieber and others. Shortly before the -speakers arrived a gentleman arose in the audience, and in a ringing -voice proposed “Three cheers for John C. Fremont!” These were given, -says a newspaper account, “with electrical effect and without a murmur -of dissent.” The meeting was evidently not in entire sympathy with the -President’s order modifying that General’s proclamation of the preceding -August. - -North Carolina, as is well known, was not so ardent for secession as -most of her sister States in the South; forced to take sides, however, -she imitated the example of her neighbors. Even then all her people did -not share the opinions of their leaders, and when Federal troops landed -in the vicinity of Hatteras nearly four thousand loyal inhabitants of -the coast flocked to their lines and readily took the oath of allegiance -to the United States; for this conduct they incurred the extreme hatred -of secessionists, who soon reduced them to a condition of distress. To -relieve their destitution, by supplies of food and clothing, the meeting -was called in Cooper Institute. Resolutions of sympathy were unanimously -adopted; a committee of relief was appointed to collect from the city -and elsewhere such funds as were necessary for the purchase of supplies, -which were to be forwarded and distributed in the most judicious manner. - -“If the President,” said Mr. Bancroft, “has any doubt under the terrible -conflict into which he has been brought, let him hear the words of one -of his predecessors. Alien nullification raised itself in South -Carolina. Andrew Jackson, in the watches of the night, as he sat alone -finishing that proclamation, sent the last words of it to Livingston, -his bosom friend and best adviser. He sent it with these words; I have -had the letter in my own hands, handed to me by the only surviving child -of Mr. Livingston. I know the letter which I now read is a copy: ‘I -submit the above as the conclusion of the proclamation for your -amendment and revision. Let it receive your best flight of eloquence to -strike to the heart and speak to the feelings of my deluded countrymen -of South Carolina. The Union must be preserved without blood if this be -possible; but it must be preserved at all hazards and at any price.’” -Mr. Bancroft added: “We send the army into the South to maintain the -Union, to restore the validity of the Constitution. If any one presents -claims under the Constitution, let him begin by placing the Constitution -in power, by respecting it and upholding it.” - -Francis Lieber referred to slavery as “that great anachronism, out of -time, out of place in the nineteenth century,” and Rev. Doctor Tyng -said, “if slavery is in the way of the Union, then tread slavery down -into the dust.”[232] These sentiments were received with applause. - -Mr. Bancroft a week later wrote to the President: - - Following out your suggestion, a very numerous meeting of - New-Yorkers assembled last week to take measures for relieving the - loyal sufferers of Hatteras. I take the liberty to enclose you some - remarks which I made on the occasion. You will find in them a copy - of an unpublished letter of one of your most honored predecessors, - with which you cannot fail to be pleased. - - Your administration has fallen upon times which will be remembered - as long as human events find a record. I sincerely wish to you the - glory of perfect success. Civil War is the instrument of Divine - Providence to root out social slavery. Posterity will not be - satisfied with the result unless the consequences of the war shall - effect an increase of free States. This is the universal expectation - and hope of men of all parties.[233] - -On the 18th Mr. Lincoln sent this reply: - - I esteem it a high honor to have received a note from Mr. Bancroft - inclosing the report of proceedings of a New York meeting taking - measures for the relief of Union people of North Carolina. I thank - you and all others participating for this benevolent and patriotic - movement. - - The main thought in the closing paragraph of your letter is one - which does not escape my attention, and with which I must deal in - all due caution, and with the best judgment I can bring to it.[234] - -We have here the key to President Lincoln’s treatment of the slavery -question down to the hour of his lamented death. As the hostile -employment of negroes constituted by act of August 6 a full answer to -any claim for service General McClellan was informed by Secretary -Seward, December 4, 1861, that the arrest of such persons as fugitives -from labor “should be immediately followed by the military arrest of the -parties making the seizure.” These instructions were called forth by -intelligence that Virginia slaves engaged in hostility to the United -States frequently escaped from the enemy and took refuge within the -lines of the Army of the Potomac. Coming afterward into the District of -Columbia, such persons upon the presumption arising from color, were -liable to be arrested by the Washington police.[235] - -On December 3, 1861, in his first annual message to Congress, Mr. -Lincoln discussed without especial emphasis the question of aiding those -slaves who had been freed under the act of August 6; he observed that -this class was dependent upon the United States; it was believed that, -for their own benefit, many of the States would enact similar laws; he -therefore recommended Congress to provide for accepting such persons -from the States, - - according to some mode of valuation, in lieu, _pro tanto_, of direct - taxes, or upon some other plan to be agreed on with such States - respectively; that such persons, on such acceptance by the General - Government, be at once deemed free; and that, in any event, steps be - taken for colonizing both classes (or the one first mentioned, if - the other shall not be brought into existence) at some place or - places in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to consider, - too, whether the free colored people already in the United States - could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such - colonization. - - To carry out the plan of colonization may involve the acquiring of - territory, and also the appropriation of money beyond that to be - expended in the territorial acquisition. Having practiced the - acquisition of territory for nearly sixty years, the question of - constitutional power to do so is no longer an open one with us. The - power was questioned at first by Mr. Jefferson, who, however, in the - purchase of Louisiana, yielded his scruples on the plea of great - expediency. If it be said that the only legitimate object of - acquiring territory is to furnish homes for white men, this measure - effects that object; for the emigration of colored men leaves - additional room for white men remaining or coming here. Mr. - Jefferson, however, placed the importance of procuring Louisiana - more on political and commercial grounds than on providing room for - population. - - On this whole proposition, including the appropriation of money with - the acquisition of territory, does not the expediency amount to - absolute necessity—that without which the Government itself cannot - be perpetuated? - - The war continues. In considering the policy to be adopted for - suppressing the insurrection, I have been anxious and careful that - the inevitable conflict for this purpose shall not degenerate into a - violent and remorseless revolutionary struggle. I have, therefore, - in every case thought it proper to keep the integrity of the Union - prominent as the primary object of the contest on our part, leaving - all questions which are not of vital military importance to the more - deliberate action of the Legislature. - - In the exercise of my best discretion I have adhered to the blockade - of the ports held by the insurgents, instead of putting in force, by - proclamation, the law of Congress enacted at the last session for - closing those ports. - - So, also, obeying the dictates of prudence as well as the - obligations of law, instead of transcending I have adhered to the - act of Congress to confiscate property used for insurrectionary - purposes. If a new law upon the same subject shall be proposed, its - propriety will be duly considered. The Union must be preserved; and - hence all indispensable means must be employed. We should not be in - haste to determine that radical and extreme measures, which may - reach the loyal as well as the disloyal, are indispensable.[236] - -The President’s mastery of national affairs is seen in the ability and -thoroughness with which he treated a great variety of important public -questions; though his message touches with the utmost delicacy the -paramount issue of slavery it really marked an advance in his position. -However, he was not yet abreast of the aggressive anti-slavery party in -the 37th Congress, which had just commenced its first regular session. - -The “increase of free States,” which Mr. Bancroft hoped would result -from the war, and which President Lincoln’s reply shows had not escaped -his attention, was not to be effected by military emancipation in the -field but by the voluntary action of the States themselves. The caution -and judgment which he brought to bear on this subject are apparent from -even a casual examination of the message, which refers to the number of -slaves that had been freed by the incidents of war, and to the extreme -probability that still others would be liberated in its progress. It -contained also a recommendation of colonization, a topic which had long -been familiar to Americans both North and South. To any new law -emancipating slaves for the participation of their masters in rebellion, -he promised to give due consideration. This part of the message had the -additional merit of being easily expanded into a more definite policy. -It was this characteristic prudence that led the President to suppress -the following remarks in a report which the Secretary of War had -prepared for the opening of Congress in December, 1861: - - If it shall be found that the men who have been held by the rebels - as slaves are capable of bearing arms and performing efficient - military service, it is the right, and may become the duty, of this - government to arm and equip them, and employ their services against - the rebels, under proper military regulation, discipline, and - command.[237] - -Any legislation, or even any extended debate, on these recommendations -was prevented by questions deemed more urgent by Congress. Indeed, the -President does not appear to have seriously expected favorable action at -this time upon his suggestions, for he resumed certain efforts which he -had been carefully considering. He believed that by the pressure of war -necessities the border States might be induced to take up the idea of -voluntary emancipation if the General Government would pay their -citizens the full property value of the slaves they were asked to -liberate; and this experiment seemed most feasible in the small State of -Delaware, which retained only the merest fragment of a property interest -in the institution. - -Even before the appearance of his message a plan of compensated -abolishment had taken definite form in the mind of the President, for -about November 26 he had prepared a draft of a bill for gradual -emancipation in Delaware.[238] Through Congressman George P. Fisher the -proposition was laid before the General Assembly of that State and -received favorable consideration in the lower House. By the Senate, -which convened November 25, 1861, it was taken up for discussion on -February 7 succeeding. Upon the question, 4 voted in favor and 4 against -concurring in the action of the more popular branch of the Legislature. -The remaining Senator, McFerran, was absent or silent and is not -accounted for in the journal of this special session. Therefore the -measure was returned non-concurred in to the other chamber. The -following preamble and joint resolution relative to the proposed -emancipation bill are self-explanatory. The Federal suggestion was -repelled as an unwarranted interference in the domestic concerns of that -State: - - _Whereas_, There has been circulating among the members of this - General Assembly a printed draft for a law to be entitled “An act - for the gradual emancipation of slaves in the State of Delaware with - just compensation to their owners”; _and whereas_ many of the - members of this General Assembly have been requested to support it, - the said draft being in the following words: [Then follows the - title, together with the twenty-one sections composing the bill. To - which is added:] _And whereas_ it is uncertain that said proposition - will be submitted to this General Assembly for its action, - nevertheless, viewing it to be unworthy of their support, they - desire to place upon record the grounds of their condemnation; - therefore - - _Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of - Delaware in General Assembly met_, That the members of this - Legislature were not elected with a view to the passage of any act - for the emancipation of slaves, but with the understanding, either - expressed or implied, that legislation upon the distracting subject - of slavery was hostile to the public peace, and therefore to be - avoided; that the passage of the act drafted as aforesaid, inasmuch - as it renders Congressional action necessary, would, upon the - apparent application of the State of Delaware, introduce the slavery - question into Congress, would encourage the abolition element - therein, and fortify it in its purpose to destroy entirely all - property in slaves, and furthermore, would be injurious to the quiet - and harmony that prevail in this State. - - _Be it further resolved by the authority aforesaid_, That it is the - opinion of this General Assembly, that Congress has no right to - appropriate a dollar for the purchase of slaves, and that such a - proposal, coming from the source to which it is traceable, evinces a - design on the part of those having control of our national affairs - to abolish slavery in the States. - - _Resolved further_, That this General Assembly having in mind the - interests of the people of Delaware, are not willing, especially at - a time of financial embarrassment, to make the State of Delaware a - guarantor of any debt the payment of which depends upon the mere - pledge of public faith; that the confidence of the people of this - State that nothing would ever be done to promote a disunion of our - National system, but that it would remain, as expressed by Webster - “one and inseparable, now and forever,” having been impaired by the - events of the last two years, we are and should be very cautious in - resting our obligations on the mere faith of others; that by - accepting the terms to be offered by the United States, we should, - upon grounds of the plainest equity, be held to have pledged the - faith of Delaware for the payment of nine hundred thousand dollars - as mentioned in the draft aforesaid; that, keeping in mind the fact - that the power of the nation is now put forth to suppress a - rebellion prevailing throughout a very large portion of its - territory, and that in consequence of such rebellion and the - uncertainty of its being speedily quelled, the stocks of the United - States, which heretofore brought in the market a sum far beyond the - par value thereof, are now selling at a continually increasing rate - of discount, we are unwilling to pledge the faith of Delaware (a - faith which has never been violated) that the proposed mode of - payment is safe and proper. - - _Resolved further_, That when the people of Delaware desire to - abolish slavery within her borders, they will do so in their own - way, having due regard to strict equity; that any interference from - without, and all suggestions of saving expense to the people, or - others of like character, are improper to be made to an honorable - people, such as we represent, and are hereby repelled—that though - the State of Delaware is small, and her people not of the richest, - they are beyond the reach of any who would promote an end by - improper interference and solicitations. - - _Resolved further_, That a copy of the foregoing resolutions, duly - attested, be transmitted to each of our Senators, and to our - Representative in Congress, to be laid before their respective - houses.[239] - -Thus ended, so far as Delaware was concerned, the question of -compensated emancipation. Precisely why the offer of Federal assistance -was rejected nowhere clearly appears except in the records of the -General Assembly. The high ground assumed in the resolutions was, of -course, the only one in harmony with public opinion in the State. There -are, however, some facts in the history of that Commonwealth which -afford a partial explanation of the action of its Legislature. When the -Federalist party as a political force had disappeared everywhere outside -of New England its principles and traditions still lingered on in -Delaware. The same conservative tendency, the same distrust of -innovation is seen again in the prudent manner in which the authorities -of the State invested and improved her portion of the surplus revenue -distributed among the States in 1837. With a half dozen exceptions the -shares allotted to other members of the Union have disappeared, in some -instances expended patriotically, in others squandered on projects more -or less visionary. It has frequently been observed, too, that a -community whose population is chiefly agricultural is apt to view with -suspicion any financial proposition of great magnitude. Whatever the -true explanation of her opposition to the policy of the President, the -question at once sank to rest in Delaware; it was soon to be revived -elsewhere, however, as will presently be seen. - -Meanwhile army officers continued to determine, on their own authority, -very important questions relative to the surrender of fugitive slaves. -Major-General Halleck declared in a proclamation of February 23, 1862, -that “it does not belong to the military to decide upon the relation of -master and slave. Such questions must be settled by the civil courts. No -fugitive slave will therefore be admitted within our lines or camps, -except when specially ordered by the General commanding.”[240] General -Halleck’s order No. 3 of November 20 preceding, as it cut off an -opportunity for the escape of thousands, occasioned much bitter -discussion both in and out of Congress. By Halleck it was explained in -these words: “Unauthorized persons, black or white, free or slaves, must -be kept out of our camps, unless we are willing to publish to the enemy -everything we do or intend to do.” This statement, however, does not -altogether harmonize with the spirit of his order.[241] - -General Buell up to March 6 appears to have uniformly returned this -class of persons, and on the 26th of that month General Hooker permitted -nine citizens of Maryland to search for negroes supposed to have taken -refuge with some of the regiments in his division. Notwithstanding the -commander desired that no obstacles be thrown in their way, trouble -occurred when the claimants showed their authority and demanded the -surrender of their slaves. They were driven from camp because fears for -their safety were entertained by some of the officers. The anger of the -soldiers appears to have been especially aroused by the fact that when -within a few yards of camp the slaveholders fired two pistol shots at a -negro who was running past them.[242] - -General Doubleday’s opinion, as stated April 6, 1862, by the Assistant -Adjutant-General, was, “that all negroes coming into the lines of any of -the camps or forts under his command, are to be treated as persons and -not as chattels. - -“Under no circumstances,” continues this regulation, “has the commander -of a fort or camp the power of surrendering persons claimed as fugitive -slaves, as it cannot be done without determining their character. - -“The additional article of war recently passed by Congress positively -prohibits this.”[243] - -Notwithstanding the unmistakable tone of the above, General Williams -announced two months later from his headquarters at Baton Rouge that -commanders of the camps and garrisons in that part of Louisiana were -required to turn all fugitives beyond the limits of their guards and -sentinels because of “the demoralizing and disorganizing tendencies to -the troops of harboring runaway negroes.”[244] - -Enough has been said to show the divergence of sentiment among Federal -commanders on the rendition of fugitive slaves. The party preferences of -officers served as a rather reliable index to the treatment of the -fugitive in any particular case. This confusion, it is scarcely -necessary to add, arose from the failure of Congress to pass a law on -the subject, and to a considerable degree from the absence of any -clearly expressed policy by the Administration. Of the changing opinions -of the President, however, we catch an occasional glimpse. Though the -contrabands at Fortress Monroe had, no doubt, brought before him the -entire question of slavery, the sagacity of General Butler had postponed -the necessity of any announcement in May, 1861; but the subject could -not always be avoided, and the imprudence of Fremont forced a -declaration in September following. The events of another year were -destined to produce changes which even the wisest could not then -foresee. - -A new phase of this troublesome question resulted from the capture, -November 7, of Hilton Head, South Carolina, and the Federal occupation -of the Sea Islands, where the labor of slaves abandoned by their masters -was organized under authority of the Treasury Department by Mr. E. L. -Pierce. This was, probably, intended as nothing more than an experiment, -to be extended if successful. To interest Government officials at -Washington in the work among these freedmen, Mr. Pierce, at the -suggestion of Secretary Chase, called, February 15, 1862, upon the -President, who seemed rather annoyed at the visit, and, after listening -a few moments, said somewhat impatiently that he did not think he ought -to be troubled with such details; that “there seemed to be an itching to -get negroes into our lines.” To this Mr. Pierce replied that the negroes -were domiciled there when the Union forces took possession. The -President then handed his visitor a card by which Mr. Chase was -authorized to give what instructions he thought judicious relative to -Port Royal contrabands.[245] This impatience Mr. Pierce explains by -saying that the President was in expectation of a personal bereavement. -This certainly accounts for the anxiety and apparent annoyance of Mr. -Lincoln, but his remark that there seemed to be an “itching” to get -negroes inside Federal lines shows that he had not yet deliberately -considered the novel case of abandoned slaves; abandoned masters had -hitherto claimed his attention. Though slowly, as it may have appeared -to radical members of his own party, the President was surely -approaching the great question, and on March 6, 1862, sent to Congress a -message which recommended the adoption, and even proposed the form, of a -joint resolution declaring: - - That the United States ought to coöperate with any State which may - adopt gradual abolishment of slavery, giving to such State pecuniary - aid, to be used by such State, in its discretion, to compensate for - the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of - system.[246] - -As one of the most efficient means of self-preservation it was -recommended by the Executive to the coördinate branch of Government; for -to deprive the cotton States of the hope of being joined by the border -States would, he said, “substantially end the rebellion; and the -initiation of emancipation completely deprives them of it as to all the -States initiating it. The point is not that all the States tolerating -slavery would very soon, if at all, initiate emancipation; but that -while the offer is equally made to all, the more Northern shall, by such -initiation, make it certain to the more Southern that in no event will -the former ever join the latter in their proposed confederacy.” Gradual -emancipation he believed better for all concerned. The current -expenditures of the war would soon purchase, at a fair valuation, all -the slaves in any named State. However, it was proposed as a matter of -perfectly free choice. “In the annual message, last December,” continued -the President, “I thought fit to say, ‘the Union must be preserved, and -hence all indispensable means must be employed.’ I said this not -hastily, but deliberately. War has been made and continues to be an -indispensable means to this end. A practical re-acknowledgment of the -national authority would render the war unnecessary, and it would at -once cease. If, however, resistance continues, the war must also -continue; and it is impossible to foresee all the incidents which may -attend and all the ruin which may follow it. Such as may seem -indispensable, or may obviously promise great efficiency, toward ending -the struggle, must and will come.” - -The message inquired “whether the pecuniary consideration tendered would -not be of more value to the States and private persons concerned than -are the institution and property in it, in the present aspect of -affairs?”[247] - -This was really a great step in advance; by many it was regarded as a -direct and positive interference with the domestic institutions of the -States; it was certainly a preliminary movement to get rid of slavery. -The deliberate opinion of the Delaware Legislature has already been -noticed. - -Easily distinguished in principle from the opposition in Delaware were -the sentiments expressed in Virginia when the equitable and generous -proposal of the President came up for consideration in the Richmond -Legislature. Mr. Collier submitted to that body a preamble and -resolution relative to the proposition. In the former it was said that -negro slaves having been the property of their masters for two hundred -and forty years, by use and custom at first, and subsequently by -recognition of the public law, ought not to be, and could not justly be, -interfered with in such property relation by the State, by “the people -in convention assembled to alter an existing constitution, or to form -one for admission into the confederacy, nor by the representatives of -the people of the State in the Confederate Legislature, nor by any means -or mode which the popular majority might adopt; and that the State, -whilst remaining republican in the structure of its government, can -lawfully get rid of that species of property, if ever, only by the free -consent of the individual owners.” For the State to deprive an -individual of this species of property would contravene the -indispensable principles of free government. This view, as further -explained by its author, denied the power of even a majority, in making -a new State constitution, to disturb a preëxisting and resident -property.[248] - -Three days after sending his recommendation to Congress, the President -wrote privately to Henry J. Raymond, editor of the _New York Times_: - - I am grateful to the New York journals and not less so to the - “Times” than to others, for their kind notices of the late special - message to Congress. - - Your paper, however, intimates that the proposition, though well - intentioned, must fail on the score of expense. I do hope you will - reconsider this. Have you noticed the facts that less than one-half - day’s cost of this war would pay for all the slaves in Delaware at - $400 per head—that eighty-seven days’ cost of this war would pay for - all in Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Kentucky, and - Missouri at the same price? Were those States to take the step, do - you doubt that it would shorten the war more than eighty-seven days, - and thus be an actual saving of expense? - - Please look at these things and consider whether there should not be - another article in the “Times.”[249] - -By his request those Congressmen from the border States then in -Washington called, March 10, on Mr. Lincoln, who explained that his -recent message was not inimical to the interests they represented. In -the progress of the war, slaves would come into camps and continual -irritation be thus maintained. In the border States that condition kept -alive a feeling of hostility to the Government. He told them further -“that emancipation was a subject exclusively under the control of the -States, and must be adopted or rejected by each for itself.”[250] - -Relative to this interview a memorandum of the Hon. John W. Crisfield, -one of the Maryland Representatives present, contains the following -entry: “He [the President] was constantly annoyed by conflicting and -antagonistic complaints; on the one side a certain class complained if -the slave was not protected by the army; persons were frequently found -who, participating in these views, acted in a way unfriendly to the -slave-holder; on the other hand, slaveholders complained that their -rights were interfered with, their slaves induced to abscond and -protected within the lines; these complaints were numerous, loud and -deep; were a serious annoyance to him and embarrassing to the progress -of the war ... [they] strengthened the hopes of the Confederates that at -some day the border States would unite with them, and thus tend to -prolong the war; and he was of opinion, if this resolution should be -adopted by Congress and accepted by our [the border slaveholding] -States, these causes of irritation and these hopes would be removed, and -more would be accomplished toward shortening the war than could be hoped -from the greatest victory achieved by Union armies; ... that he did not -claim nor had this Government any right to coerce them” to accept the -proposition. - -To Mr. Noell’s remark that the _New York Tribune_ favored the measure -and understood it to mean that gradual emancipation must be accepted or -the border States would get something worse, the President replied that -he must not be expected to quarrel with that journal before the right -time; he hoped never to have to do it. The message having said that “all -indispensable means must be employed” to preserve the Union, Mr. -Crisfield inquired pointedly, what would be the effect of the refusal of -a State to accept this proposal. Did the President, he asked, look “to -any policy beyond the acceptance or rejection of this scheme.” Mr. -Lincoln candidly replied that he had “no designs beyond the action of -the States on this particular subject,” though he should lament their -refusal to accept it. Mr. Crisfield said “he did not think the people of -Maryland looked upon slavery as a permanent institution; and he did not -know that they would be very reluctant to give it up if provision was -made to meet the loss and they could be rid of the race; but they did -not like to be coerced into emancipation, either by the direct action of -the Government or by indirection, as through the emancipation of slaves -in this District, or the confiscation of Southern property as now -threatened; and he thought before they would consent to consider this -proposition they would require to be informed on these points.” The -President answered that “unless he was expelled by the act of God or the -Confederate armies, he should occupy that house for three years; and as -long as he remained there Maryland had nothing to fear either for her -institutions or her interests on the points referred to.” Representative -Crisfield immediately added: “Mr. President, if what you now say could -be heard by the people of Maryland, they would consider your proposition -with a much better feeling than I fear without it they will be inclined -to do.” To this Mr. Lincoln said that a publication of his sentiments -would not do; it would force him before the proper time into a quarrel -which was impending with the Greeley faction. This he desired to -postpone, or, if possible, altogether to avoid. - -To an objection of Governor Wickliffe, of Kentucky, he said that the -resolution proposed would be considered rather as the expression of a -sentiment than as involving any constitutional question. He did not know -how the project was received by the members from the free States; some -of them had spoken to him and received it kindly; but for the most part -they were as reserved and chary as the border State delegations; he -could not tell how they would vote.[251] - -To James A. McDougall, of California, who was making some opposition in -the Senate, he sent, March 14, this private communication while the -resolution was still pending: - - As to the expensiveness of gradual emancipation with the plan of - compensation, proposed in the late message, please allow me one or - two brief suggestions. - - Less than one half day’s cost of this war would pay for all the - slaves in Delaware at four hundred dollars per head. - - Thus, all the slaves in Delaware by the census of 1860, 1,798 - are.... - - 400 - - ————————— - - Cost of slaves $719,200 - - One day’s cost of the war 2,000,000 - - ========= - - Again, less than eighty-seven days’ cost of this war would, at the - same price, pay for all in Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, - Kentucky, and Missouri. - - Thus, slaves in Delaware 1,798 - Maryland 87,188 - District of Columbia 3,181 - Kentucky 225,490 - Missouri 114,965 - ———————————— - 432,622 - 400 - ———————————— - Cost of slaves $173,048,800 - Eighty-seven days’ cost of war 174,000,000 - ============ - - Do you doubt that taking the initiatory steps on the part of those - States and this District would shorten the war more than - eighty-seven days, and thus be an actual saving of expense? - - A word as to the time and manner of incurring the expense. Suppose, - for instance, a State devises and adopts a system by which the - institution absolutely ceases therein by a named day—say January 1, - 1882. Then let the sum to be paid to such a State by the United - States be ascertained by taking from the census of 1860 the number - of slaves within the State, and multiplying the number by four - hundred—the United States to pay such sums to the State in twenty - equal annual installments, in six per cent. bonds of the United - States. - - The sum thus given, as to time and manner, I think, would not be - half as onerous as would be an equal sum raised now for the - indefinite prosecution of the war; but of this you can judge as well - as I. I enclose a census table for your convenience.[252] - -On the same day of the conference with the border State delegations, -March 10, the resolution, in precisely the language suggested by the -President, was introduced by Roscoe Conkling, and on the following day -by a vote of 89 to 31 passed the House.[253] The Senate by 32 yeas to 10 -nays took favorable action upon it on the 2d of April succeeding.[254] - -It is important to notice that at this time, March, 1862, the Government -set up no claim of a right by Federal authority to interfere with -slavery within the limits of a State; also that public opinion in the -North had advanced to the position occupied by Representative McKean -more than a year before, when he introduced into Congress his resolution -for compensated emancipation.[255] - -At a session, May 28, 1862, of the Union Convention of Baltimore its -Business Committee reported a series of resolutions which were adopted -unanimously, among them one approving the wise and conservative policy -proposed by the President in his message of March 6; that it was not -only the duty but the interest of the loyal people of Maryland to accept -the offer of pecuniary aid tendered by the Government to inaugurate an -equitable plan of emancipation and colonization.[256] This was the dawn -of emancipation in Maryland. - -The President approved, April 16, six days after the passage of his -cherished measure, an act prohibiting slavery and liberating slaves in -the District of Columbia. It included both compensation to owners and -the principle of colonization.[257] - -Shortly before its passage, April 17, a resolution was favorably -considered by the House to appoint a committee of nine empowered to -report whether any plan could be proposed and recommended for the -gradual emancipation of all African slaves and the extinction of slavery -in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Missouri by the -people or local authorities thereof, and how far and in what way the -United States could and ought equitably to aid in facilitating either of -the above objects. This measure was adopted by a vote of 67 to 52, and -one week later a committee was appointed by the Speaker. - -General Hunter by an order of April 25 had extended martial law over -South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. Two weeks later he proclaimed -persons in those States heretofore held as slaves forever free. “Slavery -and martial law in a free country” he declared “altogether -incompatible.” The President in his proclamation of May 19, 1862, -rescinding this order once more reveals his sentiments on the slavery -question. The act of the Department commander, he said, was wholly -unauthorized. The document continues: “I further make known that, -whether it be competent for me, as Commander-in-Chief of the army and -navy, to declare the slaves of any State or States free, and whether, at -any time, in any case, it shall have become a necessity indispensable to -the maintenance of the Government to exercise such supposed power, are -questions which, under my responsibility, I reserve to myself, and which -I cannot feel justified in leaving to the decision of commanders in the -field.”[258] - -Mr. Lincoln took this opportunity to point out to those most nearly -concerned the unmistakable signs of the times, and earnestly appealed to -them to embrace the offer of compensated abolishment, quoting upon that -subject the joint resolution of Congress. The order of General Hunter, -so far as it concerned the President, could have been dismissed by its -disavowal; but he went farther: he not only took advantage of this -occasion earnestly to urge upon the border States very serious -consideration of the principle of compensated emancipation, but he -raised, without pausing to discuss it, the question of his right as -Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy to declare the freedom of slaves -within the limits of a State should such a measure become indispensable -to the maintenance of the Union. - -For refusing to employ his regiment in returning fugitive slaves of -disloyal masters, Colonel Paine, of the Fourth Wisconsin Volunteers, was -placed under arrest in the summer of 1862; about the same time -Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony was similarly disciplined both for refusing -permission to search his camp and for ordering the arrest of those -hunting for slaves.[259] - -Instructions from the War Department, dated July 22, and applying to all -the States in rebellion except South Carolina and Tennessee, authorized -the employment as laborers of so many persons of African descent as the -military and naval commanders could use to advantage, and the payment of -reasonable wages for their labor.[260] - -On May 12, 1862, Representative Lovejoy proposed a bill, a substitute -for one previously reported by him and introduced by Mr. Isaac N. -Arnold: - - To the end that freedom may be and remain forever the fundamental - law of the land in all places whatsoever, so far as it lies within - the powers or depends upon the action of the Government of the - United States to make it so: Therefore, - - _Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the - United States of America in Congress assembled_, That slavery or - involuntary servitude, in all cases whatsoever (other than in the - punishment of crime, whereof the party shall have been duly - convicted) shall henceforth cease, and be prohibited forever in all - the Territories of the United States, now existing, or hereafter to - be formed or acquired in any way.[261] - -This measure passed by 85 yeas to 50 nays. In the Senate, June 9, it was -reported amended by inserting this substitute: “That from and after the -passage of this act there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary -servitude in any of the Territories of the United States now existing, -or which may at any time hereafter be formed or acquired by the United -States, otherwise than in punishment of crimes whereof the party shall -have been duly convicted.” In this form it passed by a vote of 28 to 10 -and the House concurred by 72 yeas to 38 nays.[262] - -Charles Sumner, writing June 5, 1862, to a correspondent who was -impatient at what seemed the short-comings of the President, says: - - Your criticism of the President is hasty. I am confident that, if - you knew him as I do, you would not make it. - - Of course, the President cannot be held responsible for all the - misfeasances of subordinates, unless adopted or at least tolerated - by him. And I am sure that nothing unjust or ungenerous will be - tolerated, much less adopted, by him. - - I am happy to let you know that he has no sympathy with Stanly in - his absurd wickedness, closing the schools, nor again in his other - act of turning our camp into a hunting ground for slaves. He - repudiates both—positively. The latter point has occupied much of - his thought; and the newspapers have not gone too far in recording - his repeated declarations, which I have often heard from his own - lips, that slaves finding their way into the national lines are - never to be re-enslaved. This is his conviction, expressed without - reserve. - - Could you have seen the President—as it was my privilege often—while - he was considering the great questions on which he has already - acted—the invitation to emancipation in the States, emancipation in - the District of Columbia, and the acknowledgment of the independence - of Hayti and Liberia—even your zeal would have been satisfied, for - you would have felt the sincerity of his purpose to do what he could - to carry forward the principles of the Declaration of Independence. - His whole soul was occupied, especially by the first proposition, - which was peculiarly his own. In familiar intercourse with him, I - remember nothing more touching than the earnestness and completeness - with which he embraced this idea. To his mind, it was just and - beneficent while it promised the sure end of slavery. Of course, to - me who had already proposed a bridge of gold for the retreating - fiend, it was most welcome. Proceeding from the President, it must - take its place among the great events of history. - - * * * * * - - I wish that you really knew the President, and had heard the artless - expression of his convictions on these questions which concern you - so deeply. You might, perhaps, wish that he were less cautious, but - you would be grateful that he is so true to all that you have at - heart. Believe me, therefore, you are wrong, and I regret it the - more because of my desire to see all our friends stand firmly - together.[263] - -The President requested and obtained, July 12, 1862, an interview with -the border State delegations. The near adjournment of Congress would -deprive him of an opportunity of seeing them for several months. He -believed they held more power for good than any other equal number of -members, and felt that the duty of making an appeal to them could not be -waived. This he did by reading a carefully prepared paper. - -The Confederate States, he said, would cling to the hope of an ultimate -union with the border States as long as they perpetuated the institution -of slavery. If the members had supported his plan of gradual -emancipation in the preceding March the rebellion would now, 1862, be -substantially ended. - -Looking to the stern facts in the case he inquired whether they could do -better for their States than to follow the course which he urged. If the -war continued long, the institution “will be extinguished by mere -friction and abrasion,”—by the incidents of war much of its value was -already gone. He did not speak of immediate emancipation, “but of a -decision at once to emancipate gradually.” Room for colonization could -be procured in South America ample and cheap enough. When their numbers -increased sufficiently to be company for one another the freed people -would not be so reluctant to go. His repudiation of General Hunter’s -proclamation had given offence to some whose support the Government -could not afford to lose. The pressure from such persons was still upon -him and the Congressmen from the border slave States could relieve him -and the country. He begged them to reexamine his message of March 6, and -commend it to the consideration of their constituents. The peril of -their common country demanded the loftiest views and the boldest action -if they desired to perpetuate popular government.[264] - -It was represented to him, in a conversation which followed this appeal, -that the resolution of Congress, being no more than an expression of -sentiment, could not be regarded by them as a basis for substantial -action. Mr. Lincoln admitted that, as a condition of taking into -consideration a proposition so nearly affecting their social system, the -border slave States were entitled to expect a substantial pledge of -pecuniary aid. - -It was further represented at this conference that the people of the -border States were interested in knowing the great importance which Mr. -Lincoln attached to the policy in question, while it was equally due to -the country, to the President and to themselves that they should -publicly announce the motives under which they were called to act, and -the considerations of public policy urged upon them and their -constituents. With a view to such a statement of their position the -members met in council to deliberate on the reply they should make, and -two days later the majority sent the following paper to the President: - -“The undersigned ... have listened to your address with the profound -sensibility naturally inspired by the high source from which it -emanates, the earnestness which marked its delivery, and the -overwhelming importance of the subject of which it treats. We have given -it our most respectful consideration, and now lay before you our -response.... - -“... Repudiating the dangerous heresies of the secessionists, we -believed, with you, that the war on their part is aggressive and wicked, -and the objects for which it was to be prosecuted on ours, defined by -your message at the opening of the present Congress, to be such as all -good men should approve. We have not hesitated to vote all supplies -necessary to carry it on vigorously....” - -This support, continues the response, was yielded “in the face of -measures most distasteful to us and injurious to the interests we -represent, and in the hearing of doctrines, avowed by those who claim to -be your friends, [which] must be abhorrent to us and our constituents.” - -The greater number of them did not, however, vote for the measure -recommended in his message of March 6, and they proceeded to state the -principal reasons which influenced their action. First, it proposed a -radical change in their social system; it was hurried through both -Houses with undue haste; and was passed without any opportunity whatever -for consultation with their constituents, whose interests it deeply -involved. “It seemed,” said the majority, “like an interference by this -Government with a question which peculiarly and exclusively belonged to -our respective States, on which they had not sought advice or solicited -aid. Many of us doubted the constitutional power of this Government to -make appropriations of money for the object designated, and all of us -thought our finances were in no condition to bear the immense outlay -which its adoption and faithful execution would impose upon the national -Treasury. If we pause but a moment to think of the debt its acceptance -would have entailed, we are appalled by its magnitude. The proposition -was addressed to all the States and embraced the whole number of -slaves.” - -The census of 1860 showed a slave population of nearly 4,000,000; from -natural increase the number in 1862 exceeded that. “At even the low -average of $300, the price fixed by the emancipation act for the slaves -of this District, and greatly below their real worth, their value runs -up to the enormous sum of $1,200,000,000; and if to that we add the cost -of deportation and colonization, at $100 each, which is but a fraction -more than is actually paid by the Maryland Colonization Society, we have -$400,000,000 more. They were not willing nor could the country bear a -tax sufficient to pay the interest on that sum in addition to the vast -and daily increasing debt already fixed upon them by the exigencies of -the war. The proposition is nothing less than the deportation from the -country of $1,600,000,000 worth of producing labor and the substitution -of an interest-bearing debt of the same amount. Even if it were expected -that only the border States would accept the proposition, that involved -a sum too great for the financial ability of the Government at this -time. The total number of slaves in those States according to the late -census was 1,196,112. The same rate of valuation with expenses of -deportation and colonization gives the enormous sum of $478,038,133. - -“We did not feel that we should be justified in voting for a measure -which, if carried out, would add this vast amount to our public debt at -a moment when the Treasury was reeling under the enormous expenditure of -the war.” - -To them the resolution seemed no more than the enunciation of a -sentiment. “No movement was then made to provide and appropriate the -funds required to carry it into effect; and we were not encouraged to -believe that funds would be provided. And our belief has been fully -justified by subsequent events. Not to mention other circumstances, it -is quite sufficient for our purpose to bring to your notice the fact -that, while this resolution was under consideration in the Senate our -colleague, the Senator from Kentucky, moved an amendment appropriating -$500,000 to the object therein designated, and it was voted down with -great unanimity. What confidence, then, could we reasonably feel that if -we committed ourselves to the policy it proposed, our constituents would -reap the fruits of the promise held out; and on what ground could we, as -fair men, approach them and challenge their support?” - -They denied that if, as the President alleged, they had supported the -resolution of March 6, the war would be substantially ended, and they -added, “The resolution has passed and if there be virtue in it, it will -be quite as efficacious as if we had voted for it.” - -The war, they asserted, was prolonged not by reason of their conduct, -but because of the union of all classes in the South. Those who wished -to break down national independence and set up State domination, the -State-rights party, could not be reconciled; but the large class who -believed their domestic interests had been assailed by the Government -might be if only they were convinced “that no harm is intended to them -and their institutions,” but that the Government was simply defending -its legitimate authority. - -“Twelve months ago,” adds this response, “both Houses of Congress, -adopting the spirit of your message, then but recently sent in, declared -with singular unanimity the objects of the war, and the country -instantly bounded to your side to assist you in carrying it on. If the -spirit of that resolution had been adhered to, we are confident that we -should before now have seen the end of this deplorable conflict. But -what have we seen? - -“In both Houses of Congress we have heard doctrines subversive of the -principles of the Constitution, and seen measure after measure founded -in substance on those doctrines proposed and carried through which can -have no other effect than to distract and divide loyal men, and -exasperate and drive still further from us and their duty the people of -the rebellious States. Military officers, following these bad examples, -have stepped beyond the just limits of their authority in the same -direction, until in several instances you have felt the necessity of -interfering to arrest them.... The effect of these measures was -foretold, and may now be seen in the indurated state of Southern -feeling.” - -To these causes, and not to the failure of the border delegations to -support the measure, they attributed the terrible earnestness of those -in arms against the Government. Nor was the institution of slavery the -source of insurgent strength, but rather the apprehension that the -powers of a common Government would be wielded against the institutions -of the Southern States. - -The reply concludes: “If Congress, by proper and necessary legislation, -shall provide sufficient funds and place them at your disposal, to be -applied by you to the payment of any of our States or the citizens -thereof who shall adopt the abolishment of slavery, either gradual or -immediate, as they may determine, and the expense of deportation and -colonization of the liberated slaves, then will our State[s] and people -take this proposition into careful consideration, for such decision as -in their judgment is demanded by their interest, their honor, and their -duty to the whole country.”[265] - -The minority, seven in number, in their reply of the 15th declared -themselves ready to make any sacrifice to save the Government and the -institutions of their fathers, and promised to ask the people of their -States calmly, deliberately and fairly to consider the recommendations -of the President; they were encouraged to assume this position because -the leaders of the rebellion had offered to abolish slavery among them -as a condition of foreign intervention in favor of their independence as -a nation.[266] - -Horace Maynard, though not representing a border State proper, expressed -his approval of the President’s policy and stated the physical -impossibility of submitting to the consideration of his people that or -any other proposition until Tennessee had first been freed from hostile -arms.[267] - -A fourth paper submitted to the President was that of Senator J. B. -Henderson, of Missouri, who had cheerfully supported the measure at the -time of its introduction; he believed the proposition would have -received the approbation of a large majority of the border State -delegations if they could have foreseen that the war would have been -protracted a twelvemonth and had felt assured that the dominant party in -Congress would, like the President, be as prompt in practical action as -they had been in the expression of a sentiment. “In this period of the -nation’s distress,” says Senator Henderson, “I know of no human -institution too sacred for discussion; no material interest belonging to -the citizen that he should not willingly place upon the altar of his -country, if demanded by the public good.”[268] - -Mr. Henderson did not agree with the opinion of the President that “the -war would now be substantially ended” had the members from the border -States supported the measure in the preceding March. Personally he was -favorable to the proposition, but remembered that he was the servant not -the master of the people of Missouri. - -To the sudden and unexpected collapse of McClellan’s Richmond campaign -has been ascribed the determination of President Lincoln to adopt -general military emancipation so much sooner than he otherwise would -have done. The great and decisive element of military strength in the -slave population which he saw so clearly a little later could not even -then, June and July, 1862, have been altogether concealed from his keen -insight into affairs. His personal appeal to the border Congressmen was -made July 12; the result of that conference he easily anticipated. Nor -was the receipt of their written replies necessary to inform him that -his offer would be rejected. So much he could readily collect from their -oral objections and verbal criticisms. The decision to give notice of -his intention to issue a proclamation concerning slavery was probably -made within a few hours after he had assured Mr. Crisfield that the -emancipation policy extended no farther than to a refusal of the border -States to accept his tender of pecuniary aid to any commonwealth -voluntarily adopting the plan of gradual abolishment. However this may -be, he confided on the following day, July 13, 1862, to Secretaries -Seward and Welles his intention to emancipate slaves by proclamation if -their masters did not cease to make war on the Government. From the -diary of the latter, we learn under what circumstances this important -communication was made. - - President Lincoln [writes Mr. Welles] invited me to accompany him in - his carriage to the funeral of an infant child of Mr. Stanton. - Secretary Seward and Mrs. Frederick Seward were also in the - carriage. Mr. Stanton occupied at that time, for a summer residence, - the house of a naval officer, some two or three miles west or - northwesterly of Georgetown. It was on this occasion and on this - ride that he first mentioned to Mr. Seward and myself the subject of - emancipating the slaves by proclamation in case the rebels did not - cease to persist in their war on the Government and the Union, of - which he saw no evidence. He dwelt earnestly on the gravity, - importance, and delicacy of the movement; said he had given it much - thought, and had about come to the conclusion that it was a military - necessity, absolutely essential for the salvation of the nation, - that we must free the slaves or be ourselves subdued, etc., etc. - This was, he said, the first occasion where he had mentioned the - subject to any one, and wished us to frankly state how the - proposition struck us. Mr. Seward said the subject involved - consequences so vast and momentous that he should wish to bestow on - it mature reflection before giving a decisive answer; but his - present opinion inclined to the measure as justifiable, and perhaps - he might say expedient and necessary. These were also my views. Two - or three times on that ride the subject, which was of course an - absorbing one for each and all, was adverted to, and before - separating, the President desired us to give the subject special and - deliberate attention, for he was earnest in the conviction that - something must be done. It was a new departure for the President, - for until this time, in all our previous interviews, whenever the - question of emancipation or the mitigation of slavery had been in - any way alluded to, he had been prompt and emphatic in denouncing - any interference by the General Government with the subject. This - was, I think, the sentiment of every member of the Cabinet, all of - whom, including the President, considered it a local domestic - question appertaining to the States respectively, who had never - parted with their authority over it. But the reverses before - Richmond, and the formidable power and dimensions of the - insurrection, which extended through all the slave States and had - combined most of them in a confederacy to destroy the Union, - impelled the Administration to adopt extraordinary measures to - preserve the national existence. The slaves, if not armed and - disciplined, were in the service of those who were, not only as - field laborers and producers, but thousands of them were in - attendance upon the armies in the field, employed as waiters and - teamsters, and the fortifications and intrenchments were constructed - by them.[269] - -The session of Congress was drawing to a close, but before adjournment -the Confiscation Act, passed July 17, 1862, was approved by the -President. This with kindred laws increased the number of forfeitures of -title to slaves for the crimes of treason and rebellion. These penalties -were by him considered just and their imposition constitutional. - -Within five days after the adjournment of Congress the President, July -21, 1862, reached his final conclusions on the subject of emancipation. -The diary of Secretary Chase contains the following record: - - [Having received notice of a Cabinet meeting, Mr. Chase says:] I - went to the President’s at the appointed hour and found that he was - profoundly concerned at the present aspect of affairs, and had - determined to take some definite steps in respect to military action - and slavery. He had prepared several orders, the first of which - contemplated authority to commanders to subsist their troops in the - hostile territory; the second, authority to employ negroes as - laborers; the third, requiring that both in case of property taken - and negroes employed, accounts should be kept with such degree of - certainty as would enable compensation to be made in proper cases. - Another provided for the colonization of negroes in some tropical - country. - - A good deal of discussion took place upon these points. The first - order was unanimously approved. The second was also unanimously - approved; and the third by all except myself. I doubted the - expediency of attempting to keep accounts for the benefit of - inhabitants of rebel States. The colonization project was not much - discussed. - - The Secretary of War presented some letters from General Hunter, in - which General Hunter advised the Department that the withdrawal of a - large proportion of his troops to reënforce General McClellan - rendered it highly important that he should be immediately - authorized to enlist all loyal persons without reference to - complexion. Mr. Stanton, Mr. Seward, and myself expressed ourselves - in favor of this plan, and no one expressed himself against it. Mr. - Blair was not present. The President was not prepared to decide the - question, but expressed himself as averse to arming negroes.[270] - -This Cabinet meeting came to no final conclusion, and, as we learn from -the same source, the discussion was resumed on the following day, July -22, when the question of arming the slaves was brought up. - - I advocated it warmly [writes Secretary Chase].[271] The President - was unwilling to adopt this measure, but proposed to issue a - proclamation on the basis of the Confiscation Bill, calling upon the - States to return to their allegiance—warning rebels that the - provisions of the act would have full force at the expiration of - sixty days—adding, on his own part, a declaration of his intention - to renew, at the next session of Congress, his recommendation of - compensation to States adopting gradual abolishment of slavery—and - proclaiming the emancipation of all slaves within States remaining - in insurrection on the first day of January, 1863.[272] - -Mr. Chase promised the measure his cordial support, but preferred that -no new expression on the subject of compensation be made at that time. -Secretary Chase, in the diary mentioned, says: “The impression left upon -my mind by the whole discussion was, that, while the President thought -that the organization, equipment, and arming of negroes, like other -soldiers, would be productive of more evil than good, he was not -unwilling that commanders should, at their discretion, arm for purely -defensive purposes, slaves coming within their lines.”[273] On the -kindred policy of emancipation, however, the President had reached a -definite conclusion which was in advance of the opinions entertained by -even the most radical members of his Cabinet. When, therefore, he read -to them, on July 22, his draft of an emancipation proclamation they were -for the most part taken completely by surprise. This momentous document -deserves to be reproduced entire. - - In pursuance of the sixth section of the act of Congress entitled - “An act to suppress insurrection and to punish treason and - rebellion, to seize and confiscate property of rebels, and for other - purposes,” approved July 17, 1862, and which act and the joint - resolution explanatory thereof are herewith published, I, Abraham - Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim to and - warn all persons within the contemplation of said sixth section to - cease participating in, aiding, countenancing, or abetting the - existing rebellion, or any rebellion, against the Government of the - United States, and to return to their proper allegiance to the - United States, on pain of the forfeitures and seizures as within and - by said sixth section provided. - - And I hereby make known that it is my purpose, upon the next meeting - of Congress, to again recommend the adoption of a practical measure - for tendering pecuniary aid to the free choice or rejection of any - and all States which may then be recognizing and practically - sustaining the authority of the United States, and which may then - have voluntarily adopted, or thereafter may voluntarily adopt, - gradual abolishment of slavery within such State or States; that the - object is to practically restore, thenceforward to be maintained, - the constitutional relation between the General Government and each - and all the States wherein that relation is now suspended or - disturbed; and that for this object the war, as it has been, will be - prosecuted. And as a fit and necessary military measure for - effecting this object, I as Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy - of the United States, do order and declare that on the first day of - January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and - sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or States - wherein the constitutional authority of the United States shall not - then be practically recognized, submitted to, and maintained, shall - then, thenceforward, and forever be free.[274] - -The diary of Secretary Chase, as well as the President’s endorsement on -his draft, shows the emancipation proclamation to have been read to the -Cabinet July 22, 1862. Various suggestions were offered; but except an -objection of Secretary Seward they had all been fully anticipated by Mr. -Lincoln and settled in his own mind. Secretary Seward said: “Mr. -President, I approve of the proclamation, but I question the expediency -of its issue at this juncture. The depression of the public mind, -consequent upon our repeated reverses, is so great that I fear the -effect of so important a step. It may be viewed as the last measure of -an exhausted Government, a cry for help; the Government stretching forth -its hands to Ethiopia, instead of Ethiopia stretching forth her hands to -the Government.” - -Speaking afterwards of this incident, Mr. Lincoln said: “Seward’s idea -was ‘that it would be considered our last _shriek_ on the retreat. Now,’ -added Mr. Seward, ‘while I approve the measure, I suggest, sir, that you -postpone its issue, until you can give it to the country supported by -military success, instead of issuing it, as would be the case now, upon -the greatest disasters of the war!’ The wisdom of this view,” said Mr. -Lincoln in recalling the occasion, “struck me with very great force. It -was an aspect of the case that, in all my thought upon the subject, I -had entirely overlooked. The result was that I put the draft of the -proclamation aside, as you do your sketch for a picture, waiting for a -victory.”[275] - -Instead of the proclamation so carefully discussed, a short one was -published three days later, of which the most important part is as -follows: - - In pursuance of the sixth section of the act of Congress entitled - “An act to suppress insurrection and to punish treason and - rebellion, to seize and confiscate the property of rebels, and for - other purposes,” approved July 17, 1862, and which act, and the - joint resolution explanatory thereof, are herewith published, I, - Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim - to and warn all persons within the contemplation of said sixth - section to cease participating in, aiding, countenancing, or - abetting the existing rebellion, or any rebellion, against the - Government of the United States, and to return to their proper - allegiance to the United States, on pain of the forfeitures and - seizures as within and by said sixth section provided.[276] - -This warning was required by the sixth section of the act mentioned. - -During the following month President Lincoln waited patiently for -tidings of some unquestioned success that would justify the publication -of his proclamation, but when instead he received in the closing days of -August intelligence of the second disaster at Manassas his anxiety must -have become intense. This victory, together with the succession of -others recently attending Confederate arms, encouraged General Lee’s -invasion of Maryland. An army, notwithstanding its late reverses, still -formidable in numbers and once more thoroughly reorganized marched -leisurely from the vicinity of Washington to locate and destroy him. -When, where or how the battle-cloud would break was uncertain. All eyes -were turned on McClellan, again in command of the Union forces and -strengthened by every soldier that could be spared from the defences of -the Federal capital. It was in this state of suspense, and on the very -day, September 13, that Lee’s victorious legions entered Frederick City -that the President gave audience to a deputation from the religious -denominations of Chicago, presenting a memorial for the immediate issue -of an emancipation proclamation, which was enforced by some remarks from -the chairman. The President replied that he had for weeks past, even for -months, thought much upon the subject of their memorial. - -“I am approached,” said he, “with the most opposite opinions and advice, -and that by religious men, who are equally certain that they represent -the Divine will. I am sure that either the one or the other class is -mistaken in that belief, and perhaps, in some respect, both. I hope it -will not be irreverent for me to say that if it is probable that God -would reveal His will to others, on a point so connected with my duty, -it might be supposed He would reveal it directly to me; for, unless I am -more deceived in myself than I often am, it is my earnest desire to know -the will of Providence in this matter. And if I can learn what it is I -will do it! These are not, however, the days of miracles, and I suppose -it will be granted that I am not to expect a direct revelation. I must -study the plain physical facts of the case, ascertain what is possible, -and learn what appears to be wise and right.” - -The difficulties of the subject and the impossibility of even -anti-slavery men, in or out of Congress, agreeing upon any measure of -emancipation were then referred to. However, he would discuss the merits -of the case and asked pointedly: - -“What good would a proclamation of emancipation from me do, especially -as we are now situated? I do not want to issue a document that the whole -world will see must necessarily be inoperative.... Would my word free -the slaves, when I cannot even enforce the Constitution in the rebel -States? Is there a single court, or magistrate, or individual that would -be influenced by it there?” - -He admitted to his visitors, however, that he raised no objections to -such a proclamation as they desired on legal or on constitutional -grounds; for, continued he, “as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, -in time of war I suppose I have a right to take any measure which may -best subdue the enemy, nor do I urge objections of a moral nature, in -view of possible consequences of insurrection and massacre at the South. -I view this matter as a practical war measure, to be decided on -according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the -suppression of the rebellion.” - -The committee replied, and the President added, “I admit that slavery is -at the root of the rebellion.... I will also concede that emancipation -would help us in Europe, and convince them that we are incited by -something more than ambition. I grant, further, that it would help -somewhat at the North, though not so much, I fear, as you and those you -represent imagine.... Unquestionably, it would weaken the rebels by -drawing off their laborers, which is of great importance; but I am not -so sure we could do much with the blacks.”[277] The President, too, -called attention to the fact that the border slave States had 50,000 -bayonets in the Union army. It would be a serious matter if in -consequence of such a proclamation they should go over to the South. In -conclusion he said that he had not decided against a proclamation of -liberty to the slaves, but held the matter under advisement and assured -them that the subject was on his mind by day and by night more than any -other. - -It was currently reported among anti-slavery men in Illinois that the -emancipation proclamation was extorted from the President by the -pressure of such delegations as this from the Christian Convention.[278] -To determine how little foundation there is for this opinion it is only -necessary to recall what had occurred in the Cabinet on July 22 -preceding. - -The repulse of Lee’s veterans at Antietam, September 17, 1862, raised -somewhat the hopes of the President. On the 19th General McClellan -telegraphed an account of his victory, and Mr. Lincoln three days later -announced his intention to issue the postponed proclamation. - -All the Cabinet members, having been summoned by messenger from the -State Department, were in attendance at the White House on September 22, -1862. After some talk of a general nature, and the reading by Mr. -Lincoln of a humorous chapter from a book by Artemus Ward, the -conversation assumed a more serious tone. What subsequently transpired -on that eventful occasion we learn from the following record in the -diary of Secretary Chase: - - “Gentlemen, [said the President] I have, as you are aware, thought a - great deal about the relation of this war to slavery, and you all - remember that, several weeks ago, I read to you an order I had - prepared upon the subject, which, on account of objections made by - some of you, was not issued. Ever since then my mind has been much - occupied with this subject, and I have thought all along that the - time for acting on it might probably come. I think the time has come - now. I wish it was a better time. I wish that we were in a better - condition. The action of the army against the rebels has not been - quite what I should have best liked. But they have been driven out - of Maryland, and Pennsylvania is no longer in danger of invasion. - When the rebel army was at Frederick I determined, as soon as it - should be driven out of Maryland, to issue a proclamation of - emancipation, such as I thought most likely to be useful. I said - nothing to any one, but I made a promise to myself and [hesitating a - little] to my Maker. The rebel army is now driven out, and I am - going to fulfill that promise. I have got you together to hear what - I have written down. I do not wish your advice about the main - matter, for that I have determined for myself. This I say without - intending anything but respect for any one of you. But I already - know the views of each on this question. They have been heretofore - expressed, and I have considered them as thoroughly and as carefully - as I can. What I have written is that which my reflections have - determined me to say. If there is anything in the expressions I use - or in any minor matter which any one of you thinks had best be - changed, I shall be glad to receive your suggestions. One other - observation I will make. I know very well that many others might, in - this matter as in others, do better than I can; and if I was - satisfied that the public confidence was more fully possessed by any - one of them than by me, and knew of any constitutional way in which - he could be put in my place, he should have it. I would gladly yield - it to him. But though I believe that I have not so much of the - confidence of the people as I had some time since, I do not know - that, all things considered, any other person has more; and, however - this may be, there is no way in which I can have any other man put - where I am. I am here. I must do the best I can, and bear the - responsibility of taking the course which I feel I ought to take.” - - The President then proceeded to read his Emancipation Proclamation, - making remarks on the several parts as he went on, and showing that - he had fully considered the subject in all the lights under which it - had been presented to him. - - After he had closed, Governor Seward said: “The general question - having been decided, nothing can be said further about that. Would - it not, however, make the proclamation more clear and decided to - leave out all reference to the act being sustained during the - incumbency of the present President; and not merely say that the - Government _recognises_, but that it will maintain the freedom it - proclaims?” - - I followed, saying: “What you have said, Mr. President, fully - satisfies me that you have given to every proposition which has been - made a kind and candid consideration. And you have now expressed the - conclusion to which you have arrived clearly and distinctly. This it - was your right, and, under your oath of office, your duty to do. The - proclamation does not, indeed, mark out the course I would myself - prefer; but I am ready to take it just as it is written and to stand - by it with all my heart. I think, however, the suggestions of - Governor Seward very judicious, and shall be glad to have them - adopted.” - - The President then asked us severally our opinions as to the - modifications proposed, saying that he did not care much about the - phrases he had used. Every one favored the modification, and it was - adopted. Governor Seward then proposed that in the passage relating - to colonization some language should be introduced to show that the - colonization proposed was to be only with the consent of the - colonists, and the consent of the states in which the colonies might - be attempted. This, too, was agreed to, and no other modification - was proposed. Mr. Blair then said that the question having been - decided, he would make no objection to issuing the proclamation; but - he would ask to have his paper, presented some days since, against - the policy, filed with the proclamation. The President consented to - this readily. And then Mr. Blair went on to say that he was afraid - of the influence of the proclamation on the border States and on the - army, and stated, at some length, the grounds of his apprehensions. - He disclaimed most expressly, however, all objections to - emancipation _per se_, saying he had always been personally in favor - of it—always ready for immediate emancipation in the midst of slave - States, rather than submit to the perpetuation of the system.[279] - -The foregoing account from the diary of Secretary Chase is fully -corroborated by a narrative of Mr. Welles describing the same -event.[280] Mr. Blair, as already observed, believed the time -inopportune for issuing the proclamation and feared as a result that the -border States would go over to secession. The President, however, -thought the difficulty not to act as great as to act. There were two -sides, he said, to that question. For months he had labored to get those -States to move in this matter, convinced in his own mind that it was -their true interest to do so, but his labors were vain. “We must take -the forward movement,” he declared. “They would acquiesce, if not -immediately, soon; for they must be satisfied that slavery had received -its death-blow from slave-owners—it could not survive the -rebellion.”[281] - -When the Cabinet had concluded its deliberations the document was duly -attested, the seal affixed and the President’s signature added. On the -following morning, September 23, 1862, the proclamation was published in -full by all the leading newspapers of the loyal States, where it excited -the most profound surprise. Indicating, as it does, the progress of -opinion, it was the first great landmark of the war; behind it lay the -old, before it the new order of things. The successive steps by which -Mr. Lincoln reached this position have been sketched in the present -chapter with fullness and, it is believed, with accuracy. It has been -shown how fugitive slaves escaping to the Federal lines were at first -surrendered to their masters; how soon afterward, as in the case of -General Butler’s command, they were protected by the army and employed -as laborers; how in a later stage, certain Union commanders who proposed -to confiscate slave property or to arm negroes as soldiers were gently -rebuked and their acts disavowed by the President. This forbearance, -however, was without effect on the Southern people, whose hatred was -quite as likely to ascribe it to Yankee cowardice as to Yankee -magnanimity. - -With this account of the introduction into the problem of reconstruction -of a novel and very perplexing element we are prepared to examine the -various theories of State status held by those whose position and -ability made them leaders of public opinion. That subject will be more -properly discussed in a separate chapter. - ------ - -Footnote 213: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 209. - -Footnote 214: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 1. - -Footnote 215: - - Addresses and Papers of Edward L. Pierce, pp. 20–25. - -Footnote 216: - - Addresses and Papers of E. L. Pierce, p. 26. - -Footnote 217: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist. p. 244. - -Footnote 218: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 219: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 244. - -Footnote 220: - - Ibid., p. 245. - -Footnote 221: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 235n. - -Footnote 222: - - Addresses and Papers of E. L. Pierce, p. 29. - -Footnote 223: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 245. - -Footnote 224: - - Appendix, Globe, 1 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 42. - -Footnote 225: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 245. - -Footnote 226: - - Ibid., pp. 245–246. - -Footnote 227: - - General Anderson had telegraphed President Lincoln that an entire - company of Kentucky soldiers had laid down their arms upon hearing of - Fremont’s action. - -Footnote 228: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 77. - -Footnote 229: - - Ibid., pp. 78–79. - -Footnote 230: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 247–248. - -Footnote 231: - - Ibid., p. 248. - -Footnote 232: - - N. Y. Tribune, November 8, 1861. - -Footnote 233: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 90. - -Footnote 234: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 235: - - Ann. Cycl., 1861, p. 646. - -Footnote 236: - - First Annual Message, December 3, 1861. McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. - 134; Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 102–103. - -Footnote 237: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 249. - -Footnote 238: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 91. - -Footnote 239: - - See “Journal of the Senate of the State of Delaware, At a Special - Session of the General Assembly, Commenced and held at Dover, on - Monday, the 25th day of November, 1861.” - -Footnote 240: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 250. - -Footnote 241: - - Ibid., p. 248. - -Footnote 242: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 250. - -Footnote 243: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 244: - - Ibid., p. 251. - -Footnote 245: - - Addresses and Papers of E. L. Pierce, p. 87; also Letters and State - Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 126. - -Footnote 246: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 129. - -Footnote 247: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 129–130. - -Footnote 248: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, pp. 799–800. - -Footnote 249: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 132. - -Footnote 250: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 210. - -Footnote 251: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 133–135; also - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 210–211. - -Footnote 252: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 137–138. - -Footnote 253: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, pp. 346–347. - -Footnote 254: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 1496. - -Footnote 255: - - See p. 143, _ante_. - -Footnote 256: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 226–227. - -Footnote 257: - - The question of colonizing free blacks out of the United States - engaged the attention of Thomas Jefferson and James Monroe, who had - some correspondence on the subject at the beginning of the nineteenth - century. Late in the year 1816 there was organized in the city of - Washington the “National Colonization Society,” of which the expressed - purpose was to encourage emancipation by procuring a place outside the - United States, preferably in Africa, to which free negroes could be - aided in emigrating. This, it was believed, would rid the South of its - free colored population which had already become a nuisance. Until - 1830 it was warmly supported everywhere, and branches of the society - were established in nearly every State. In the South its purposes were - furthered by James Madison, by Charles Carroll and by Henry Clay. - Bushrod Washington became president of the association. Rufus King and - President Harrison were among its friends in the North. - - Though Texas and Mexico were looked upon as favorable places for - locating a colony of free blacks, they were sent to the British - possession of Sierra Leone. In 1821 a permanent location was purchased - in Liberia. This settlement, with Monrovia as its capital, became - independent in 1847. The American Colonization Society attracted - little notice after the rise, about 1829–30, of those known as - immediate abolitionists. - -Footnote 258: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 155. - -Footnote 259: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 251. - -Footnote 260: - - Ibid., p. 252. - -Footnote 261: - - Globe, Part III., 2 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 2068. - -Footnote 262: - - Ibid., p. 2618. Ibid., p. 2769. - -Footnote 263: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 233. - -Footnote 264: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 204–205. - -Footnote 265: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 214–217. - -Footnote 266: - - Ibid., pp. 217–218. - -Footnote 267: - - Ibid., p. 218. - -Footnote 268: - - Ibid., pp. 218–220. - -Footnote 269: - - Quoted in Nicolay and Hay’s Abraham Lincoln, A History. Vol. VI. p. - 121 _et seq._ - -Footnote 270: - - Schuckers’ Life of Salmon Portland Chase, pp. 439–440. - -Footnote 271: - - Ibid., p. 440. - -Footnote 272: - - Shuckers’ Life of Chase, pp. 440–441. - -Footnote 273: - - Ibid., p. 441. - -Footnote 274: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 213. - -Footnote 275: - - Carpenter’s Six Months at the White House, pp. 21–22. - -Footnote 276: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 214. - -Footnote 277: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 231–232. - -Footnote 278: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 233. - -Footnote 279: - - Quoted in Schuckers’ Life of Chase, pp. 453–455. - -Footnote 280: - - The Galaxy, December, 1872, pp. 846–847. - -Footnote 281: - - Ibid., p. 847. - - - - - VI - THEORIES AND PLANS OF RECONSTRUCTION - - -In considering the different plans of reconstruction it is not deemed -necessary to discuss further than has been done in the preceding pages -the President’s theory of State status. There, in his effort to -establish loyal governments in three of the rebellious States, as well -as in the protection and encouragement extended to reorganized Virginia, -we have seen practical applications of that theory. In his first -inaugural Mr. Lincoln said: “It is safe to assert that no government -proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination,” -and on the same occasion he added, “No State, upon its own mere motion, -can lawfully get out of the Union; that _resolves_ and _ordinances_ to -that effect are legally void.”[282] From the principles of March 4, -1861, was logically deduced the central idea of the plan announced in -December, 1863, and maintained by the President till the last hour of -his life. In his first message to Congress, submitted at the special -session beginning July 4, 1861, he again attempted to remove the fears -of those whose prejudice ascribed to the dominant political party a -purpose to interfere in the domestic concerns of the slaveholding -States. As will be seen by the following quotation he little more than -reiterated on that occasion what he had solemnly declared four months -earlier: - - Lest there be some uneasiness in the minds of candid men as to what - is to be the course of the Government towards the Southern States - _after_ the rebellion shall have been suppressed, the Executive - deems it proper to say, it will be his purpose then, as ever, to be - guided by the Constitution and the laws; and that he probably will - have no different understanding of the powers and duties of the - Federal Government relatively to the rights of the States and the - people, under the Constitution, than that expressed in the inaugural - address. - - He desires to preserve the Government, that it may be administered - for all, as it was administered by the men who made it. Loyal - citizens everywhere have the right to claim this of their - Government, and the Government has no right to withhold or neglect - it. It is not perceived that, in giving it, there is any coercion, - any conquest, or any subjugation, in any just sense of those - terms.[283] - -The first paragraph quoted expresses his perfect confidence in a -successful conclusion of the war, and in this respect suggests the faith -of Charles Sumner, in whose private correspondence the same thought -constantly occurs. In his message the President observed also that -Virginia had allowed “this giant insurrection to make its nest within -her borders; and this Government has no choice left but to deal with it -_where_ it finds it. And it has the less regret, as the loyal citizens -have, in due form, claimed its protection. Those loyal citizens this -Government is bound to recognize, and protect, as being Virginia.”[284] - -As early as June, 1861, Mr. Lincoln, on application of Governor -Pierpont, recognized the restored State of Virginia by promising -assistance to repel invasion and to suppress domestic violence; his -example was followed by both Houses of Congress: first, in the prompt -admission of Senators and Representatives from that Commonwealth, and -long afterward, when there was ample time for reflection, by consenting -to admit the new State of West Virginia, to whose separate and -independent existence the reorganized Legislature had formally assented. -The recognition of Pierpont’s government, however, involved on the -constitutional question little difference of opinion between the -President and Congress. Thus far the political departments, if not in -complete harmony, were at any rate not in conflict. This act, though it -marked no distinct Executive policy, was the occasion of some discordant -notes which will be referred to in their proper relation. - -It may not be unnecessary to observe that underlying the early policy of -the President was a conviction that the rebellion was effected by a -small but treasonable faction; indeed, in the message of July 4 he -expressed his belief that, with the probable exception of South -Carolina, the disloyal were in a minority in all the seceding States. -The great mass of Southern people, it was assumed, opposed disunion, and -with Federal assistance would soon right themselves. Peaceful citizens -of that section, being regarded as still under protection of the -Constitution, were, therefore, not to be molested. The conflict waged by -the General Government was a personal war against insurgents. Leaders -who encouraged sedition and committed acts of hostility against the -United States could be tried precisely as in a consolidated state like -Great Britain, and upon conviction punished for their treason. This -attitude was not only wise, but had the additional merit of greatly -simplifying the method of restoration. It asserted further that the -rebellious States were still in the Union, and under the existing -compact could not lawfully withdraw from it; being in the Union, they -were entitled to all the rights accorded to other members of the -confederation. In brief, its essential idea was the indestructibility of -a State, and it denied that the integrity of the national domain had -been impaired or the number of States diminished by the ordinances of -secession. The General Government could properly aid the people of a -State to express their will, but, beyond what was demanded by the -exigencies of the war, could not legally exercise those powers -constitutionally reserved to the States. By the treasonable act of -levying war against the Republic the rights and franchises incident to -United States citizenship were forfeited. The power of Congress extended -no further than to a guaranty of preëxisting republican forms of -government. - -To the correctness of these principles Democrats and Republicans alike -gave almost universal assent. But the war was increasing in magnitude, -and the measures adequate to the suppression of a gigantic rebellion -proved to be very different from those adapted to a local insurrection. -The President’s original intention was to overcome armed resistance to -Federal power and as speedily as possible restore the States to their -former relations. This task, however, was more easily conceived than -accomplished, and in the terrible conflict that ensued political parties -as well as individual statesmen were swept onward from point to point to -very different resting-places. From this condition resulted the great -number of theories of reconstruction presented before the end of the -rebellion. - -The President early in the war adopted principles that found little -favor with conservative Democrats. His readiness to recognize the -restored State of Virginia was equivalent to a declaration that if a -majority of the people in one of the seceded States voluntarily -transferred their obedience and support to a hostile power the loyal -minority constituted the State and should govern it. In this connection -will be remembered the objections of Bayard and Saulsbury to receiving -Senators Willey and Carlile from the reorganized government of Virginia. -A further advance is indicated by Mr. Lincoln’s appointment, early in -1862, of military governors for those States that had been brought -partly within Federal military lines. After the proclamation of -September 22, 1862, and that of January 1 succeeding, the question of -restoration was left permanently out of view. If the erring States were -ever to resume their places they must first recognize the anti-slavery -legislation summarized in the preceding chapter. Hitherto the paramount -consideration with the President was a speedy restoration of former -relations; thenceforth “the Union as it was” became impossible, because -slaves liberated in the progress of the war could never be returned to a -condition of servitude. The introduction of this element greatly -increased the difficulties of a problem already sufficiently intricate. -But neither this nor any other consequence of his proclamation appears -to have been overlooked by the Executive. - -The message of December 8, 1863, together with the accompanying -proclamation sketched in outline the only plan which Mr. Lincoln ever -published on the subject of reconstruction, and even to this mode of -reinstatement he did not require exact conformity, recognizing that its -modification might be demanded by inherent differences in situation -among the returning States. By its terms all persons participated in the -rebellion, except certain described classes, were promised amnesty with -restoration of property (excluding slaves and those cases of property in -which rights of third parties intervened) upon taking an oath which -pledged support of the Constitution and the Union; of the slavery -legislation enacted during the war (unless such acts were repealed by -Congress, or were modified or annulled by the Supreme Court), and -adherence to all Executive proclamations on that subject so long and so -far as not modified or declared void by the Judiciary. Whenever in any -of the rebellious States a number of persons equal to one tenth of the -voters participating in the Presidential election of 1860, who were -qualified electors under the laws existing immediately before the -ordinance of secession, should reëstablish a State government republican -in form, and not contravening this oath, it would be recognized as the -true government of that State and should receive the benefits of the -constitutional guaranty. To the emancipated race renewed assurance of -permanent freedom was given. It was also suggested that in -reorganization the political framework of the States be maintained. The -admission of members elected to Congress was a matter for the -determination of its respective Houses. - -It is proper to notice in this method of reorganization, known afterward -as “the Louisiana Plan,” the absence of any provision for conferring on -the freedmen the elective franchise. In a private letter to Governor -Hahn the President had, it is true, expressed his personal preference -for including among the electors such of the colored race as had fought -gallantly in the Union ranks and also the very intelligent among -them[285]. This, however, was only an unofficial suggestion. Nor were -securities of any sort required for the future as a condition of -reinstatement. - -Under this plan, which was presented as only a rallying point, Union -governments had been inaugurated in Tennessee, Louisiana and Arkansas; -the first two participated in the Presidential election of 1864, and -before the close of the war they had all elected members to Congress. -The legality of these governments Mr. Lincoln always maintained. How -Congress regarded them will be related in succeeding chapters. - -Long before the announcement of any mode of reorganization by the -Executive, members of the Legislative branch of Government had made some -efforts in this field; these, however, were for the most part tentative -and hesitant. The question had not yet been brought fairly before -Congress; indeed, it was in discussing the results and tendencies of -Presidential reconstruction that the Congressional plan, destined -ultimately to prevail, slowly assumed definitive form. - -As early as December, 1861, Mr. Harlan, of Iowa, introduced into the -Senate a bill for the establishment of provisional governments for the -territory embraced by the States of Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, -Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas and Tennessee. It was referred to the -Committee on Territories, but was never reported. - -More important, however, than this proposed enactment, both because of -the acknowledged position of their author and the influence which they -exerted upon the mode of reconstruction finally adopted, were the nine -resolutions offered, February 11, 1862, by Charles Sumner. These were -“declaratory of the relations between the United States and the -territory once occupied by certain States, and now usurped by pretended -governments, without constitutional or legal right.” A preamble in the -characteristic style of this celebrated statesman introduced his famous -propositions, which were as follows: - - Whereas certain States, rightfully belonging to the Union of the - United States, have through their respective governments wickedly - undertaken to abjure all those duties by which their connection with - the Union was maintained; to renounce all allegiance to the - Constitution; to levy war upon the national Government; and, for the - consummation of this treason, have unconstitutionally and unlawfully - confederated together, with the declared purpose of putting an end - by force to the supremacy of the Constitution within their - respective limits; and whereas this condition of insurrection, - organized by pretended governments, openly exists in South Carolina, - Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, - Tennessee, and Virginia, except in Eastern Tennessee and Western - Virginia, and has been declared by the President of the United - States, in a proclamation duly made in conformity with an act of - Congress, to exist throughout this territory, with the exceptions - already named; and whereas the extensive territory thus usurped by - these pretended governments and organized into a hostile - confederation, belongs to the United States, as an inseparable part - thereof, under the sanctions of the Constitution, to be held in - trust for the inhabitants in the present and future generations, and - is so completely interlinked with the Union that it is forever - dependent thereupon; and whereas the Constitution, which is the - supreme law of the land, cannot be displaced in its rightful - operation within this territory, but must ever continue the supreme - law thereof, notwithstanding the doings of any pretended governments - acting singly or in confederation, in order to put an end to its - supremacy: Therefore: - - 1. _Resolved_, That any vote of secession or other act by which any - State may undertake to put an end to the supremacy of the - Constitution within its territory is inoperative and void against - the Constitution, and when sustained by force it becomes a practical - _abdication_ by the State of all rights under the Constitution, - while the treason which it involves still further works an instant - _forfeiture_ of all those functions and powers essential to the - continued existence of the State as a body politic, so that from - that time forward the territory falls under the exclusive - jurisdiction of Congress as other territory, and the State being, - according to the language of the law, _felo-de-se_, ceases to exist. - - 2. That any combination of men assuming to act in the place of such - State, attempting to insnare or coerce the inhabitants thereof into - a confederation hostile to the Union, is rebellious, treasonable, - and destitute of all moral authority; and that such combination is a - usurpation incapable of any constitutional existence and utterly - lawless, so that everything dependent upon it is without - constitutional or legal support. - - 3. That the termination of a State under the Constitution - necessarily causes the termination of those peculiar local - institutions which, having no origin in the Constitution or in those - natural rights which exist independent of the Constitution, are - upheld by the sole and exclusive authority of the State. - - 4. That slavery, being a peculiar local institution, derived from - local laws, without any origin in the Constitution or in natural - rights, is upheld by the sole and exclusive authority of the State, - and must therefore cease to exist legally or constitutionally when - the State on which it depends no longer exists; for the incident - cannot survive the principal. - - 5. That in the exercise of its exclusive jurisdiction over the - territory once occupied by the States, it is the duty of Congress to - see that the supremacy of the Constitution is maintained in its - essential principles, so that everywhere in this extensive territory - slavery shall cease to exist practically, as it has already ceased - to exist constitutionally or legally. - - 6. That any recognition of slavery in such territory, or any - surrender of slaves under the pretended laws of the extinct States - by any officer of the United States, civil or military, is a - recognition of the pretended governments, to the exclusion of the - jurisdiction of Congress under the Constitution, and is in the - nature of aid and comfort to the rebellion that has been organized. - - 7. That any such recognition of slavery or surrender of pretended - slaves, besides being a recognition of the pretended governments, - giving them aid and comfort, is a denial of the rights of persons - who, by the extinction of the States, have become free, so that, - under the Constitution, they cannot again be enslaved. - - 8. That allegiance from the inhabitant and protection from the - Government are corresponding obligations, dependent upon each other, - so that while the allegiance of every inhabitant of this territory, - without distinction of color or class, is due to the United States, - and cannot in any way be defeated by the action of any pretended - Government, or by any pretence of property or claim to service, the - corresponding obligation of protection is at the same time due by - the United States to every such inhabitant, without distinction of - color or class; and it follows that inhabitants held as slaves, - whose paramount allegiance is due to the United States, may justly - look to the national Government for protection. - - 9. That the duty directly cast upon Congress by the extinction of - the States is reinforced by the positive prohibition of the - Constitution that “no State shall enter into any Confederation,” or - “without the consent of Congress keep troops or ships-of-war in time - of peace, or enter into any agreement or compact with another - State,” or “grant letters of marque and reprisal,” or “coin money,” - or “emit bills of credit,” or “without the consent of Congress lay - any duties on imports or exports,” all of which have been done by - these pretended Governments, and also by the positive injunction of - the Constitution, addressed to the nation, that “the United States - shall guaranty to every State in this Union a republican form of - government,” and that in pursuance of this duty cast upon Congress, - and further enjoined by the Constitution, Congress will assume - complete jurisdiction of such vacated territory where such - unconstitutional and illegal things have been attempted, and will - proceed to establish therein republican forms of government under - the Constitution; and in the execution of this trust will provide - carefully for the protection of all the inhabitants thereof; for the - security of families, the organization of labor, the encouragement - of industry, and the welfare of society, and will in every way - discharge the duties of a just, merciful and paternal - Government.[286] - -Sumner, as already noticed, having confidence in the ultimate triumph of -the national cause, began early in the war to reflect on the subject of -reorganization. As might have been expected from his previous career, -his opinion of the changes that would result from rebellion inclined him -at the outset to adopt the views of the less extreme anti-slavery men. -Notwithstanding this fact, however, his scheme of reconstruction, -because of its radical and comprehensive character, caused something of -a sensation when introduced in the Senate, and disturbed the repose of -many conservative patriots outside. By leading Republicans it was -promptly disavowed as the policy of their party. These resolutions, -though never adopted or even formally discussed by Congress, colored -somewhat the final work of reconstruction. An account of the extent and -the manner in which they influenced the legislative plan belongs -properly to a consideration of the acts of March, 1867. What appeared to -be a public necessity had by that time brought many members of his party -fully abreast of Mr. Sumner. - -The interval had been employed in various ways to keep his peculiar -theory before the public. A private letter to Francis Lieber, dated -March 29, 1862, shows that Sumner’s view of the measures essential to -restoration had not been modified by the discussions of a month. -“Assuming,” he says, “that our military success is complete, and that -the rebel armies are scattered, what next? Unless I am mistaken, the -most difficult thing of all,—namely, the reorganization. How shall it be -done,—by what process? What power shall set a-going the old governments? -Will the people coöperate enough to constitute self-government? I have -positive opinions here. If successful in war, we shall have then before -us the alternative: (1) Separation; or (2) subjugation of these States -with emancipation. I do not see any escape. Diplomatists here and abroad -think it will be separation. I think the latter, under my resolutions or -something like.”[287] - -By a distinguished Confederate officer Sumner has been described as a -statesman who seemed over-educated, and who had retained without having -digested his learning;[288] by an admirer of his own party as wanting in -tact and practical wisdom as a legislator.[289] Though it must be -admitted that a grain of truth forms the basis of these criticisms, yet -the letter to his friend Dr. Lieber shows no lack of insight into the -events and tendencies of the times. Without anticipating a subsequent -portion of this narrative it may be observed here that if his vision did -not pierce the remote future, his knowledge and experience enabled him -to see as much of coming events as the most gifted of his -contemporaries. Writing a year later, July 21, 1863, to Hon. John -Bright, one of our few friends in England, he remarked that “so great a -revolution cannot come to a close at once.”[290] The defeat of General -Lee at Gettysburg a few weeks earlier suggested the thought that the -destruction of the Army of Northern Virginia would have precipitated on -Congress the entire question of reconstruction, and time was an -essential element in the development of Sumner’s most cherished plans. - -Not only in his private correspondence and in the discussion of every -conceivable measure before Congress did he endeavor to enforce his -theory of State status, but he also published in a leading periodical an -elaboration and defence of his opinions. For many reasons the -undelivered speech forming the basis of his article in the _Atlantic -Monthly_ for October, 1863, is of remarkable interest. It reveals the -mental habits of one of the most useful and influential characters then -in public life; the statesman is really thinking aloud. He appears, for -instance, to have been much impressed by the fact that, under the -Commonwealth, Cromwell partitioned his country into military districts -of which Sumner remarked that there were precisely _eleven_, just the -number of States in rebellion. One view is enforced by an appropriate -passage from Cicero, while of Edmund Burke it is asserted that had he -lived during the Civil War his eloquence would have blasted Southern -leaders for their folly and madness in entering upon a career of -rebellion. All who are familiar with the debates of that period must -have observed that Sumner was considerably influenced by the authority -of great names, and in consequence sometimes exposed himself to rebuke -from men who, though in many respects inferior, had studied the -questions of the day in the light of their own times. - -It is not intended, however, to trace the origin of the doctrine of -State suicide or even to suggest all the arguments upon which he relied -for its support, the purpose of these remarks being rather to show on -what principles its essential propositions were based. This, it is -believed, cannot be better done than by explaining the resolutions in -his own language. - -In the _Atlantic Monthly_ he wrote: “It is sometimes said that the -States themselves committed _suicide_, so that as States they ceased to -exist, leaving their whole jurisdiction open to the occupation of the -United States under the Constitution. This assumption is founded on the -fact that, whatever may be the existing governments in these States, -they are in no respect constitutional, and since the State itself is -known by the government, with which its life is intertwined, it must -cease to exist constitutionally when its government no longer exists -constitutionally.” - -He acknowledges the difficulty of defining the entity which we call a -State. “Among us,” says Mr. Sumner, “the term is most known as the -technical name for one of the political societies which compose our -Union.... Nobody has suggested, I presume, that any ‘State’ of our Union -has, through rebellion, ceased to exist as a _civil society_, or even as -a _political community_. It is only as a _State of the Union_, armed -with State rights, or at least as a _local government_, which annually -renews itself, as the snake its skin, that it can be called in question. -But it is vain to challenge for the technical ‘State,’ or for the annual -government, that immortality which belongs to civil society. The one is -an artificial body, the other is a natural body; and while the first, -overwhelmed by insurrection or war, may change or die, the latter can -change or die only with the extinction of the community itself, whatever -may be its name or its form.” - -Phillimore is quoted in support of the proposition that a “State,” even -in a broader signification, may lose its life. That author says: “A -state, like an individual, may die,” and, among the various ways in -which this may occur, adds, “by its submission and the donation of -itself to another country.” “But in the case of our Rebel States,” -resumes Mr. Sumner, “there has been a plain submission and donation of -themselves,—_effective, at least, to break the continuity of -government_, if not to destroy that immortality which has been claimed. -Nor can it make any difference, in breaking this continuity, that the -submission and donation, constituting a species of attornment, were to -enemies at home rather than to enemies abroad,—to Jefferson Davis rather -than to Louis Napoleon. The thread is snapped in one case as much as in -the other. - -“But a _change of form_ in the actual government may be equally -effective. Cicero speaks of a change so complete as ‘to leave no image -of a state behind.’ But this is precisely what has been done throughout -the whole Rebel region: there is no image of a _constitutional_ State -left behind.” - -The first resolution of the series quoted declares “That any vote of -secession or other act by which any State may undertake to put an end to -the supremacy of the Constitution within its territory is inoperative -and void against the Constitution, and when sustained by force it -becomes a practical _abdication_ by the State of all its rights under -the Constitution.” Perhaps Mr. Sumner in the essay failed to strengthen -his original statement of this proposition, which he believed was -“upheld by the historic example of England, at the Revolution of 1688, -when, on the flight of James II. and the abandonment of his kingly -duties, the two Houses of Parliament voted that the monarch, ‘having -violated the fundamental laws, and having withdrawn himself out of the -kingdom, _had abdicated the government_, and that the throne had thereby -become vacant.’” This precedent, which Senator Sumner thought -applicable, was by no means so formidable an argument against the -rebellious States as he chose to regard it. If the term _abdicate_ is -equivalent to a species of informal resignation it did not apply -strictly to the case of James II., for that unfortunate ruler presented -to Englishmen the unusual spectacle of withdrawing from his kingdom -under an escort of Dutch troops. Doubtless he remembered the saying of -his father, who proved the truth of the adage in his own person, that -the distance is short between the prison and the grave of a king. The -expectation of recovering his throne was a motive with James scarcely -less powerful than that of taking precaution for his personal safety. -This intention appears from the unsuccessful campaign in Ireland, which -he had selected as a rallying point. That monarch’s real offence was his -violation of the laws of England. Many of his predecessors, as well as -some of his successors, were as unreasonable and as obstinate as he. The -charge of abdication was scarcely a decent pretext for declaring the -throne vacant, and Mr. Sumner appears to have forgotten for the moment -that the Federal Government is one of limited while Parliament is -clothed with absolute powers. In reality James was coerced by the Prince -of Orange into “withdrawing” from the Kingdom. It is not intended here -to call in question the accepted vindication of the Revolution of 1688, -but merely to show that the Massachusetts statesman was at times not -above supporting an argument by a legal or an historical fiction. - -The same resolution continues: “The treason which it [the attempt by -force to terminate the supremacy of the Constitution] involves still -further works an instant _forfeiture_ of all those functions and powers -essential to the continued existence of the State as a body politic.” - -On the idea of State forfeiture his reasoning is entitled to more -respect. He argues: “But again it is sometimes said that the States, by -their flagrant treason, have _forfeited_ their rights as States, so as -to be civilly dead. It is a patent and indisputable fact, that this -gigantic treason was inaugurated with all the forms of law known to the -State; that it was carried forward not only by individuals, but also by -States, so far as States can perpetrate treason; that the States -pretended to withdraw bodily in their corporate capacities;—that the -Rebellion, as it showed itself, was _by_ States as well as _in_ States; -that it was by the governments of States as well as by the people of -States; and that, to the common observer, the crime was consummated by -the several corporations as well as by the individuals of whom they were -composed. From this fact, obvious to all, it is argued that, since, -according to Blackstone, ‘a traitor hath abandoned his connection with -society, and hath no longer any right to the advantages which before -belonged to him purely as a member of the community,’ by the same -principle the traitor State is no longer to be regarded as a member of -the Union. But it is not necessary, on the present occasion, to insist -on the application of any such principle to States.” - -Discarding as not essential to his defence the theories of State -forfeiture, State abdication, or even State suicide, the article adds: -“It is enough, that, for the time being, and _in the absence of a loyal -government_, they can take no part and perform no function in the Union, -_so that they cannot be recognized by the National Government_. The -reason is plain. There are in these States no local functionaries bound -by constitutional oaths, so that, in fact, there are no constitutional -functionaries; and since the State government is necessarily composed of -such functionaries, there can be no State government. Thus, for -instance, in South Carolina, Pickens and his associates may call -themselves the governor and legislature; and in Virginia, Letcher and -his associates may call themselves governor and legislature; but we -cannot recognize them as such. Therefore to all pretensions in behalf of -State governments in the Rebel States I oppose the simple FACT, that for -the time being no such governments exist. The broad spaces once occupied -by those governments are now abandoned and vacated.” - -Discussing the question of transition to rightful government he says: -“And here the question occurs, How shall this rightful jurisdiction be -established in the vacated States? Some there are, so impassioned for -State rights, and so anxious for forms even at the expense of substance, -that they insist upon the instant restoration of the old State -governments in all their parts, through the agency of loyal citizens, -who meanwhile must be protected in this work of restoration. But -assuming that all this is practicable, as it clearly is not, it -attributes to the loyal citizens of a Rebel State, however few in -numbers,—it may be an insignificant minority,—a power clearly -inconsistent with the received principle of popular government, that the -majority must rule, ... but the argument for State Rights assumes that -all these rights may be lodged in voters as few in number as ever -controlled a rotten borough of England. - -“Pray admitting that a minority may organize the new government, how -shall it be done? and by whom shall it be set in motion?... It is not -easy to see how the new government can be set in motion without a resort -to some revolutionary proceeding, instituted either by the citizens or -by the military power,—unless Congress, in the exercise of its plenary -powers, should undertake to organize the new jurisdiction. - -“But every revolutionary proceeding is to be avoided. It will be within -the recollection of all familiar with our history, that our fathers, -while regulating the separation of the Colonies from the parent country, -were careful that all should be done according to the forms of law, so -that the thread of _legality_ should continue unbroken. To this end the -Continental Congress interfered by a supervising direction. But the Tory -argument in that day denied the power of Congress as earnestly as it -denies this power now.”... - -“But, happily,” he says, “we are not constrained to any such -revolutionary proceeding. The new governments can all be organized by -Congress, which is the natural guardian of people without any immediate -government, and within the jurisdiction of the Constitution of the -United States. Indeed, with the State governments already _vacated_ by -rebellion, the Constitution becomes, for the time, the supreme and only -law, binding alike on President and Congress, so that neither can -establish any law or institution incompatible with it. And the whole -Rebel region, deprived of all local government, lapses under the -exclusive jurisdiction of Congress, precisely as any other territory; -or, in other words, the lifting of the local governments leaves the -whole vast region without any other government than Congress, unless the -President should undertake to govern it by military power.”... - -This part of the essay concludes with a declaration that its author had -no pride of opinion, but would cheerfully abandon his views when -convinced of their error. He next proceeds to an examination of the -sources of Congressional power. These, he asserts, are derived from the -necessity of the case, for Congress must have jurisdiction over every -portion of the United States _where there is no other government_; and -from the _Rights of War_, which he deemed not less abundant for Congress -than for the President. “It is Congress,” he contended, “that conquers; -and the same authority that conquers must govern.” A third source of -authority, common alike to Congress and the President, was the -constitutional provision imposing on the United States the duty of -guarantying republican forms of government. These ample powers were -confirmed by an additional grant in the clause concerning the admission -of new States “into this Union.” The latter left it with Congress to -prescribe the time and manner of the return of the rebel States, -assuming that they were no longer _de facto_ States of the Union. - -Among the “unanswerable reasons for Congressional governments” the -article says: “Slavery is so odious that it can exist only by virtue of -positive law, plain and unequivocal; but no such words can be found in -the Constitution. Therefore Slavery is impossible within the exclusive -jurisdiction of the National Government.... I am glad to believe that it -is implied, if not expressed, in the Chicago Platform; ... but if the -rebel territory falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the National -Government, then Slavery will be impossible there.... The moment that -the States fell, Slavery fell also; so that, even without any -Proclamation of the President, Slavery had ceased to have a legal and -constitutional existence in every rebel State.”[291] - -“Let it be established in advance,” declared Mr. Sumner, “as an -inseparable incident to every Act of Secession, that it is not only -impotent against the Constitution of the United States, but that, on its -occurrence, both soil and inhabitants will lapse beneath the -jurisdiction of Congress, and no State will ever again pretend to -secede.” - -The argument of which an epitome has been given was regarded by the -Postmaster-General, Montgomery Blair, as formidable enough to merit -attention, and he accordingly replied in a speech at Rockville, -Maryland, in which Sumner, for arraying himself directly against the -President on a question of fundamental policy in the conduct of the war, -was mentioned with sharp censure. This brought upon the Cabinet member, -and upon Mr. Lincoln over his shoulders, much vehement criticism. It was -in relation to this address that the President said: - - The controversy between the two sets of men represented by Blair and - by Sumner is one of mere form and little else. I do not think Mr. - Blair would agree that the States in rebellion are to be permitted - to come at once into the political family and renew their - performances, which have already so bedeviled us, and I do not think - Mr. Sumner would insist that when the loyal people of a State obtain - supremacy in their councils and are ready to assume the direction of - their own affairs they should be excluded. I do not understand Mr. - Blair to admit that Jefferson Davis may take his seat in Congress - again as a representative of his people. I do not understand Mr. - Sumner to assert that John Minor Botts may not. So far as I - understand Mr. Sumner, he seems in favor of Congress taking from the - Executive the power it at present exercises over insurrectionary - districts and assuming it to itself; but when the vital question - arises as to the right and privilege of the people of these States - to govern themselves, I apprehend there will be little difference - among loyal men. The question at once is presented, In whom is this - power vested? and the practical matter for discussion is how to keep - the rebellious population from overwhelming and outvoting the loyal - minority.[292] - -Concisely expressed, the theory of State suicide based reconstruction -upon the right of Congress to legislate for Federal territories and to -admit new States into this Union. In one view it rested on a provision -in the Constitution which makes it obligatory on the States to have -republican governments. This side of the doctrine shaded into the -conservative view, according to which it is the duty of the States to be -represented in Congress; but Sumner, as will subsequently appear, -maintained that the Confederate States should not be counted when -numbers were to be estimated in the adoption of constitutional -amendments; also that Congress had power to prescribe the qualifications -of voters for conventions in those States. This view regarded the war as -a conflict of ideas; it assumed to find authority in the individual -conscience discerning the will of God, was inclined to disallow -objective standards, and to consider all law as matter of subjective -determination. From a careful perusal of his speeches Mr. Sumner appears -to have insisted that a republican form of government could be such a -one only as conformed to his subjective ideas. Except his own State, -whose constitution of 1780 was held to have abolished slavery in that -Commonwealth, no one of the States in 1789 possessed, according to his -notions, a republican form of government. His touchstone of -republicanism was the Declaration of Independence. In short, the -requirements of the Constitution appear to have been found, not in the -written instrument, but in his individual conceptions of political -justice, equality and liberty whereby he constituted himself a new -source of law. In the matter of a subjective standard of natural justice -and the like, the “radicals” generally agreed with Sumner.[293] - -The position that the object of the war from the beginning, on the part -of the Federal authorities, was to fulfill the guaranty of a republican -form of government is untenable. It may well be doubted whether the -community so guaranteed can be restricted to any particular government; -indeed, it is difficult to see how a government not voluntarily -instituted by the people of a State can be called republican. By having -a government imposed by Congress they would resemble the people of a -Territory, and the result would be an inequality among the States -composing the Union. - -Though it has been commended as well written, there is some crude -thinking and even cruder phraseology in the preamble as well as in the -resolutions themselves. Mr. Sumner appears to have been much influenced -by feudal and other historical analogies. It will be seen later how he -recoiled somewhat from accepting fully the consequences of his own -principles.[294] The famous theory of State suicide, as tersely stated -by an able advocate of the doctrine, was in effect that “a Territory by -coming into the Union becomes a State; a State by going out of the Union -becomes a Territory.”[295] - -To offset the resolutions of Sumner, Hon. Garrett Davis, of Kentucky, -introduced two days later a series of eight propositions. Of these the -first asserts that the rights, privileges and liberties which the -Constitution assures to the people of the United States “are fixed, -permanent, and immutable through all the phases of peace and war, until -changed by the power and in the mode prescribed by the Constitution -itself.” - -In the light of subsequent events, however, the last is the most -interesting of the series. This declares “That the United States -Government should march their armies into all the insurgent States, and -promptly put down the military power which they have arrayed against it, -and give protection and security to the loyal men thereof, to enable -them to reconstruct their legitimate State governments, and bring them -and the people back to the Union and to obedience and duty under the -Constitution and the laws of the United States, bearing the sword in one -hand and the olive branch in the other, and whilst inflicting on the -guilty leaders condign and exemplary punishment, granting amnesty and -oblivion to the comparatively innocent masses; and if the people of any -State cannot, or will not reconstruct their State government and return -to loyalty and duty, Congress should provide a government for such State -as a Territory of the United States, securing to the people thereof -their appropriate constitutional rights.”[296] - -These propositions, like the resolutions of Sumner, were never taken up -for discussion, and they are referred to as containing a clear -expression, by a Southern Democrat,[297] of extra-constitutional powers -in treating incorrigible States as Territories. - -Sumner was not alone in maintaining novel opinions concerning the -relation of the seceded States to the Federal Government. A theory -destined to exert even greater influence in shaping the plan of -reconstruction finally adopted was announced at the very commencement of -hostilities by Thaddeus Stevens, of Pennsylvania, then one of the -foremost members of the Republican party and a few years later its -acknowledged leader in the House. Unlike the Massachusetts Senator, Mr. -Stevens never formulated his views of State status; but as he urged them -on almost every conceivable occasion the essential principles of his -system may be easily collected from his numerous speeches in Congress. -Subjects of legislation only remotely related to his favorite topic -appear to have been regarded by him as important chiefly because of the -opportunity afforded to express his sentiments on the measures necessary -to reorganization. These opinions, he declared, had been deliberately -formed; we know that to the end they were persistently urged and ably -defended. Because of their radical nature and the frequency with which -they were reiterated Stevens was by many regarded as a sort of fanatic; -this estimate was confirmed, no doubt, by his bodily deformity as well -as by an apparent want of amiability and a certain bluntness of -expression. Even by keen observers he was at first considered a man of -mediocre ability. But, though not to be compared with the giant race of -an earlier generation, he was a statesman far above the common-place. -Among the multitude of plans and theories offered in Congress his system -was distinguished for the harmony of its parts; and enemies who hated, -no less than followers who feared, him were forced to admit the -consistency of his principles. - -The limitations of Stevens in the field of constructive statesmanship -cannot now be discussed; for their consideration belongs properly to an -examination of the first reconstruction act, which was no more than a -modification of his theory. Long before Sumner’s plan had agitated timid -conservatives the Pennsylvanian leader by his extreme opinions had -astonished Congress. When the question of discharging from labor or -service those slaves employed in hostility to the United States came -before the House at the special session beginning July 4, 1861, Stevens -said: - - Mr. Speaker, I thought the time had come when the laws of war were - to govern our action; when constitutions, if they stood in the way - of the laws of war in dealing with the enemy, had no right to - intervene. Who pleads the Constitution against our proposed action? - Who says the Constitution must come in, in bar of our action? It is - the advocates of rebels, of rebels who have sought to overthrow the - Constitution and trample it in the dust—who repudiate the - Constitution. Sir, these rebels, who have disregarded and set at - defiance that instrument, are, by every rule of municipal and - international law, estopped from pleading it against our action. - Who, then, is it that comes to us and says, “You cannot do this - thing, because your Constitution does not permit it?” The - Constitution! Our Constitution, which you repudiate and trample - under foot, forbids it! Sir, it is an absurdity. There must be a - party in court to plead it, and that party, to be entitled to plead - it in court, must first acknowledge its supremacy, or he has no - business to be in court at all. I repeat, then, that those who bring - in this plea here, in bar of our action, are the advocates of - rebels. They are nothing else, whatever they intend. I mean it, of - course, in a legal sense. I mean they are acting in the capacity of - counsellors-at-law for the rebels; they are speaking for them, and - not for us—who are the plaintiffs in this transaction. I deny that - they have any right to plead at all. I deny that they have any - standing in court. I deny that they have any right to invoke this - Constitution, which they deny has authority over them, which they - set at defiance and trample under foot. I deny that they can be - permitted to come here and tell us we must be loyal to the - Constitution.[298] - -The expectation almost universally cherished at this time was that when -the insurrection should have been suppressed, as it was confidently -believed it speedily would be, the erring States, without the -interposition of Federal authority, would resume their normal relations -to the General Government. With this state of public opinion in mind it -will readily be perceived how great an interval separated Mr. Stevens -from both parties in Congress. The opening sentence of the remarks -quoted contains the essential idea of his theory of the change resulting -from rebellion. Armed secession had unlocked the war powers, and the -Constitution, where it conflicted with these powers, had ceased to be a -restraint upon government. The military had risen superior to the civil -authority. The principle was boldly and emphatically announced that -those who repudiated and defied the supreme law could not at the same -time plead its provisions. - -On January 8, 1863, the appropriation bill being under consideration, an -amendment was offered to add to the clause “for compensation of -thirty-three commissioners, at $3,000 each, and eleven clerks, at $1,200 -each, $112,200,” the following: - - _Provided_, A sufficient sum shall be collected in the - insurrectionary States to pay said salaries: _And provided further_, - That no greater sum shall at any time be paid to said commissioners, - or to any of them, than shall have been collected from the taxes in - the insurrectionary States, and paid into the Treasury of the United - States.[299] - -The discussion which ensued brought out an expression of views relative -to the position of the seceded States under the Federal Government. -Stevens in the course of his remarks said: “I did say, sir, that I find -no warrant in the Constitution for the admission, under the -Constitution, of West Virginia. I do not know whether the gentleman from -Kentucky voted for that bill or not.” Mr. Dunlap, the member referred -to, stated that he had voted against the bill, because he deemed it -unconstitutional. After this explanation the Pennsylvania leader -proceeded as follows: - - Then the gentleman voted against it upon the same opinion I - expressed, that it was unconstitutional. But I went further and - voted for it because I did not believe that the Constitution - embraced a State now in arms against the Government of this Union - and I hold that doctrine now. It was not said upon the spur of the - occasion. It is a deliberate opinion, formed upon a careful - examination of the law of the United States and the laws of nations. - - Though it may be out of place just now, I will give one or two - reasons for my opinion. The establishment of our blockade admitted - the Southern States, the Confederates, to be a belligerent power. - Foreign nations have all admitted them as a belligerent power. - Whenever that came to be admitted by us and by foreign nations, it - placed the rebellious States precisely in the condition of an alien - enemy with regard to duties and obligations. Now, I think there is - nothing more plainly written in the law of nations than that - whenever a war, which is admitted to be a national war, springs up - between nation and nation, ally and ally, confederate and - confederate, every obligation which previously existed between them, - whether treaty, compact, contract, or anything else, is wholly - abrogated, and from that moment the belligerents act toward each - other, not according to any municipal obligations, not according to - any compacts or treaties, but simply according to the laws of war. - And I hold and maintain that with regard to all the Southern States - in rebellion. I do not speak of Kentucky, but of those States which - have gone out under an act of legislation or convention—the - Constitution has no binding influence and no application. - -In answer to a question by Representative Dunlap he stated further that -the seceded States, in his opinion, were not members of the Union. “The -ordinances of secession,” he added, “backed by the armed power which -made them a belligerent nation, did take them, so far as present -operations are concerned, from under the laws of the nation.” When asked -how, as Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, he proposed to pass -an appropriation to pay officers to collect revenue in States which did -not belong to the Union, he said: - - I propose to levy that tax, and collect it as a war measure. I would - levy a tax wherever I can upon these conquered provinces, just as - all nations levy them upon provinces and nations they conquer. If my - views and principles are right, I would not only collect that tax, - but I would, as a necessary war measure, take every particle of - property, real and personal, life estate and reversion, of every - disloyal man, and sell it for the benefit of the nation in carrying - on this war. We have such power and we are to treat them simply as - provinces to be conquered, and as a nation fighting in hostility to - us until we do conquer them. To me it is a great absurdity to say - that men, by millions, in arms, shall claim the protection of the - provisions of the Constitution and laws made for loyal men, while - they do not obey one of those laws, but repudiate their binding - effect. There never was a principle more clear than that every - obligation, whether in a national or civil point of view, in order - to be binding, must be reciprocal; and that the moment the duty - ceases upon the one part, the obligation ceases upon the other; and - that, in my judgment, is precisely the condition of the rebel States - now. - -The secession ordinance of South Carolina he characterized in response -to an inquiry as an act of treason and rebellion, and when asked whether -the backing up of these ordinances by armed force imparted to them any -validity, he replied: “I hold that so long as they remain in force -against us as a belligerent power, and until they are conquered, it is -in fact an existing operation. I will not say anything about its -legality. [Laughter.] I hold that it is an existing _fact_, and that so -far from enforcing any laws, you have not the power.” - -To Mr. Yeaman, who asked whether those people were then citizens of the -United States, or whether they formed an independent nation, and if the -latter whence was derived the right or the authority to wage war against -them, and to tax them for the support of that war, Stevens answered: “I -hold that the Constitution, in the first place, so far operated that -when they went into secession and armed rebellion they committed -treason; and that when they so combined themselves as to make themselves -admitted as belligerents—not merely as men in insurrection, but as -belligerents—they did acquire the right to be treated as prisoners of -war, and all the other rights which pertain to belligerents under the -laws of nations.” - -Some members held in utter abhorrence the principles of the Pennsylvania -leader; others were astonished at their boldness. It was in the course -of this discussion, participated in by many Representatives, that -Stevens defined his existing as well as his past relations to his party, -and referred, not without a touch of pride, to the fact that hitherto he -had pointed out the way for the Republican majority—in short, that he -had been the political prophet of his party. He declared: - - I know perfectly well, as I said before, I do not speak the - sentiments of this side of the House as a party. I know more than - that: that for the last fifteen years I have always been a step - ahead of the party I have acted with in these matters; but I have - never been so far ahead with the exception of the principles I now - enunciate, but that the members of the party have overtaken me and - gone ahead; and they, together with the gentleman from New York, - [Mr. Olin] will again overtake me and go with me, before this - infamous and bloody rebellion is ended. They will find that they - cannot execute the Constitution in the seceding States; that it is a - total nullity there; and that this war must be carried on upon - principles wholly independent of it. They will come to the - conclusion that the adoption of the measures I advocated at the - outset of the war, the arming of the negroes, the slaves of the - rebels, is the only way left on earth in which these rebels can be - exterminated. They will find that they must treat those States now - outside of the Union as conquered provinces and settle them with new - men, and drive the present rebels as exiles from this country; for I - tell you they have the pluck and endurance for which I gave them - credit a year and a half ago in a speech which I made, but which was - not relished on this side of the House, nor by the people in the - free States. They have such determination, energy, and endurance, - that nothing but actual extermination or exile or starvation will - ever induce them to surrender to this Government. I do not ask - gentlemen to indorse my views, nor do I speak for anybody but - myself; but in order that I may have some credit for sagacity, I ask - that gentlemen will write this down in their memories. It will not - be two years before they will call it up, or before they will adopt - my views, or adopt the other alternative of a disgraceful submission - by this side of the country.[300] - -For himself, for the Administration and for the Republican party even so -radical an anti-slavery man as Owen Lovejoy made haste to repudiate -these extreme opinions. - -In debate, January 22, 1864, Stevens enunciated still more clearly the -fundamental principles of his system. “I mean to say,” he declared on -that occasion, “that if a State, as a State, makes war upon the -Government and becomes a belligerent power, we treat it as a foreign -nation, and when we conquer it we treat it just as we do any other -foreign nation.” “There can be no neutrals,” he added, “in a hostile -State.” If loyal people domiciled in the South desired to avoid -punishment or the hardships of public enemies, they should change their -place of residence. - -Relative to discerning the State in the Union minority he observed: “If -ten men fit to save Sodom can elect a Governor and other State officers -for and against the eleven hundred thousand Sodomites in Virginia, then -the democratic doctrine that the majority shall rule is discarded and -dangerously ignored. When the doctrine that the _quality_ and not the -_number_ of voters is to decide the right to govern, then we are no -longer a republic, but the worst form of despotism.” It was a mere -mockery, he affirmed, to say that a tithe of the residents, because they -were holier or more loyal than others, could change the form and -administer the government of an organized State. The people who took a -State out of the Union were subject to the laws of the commonwealth, -and, so far as the General Government is concerned, subject to the laws -of war and of nations, both while the war continued and when it -ended.[301] - -Northern Democrats, from the beginning to the end of reconstruction, -were consistent advocates of a doctrine which involved no contradictions -like the system of Sumner and no element of vindictiveness like the -“conquered province” theory of Stevens. Ordinances of secession they -held to be null and void; these measures in no way impaired the vitality -or contracted the scope of the Constitution because the power by which -they were temporarily maintained, however near to attaining its object, -had not been crowned with success. The result of the conflict could -alone determine whether the bond of union between the seceding and the -loyal States had been severed. Armed resistance to the supreme law was -treason in those so engaged, even though such resistance was decreed by -States. _Ante bellum_ relations would continue unimpaired if the General -Government succeeded in suppressing the rebellion. This doctrine, once a -State in the Union always a State, was, so far, in harmony with the -policy adopted by the Administration at the commencement of hostilities. - -With all the following propositions, however, the policy of the -Government was not in entire accord, nor, indeed, was it in exact -conformity with the principles above ascribed to the President. The -people of a State, the Democratic leaders asserted, are the State, in -the widest sense of that term, and they make its fundamental law; to be -their constitution it must be their unrestrained and voluntary act, not -a result of coercion or intimidation. When they have freely acted, then -the only essential conditions of a State constitution, in its Federal -relations, are that it should be republican in form and not conflict -with the Constitution of the United States. South Carolina, for example, -was made a member of the Union by the Constitution and the consent of -her people; except successful revolution no other power could unmake -her. That revolution being unsuccessful she was still in the Union. The -idea that a State was partly out of and partly in the Union, Democratic -doctrine regarded as an absurdity. State officers, indeed, could commit -suicide; a majority of its people could commit suicide; but the State -did not, therefore, cease to exist, for the idea of a State involved the -fourfold notion of a defined territory, people occupying it, functions -constituting a system of government and officers to administer it. - -Representative Joseph K. Edgerton, of Indiana, in an able speech -delivered February 20, 1865, said that he accepted the principle of -President Lincoln’s inaugural and only regretted that after so clear and -sound a statement of constitutional law and good intentions the -President had subsequently come to the same conclusion as Mr. Stevens. -The theory then announced was the only one consistent with the true -constitutional idea that the Federal Union is a perpetual union of -States, and that each State, as an individual member of the Union, has -in itself the same element of perpetuity that belongs to the aggregate -Republic formed by the Federal union of States. The Union can be held to -be perpetual only on the principle that the States composing it are -perpetual corporations or bodies politic, and indestructible by any act -of the aggregate body or by their own act. The States united cannot -destroy a single commonwealth; power to do that is power to consolidate -the States into one. A single member cannot destroy the Union; power to -do that is power to secede, and neither consolidation nor secession is a -principle of the Union. Here we have in amplified form the celebrated -declaration of Chief Justice Chase, that the Constitution in all its -provisions contemplates “an indestructible union of indestructible -States.”[302] For a different though a very able presentation of -Democratic theory the reader is referred to the address of Mr. Pendleton -on the bill to guarantee republican forms of government to the -rebellious States.[303] - -Though this theory of a perpetual Union was the one almost universally -held at the beginning of the war, it came during the progress of the -conflict to be little regarded by the dominant party in Congress; by -Republican leaders it was soon cast aside with indignation or contempt; -it remained unaltered when their views of State status were adapted to -changed conditions, and the Democratic organization, so far at least as -reconstruction was concerned, settled down into little more than a party -of protest. - -The silence in which Sumner’s propositions were received may be regarded -as a negative testimony to the conservative sentiments of Senators even -after war had existed for nearly a year; the House, however, just twelve -months before the Massachusetts Senator offered his plan, February 11, -1861, made a positive declaration of its opinion relative to the -limitations of Federal authority by passing unanimously the following -resolution: “That neither Congress, nor the people or the governments of -the non-slaveholding States, have the right to legislate upon or -interfere with slavery in any of the slaveholding States in the -Union.”[304] This deliberate expression establishes beyond question the -fact that the Constitution, as then understood, gave no authority to the -Federal Government to interfere with, control or regulate relations -between master and slave in any State which recognized the right of -property in man. On this subject the people were practically unanimous, -their Representatives entirely so. Even three months of war, with all -the antagonisms and all the bitterness excited, failed to shake this -conviction. - -On July 22, 1861, the day after the disaster at Bull Run, Representative -Crittenden, of Kentucky, introduced the following resolution: - - That the present deplorable civil war has been forced upon the - country by the disunionists of the Southern States, now in arms - against the constitutional Government, and in arms around the - capital; that in this national emergency, Congress, banishing all - feelings of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty - to the whole country; that this war is not waged on their part in - any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquest or - subjugation, or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the - rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend - and maintain the _supremacy_ of the Constitution, and to preserve - the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several - States unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are - accomplished the war ought to cease. - -Only two votes were recorded against it.[305] Four days later Andrew -Johnson offered in the upper House a resolution in nearly the same -language, and it was opposed by only five Senators. There is little -doubt that this practical unanimity in Congress reflected the sentiment -of almost the entire North. This conspicuous landmark, so frequently -referred to before the reunion was completed, will be useful to show how -far the warring factions drifted during the progress of the conflict. - -Senator Trumbull, of Illinois, who disliked certain expressions in the -form in which it was proposed, said, relative to the object of the war -as declared by the resolution: - - I trust this war is prosecuted for the purpose of subjugating all - rebels and traitors who are in arms against the Government. What do - you mean by “subjugation”? I know that persons in the Southern - States have sought to make this a controversy between States and the - Federal Government, and have talked about coercing States and - subjugating States; but, sir, it has never been proposed, so far as - I know, on the part of the Union people of the United States, to - subjugate States or coerce States. It is proposed, however, to - subjugate citizens who are standing out in defiance of the laws of - the Union, and to coerce them into obedience to the laws of the - Union. I dislike that word in this connection. In its broadest sense - I am opposed to it. If it means the war is not for the purpose of - the subjugation of traitors and rebels into obedience to the laws, - then I am opposed to it. I trust the war is prosecuted for that very - purpose. I move to strike out the words “and in arms around the - capital,” and also the words “or subjugation.”[306] - -Mr. Harris, of New York, said: “If slavery shall be abolished, shall be -overthrown as a consequence of this war, I shall not shed a tear over -that result; but, sir, it is not the purpose of the Government to -prosecute this war for the purpose of overthrowing slavery. If it comes -as a consequence, let it come; but it is not an end of the war.”[307] - -In the succeeding chapter will be traced with some degree of fullness -the sentiments on reconstruction, in July, 1864, not only of the -majority but of every important element composing Congress. The position -then attained by the average Republican member, it must be repeated, was -not reached at a single bound. Its progress has been described in the -preceding pages. The vote on the Crittenden resolution marks the -starting point. There was then, though war had existed for three months, -no diversity of opinion worthy of notice. The successive advances from -the declaration, February 11, 1861, that neither Congress nor the -governments of the free States had a constitutional right to interfere -with slavery in any slaveholding State of the Union to the passage by -both Houses, July 2, 1864, of the Wade-Davis bill, which proposed by -Federal law to regulate the franchise in the rebellious States, to -appoint provisional governors (empowered to dissolve State conventions), -and to prescribe provisions for their local constitutions, form one of -the most instructive commentaries on the importance of necessity as a -principle of constitutional interpretation. - -A resolution introduced December 4, 1861, by Mr. Holman, of Indiana, for -the purpose of getting the House to re-affirm the Crittenden -propositions of July 22 preceding, was tabled by a vote of 71 to -65.[308] - -A discussion of the various theories of reconstruction might seem to -require in this place, by way of anticipation, at least a summary of the -Congressional plan; but as this was the mode of reorganization which was -finally imposed on the South it is preferred to present its development -chronologically and to consider it apart. Several of the remaining -chapters will be devoted to an account of its successive modifications -until the subject was taken, in December, 1865, altogether out of -Executive hands. - ------ - -Footnote 282: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 106. - -Footnote 283: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 129. - -Footnote 284: - - Ibid., p. 125. - -Footnote 285: - - See p. 73, _ante_. - -Footnote 286: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 322–323. - -Footnote 287: - - Memoir of Charles Sumner by E. L. Pierce, Vol. IV. pp. 74–75. - -Footnote 288: - - General Richard Taylor in Destruction and Reconstruction, p. 245. - -Footnote 289: - - Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 114. - -Footnote 290: - - Memoir of Sumner by E. L. Pierce, Vol. IV. p. 143. - -Footnote 291: - - Mr. Sumner, notwithstanding this view, proposed to enact the - Emancipation Proclamation into a law. See pp. 272–273 _infra_. - -Footnote 292: - - N. and H., Vol. IX. pp. 335–336. - -Footnote 293: - - In his Theory of our National Existence (_passim_) and in the American - Law Review for January, 1865, Mr. John C. Hurd has much keen criticism - of the reconstruction theories of Sumner and others. - -Footnote 294: - - Colloquy with Senator Doolittle, December 19, 1866, Cong. Globe, p. - 192. - -Footnote 295: - - Brownson’s American Republic, p. 308. - -Footnote 296: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 323. - -Footnote 297: - - Mr. Davis is sometimes classed as a Unionist. - -Footnote 298: - - Globe, 1 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 414. - -Footnote 299: - - Globe, Part I., 3 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 238. - -Footnote 300: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 239–243. - -Footnote 301: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 317. - -Footnote 302: - - Texas vs. White, 7 Wall., p. 725. - -Footnote 303: - - See Chapter VII., pp. 257–261, _infra_. - -Footnote 304: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 36th Cong., p. 857. - -Footnote 305: - - Globe, 1 Sess. 37th Cong., pp. 222–223. - -Footnote 306: - - Ibid., p. 258. - -Footnote 307: - - Globe, 1 Sess. 37th Cong., p. 259. - -Footnote 308: - - Ann. Cycl., 1862, p. 277. - - - - - VII - RISE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL PLAN - - -A previous chapter, in relating the military events which succeeded the -disaster at Chickamauga, noticed a suggestion of the defeated Federal -commander as well as Mr. Lincoln’s reply relative to the publication at -that time of a declaration of amnesty to those in arms against the -Government.[309] The double victory of Mission Ridge and Lookout -Mountain, following the removal of Rosecrans, confirmed the President in -his purpose of offering a general pardon to those who would lay down -their arms and return to their obedience to the laws. The Proclamation -of December 8, 1863, followed promptly and brought the subject of -reconstruction before the Thirty-eighth Congress at its first session. -The preceding pages have alluded to the universal favor with which that -announcement was received. Though opposition to Executive measures was -hushed for the time, it appears only to have gathered strength in this -brief interval of silence. One short week introduced into the House of -Representatives a resolution the subsequent progress of which brought -the dominant party in Congress to the support of a measure hostile to -that submitted by the President. Its interesting history may be -collected from the pages of the _Congressional Globe_. - -On December 15, from the Committee of Ways and Means, Thaddeus Stevens -reported among other resolutions one to refer so much of the President’s -message as was contained in the Proclamation, and as related to the -condition and treatment of rebellious States, to a special committee of -nine to be appointed by the Speaker. Henry Winter Davis inquired whether -Mr. Stevens would accept for that resolution an amendment pointing more -directly to the purpose in view. This substitute read as follows: - - That so much of the President’s message as relates to the duty of - the United States to guarantee a republican form of government to - the States in which the governments recognized by the United States - have been abrogated or overthrown, be referred to a select committee - of nine, to be named by the Speaker, which shall report the bills - necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing - guaranty.[310] - -Stevens offering no objection, Representative Davis remarked that the -language of the resolution was general, and, he believed, would cover -the whole war; the committee, he supposed, intended to point to what, in -the very inaccurate phraseology of the day, was known as the question of -reconstruction; but believing there had been no destruction, he -carefully avoided the use of that term. - -The Government of the United States, continued Mr. Davis, was engaged in -two operations: the suppression of armed resistance to the supreme -authority of the nation and a very delicate, and perhaps as high a -duty—to see, when armed resistance should be overcome, that governments -republican in form should be restored in all those States. His -substitute directed the investigations of the committee to that one -point. It was not intended as a peremptory instruction to the committee -to report any particular measure, but to take such action as their -wisdom should recommend. - -Democratic feeling on this subject appears in an inquiry by -Representative Brooks, of New York, as to whether republican governments -had not been abrogated and overturned north as well as south of the -Potomac since the revolution began.[311] - -The amendment of Mr. Davis prevailed, and of the special committee -appointed he was made chairman. On January 18, 1864, he asked unanimous -consent to report a bill to guarantee certain States a republican form -of government. Objection having been made, he moved a suspension of the -rules; but failing to receive the necessary two thirds vote his motion -was lost. On February 15 succeeding, when he brought the measure before -the House again and requested a postponement of its consideration for -two weeks, it encountered Democratic opposition. The bill was then read -a first and second time, ordered to be printed, and returned to the -committee. - -On March 22 the bill came before the House on the question of ordering -it to be engrossed and read a third time. In its support Mr. Davis made -an able address in which he analyzed the plan proposed by the Executive -and emphasized its deficiencies. He said: - - The bill which I am directed by the Committee on the Rebellious - States to report is one which provides for the restoration of civil - government in States whose governments have been overthrown. It - prescribes such conditions as will secure not merely civil - government to the people of the rebellious States, but will also - secure to the people of the United States permanent peace after the - suppression of the rebellion. - - The bill challenges the support of all who consider slavery the - cause of the rebellion, and that in it the embers of rebellion will - always smoulder; of those who think that freedom and permanent peace - are inseparable, and who are determined, so far as their - constitutional authority will allow them, to secure these fruits by - adequate legislation. - - ... It is entitled to the support of all gentlemen upon this side of - the House, whatever their views may be of the nature of the - rebellion; and the relation in which it has placed the people and - States in rebellion toward the United States, not less of those who - think that the rebellion has placed the citizens of the rebel States - beyond the protection of the Constitution, and that Congress, - therefore, has supreme power over them as conquered enemies, than of - that other class who think that they have not ceased to be citizens - and States of the United States, though incapable of exercising - political privileges under the Constitution, but that Congress is - charged with a high political power by the Constitution to guarantee - republican governments in the States, and that this is the proper - time and the proper mode of exercising it. It is also entitled to - the favorable consideration of gentlemen upon the other side of the - House, who honestly and deliberately express their judgment that - slavery is dead. To them it puts the question whether it is not - advisable to bury it out of our sight, that its ghost may no longer - stalk abroad to frighten us from our propriety. - - It does not address itself to that class of gentlemen upon the other - side of the House, if there be any, nor to that class of the people - of the country who look for political alliance to the men who head - the rebellion in the South.... - - It purports, sir, not to exercise a revolutionary authority, but to - be an execution of the Constitution of the United States, of the - fourth section of the fourth article of that Constitution, which not - merely confers the power upon Congress, but imposes upon Congress - the duty of guaranteeing to every State in this Union a republican - form of government. That clause vests in the Congress of the United - States a plenary, supreme, unlimited political jurisdiction, - paramount over courts, subject only to the judgment of the people of - the United States, embracing within its scope every legislative - measure necessary and proper to make it effectual; and what is - necessary and proper the Constitution refers, in the first place, to - our judgment, subject to no revision but that of the people. It - recognizes no other tribunal. It recognizes the judgment of no - court. It refers to no authority except the judgment and will of the - majority of Congress, and of the people on that judgment, if any - appeal from it. - - [Secession he described as] the act of the people of the States, - carrying with it all the consequences of such an act. And therefore - it must be either a legal revolution which makes them independent, - and makes of the United States a foreign country, or it is a - usurpation against the authority of the United States, the erection - of governments which do not recognize the Constitution of the United - States, which the Constitution does not recognize, and, therefore, - not republican governments of the States in rebellion. The latter is - the view which all parties take of it. I do not understand that any - gentleman on the other side of the House says that any rebel - government which does not recognize the Constitution of the United - States, and which is not recognized by Congress, is a State - government within the meaning of the Constitution. Still less can it - be said that there is a State government, republican or - un-republican, in the State of Tennessee, where there is no - government of any kind, no civil authority, no organized form of - administration except that represented by the flag of the United - States, obeying the will, and under the orders of the military - officer in command. It is the language of the President of the - United States in every proclamation, of Congress in every law on the - statute-book, of both Houses in their forms of proceeding, and of - the Courts of the United States in their administration of the law. - It is the result of every principle of law, of every suggestion of - political philosophy, that there can be no republican government - within the limits of the United States that does not recognize, but - does repudiate, the Constitution, and which the President and the - Congress of the United States do not, on their part, recognize. - Those that are here represented are the only governments existing - within the limits of the United States. Those that are not here - represented are not governments of the States, republican under the - Constitution. And if they be not, then they are military - usurpations, inaugurated as the permanent governments of the States, - contrary to the supreme law of the land, arrayed in arms against the - Government of the United States; and it is the duty, the first and - highest duty, of the Government to suppress and expel them. Congress - must either expel, or recognize and support them. If it do not - guarantee them, it is bound to expel them; and they who are not - ready to suppress them are bound to recognize them. - -“In the famous Rhode Island cases,” he continued, the Supreme Court of -the United States by the mouth of Chief Justice Taney, declared “that a -military government, established as the permanent government of a State, -is not a republican government in the meaning of the Constitution, and -that it is the duty of Congress to suppress it. That duty Congress is -now executing by its armies. He [Justice Taney] further said in that -case that it is the exclusive prerogative of Congress—of Congress, and -not of the President—to determine what is and what is not the -established government of the State; and, to come to that conclusion, it -must judge of what is and what is not a republican government, and its -judgment is conclusive on the Supreme Court, which cannot judge of the -fact for itself, but accepts the fact declared by the political -department of the Government.” - -Mr. Davis resumed: - - We are now engaged in suppressing a military usurpation of the - authority of the State government. When that shall have been - accomplished, there will be no form of State authority in existence - which Congress can recognize. Our success will be the overthrow of - all semblance of government in the rebel States. The Government of - the United States is then, in fact, the _only_ Government existing - in those States, and it is there charged to guarantee them - republican governments. - - ... The duty of guaranteeing carries with it the right to pass all - laws necessary and proper to guaranty.... It places in the hands of - Congress the right to say what is and what is not, with all the - light of experience and all the lessons of the past, inconsistent, - in its judgment, with the permanent continuance of republican - government; and if, in its judgment, any form of policy is radically - and inherently inconsistent with the permanent and enduring peace of - the country, with the permanent supremacy of republican government, - and it have the manliness to say so, there is no power, judicial or - executive, in the United States, that can even question this - judgment but the =People=; and they can do it only by sending other - representatives here to undo our work. The very language of the - Constitution and the necessary logic of the case involve that - consequence. The denial of the right of secession means that all the - territory of the United States shall remain under the jurisdiction - of the Constitution. If there can be no State government which does - not recognize the Constitution, and which the authorities of the - United States do not recognize, then there are these alternatives, - and these only: the rebel States must be governed by Congress till - they submit and form a State government under the Constitution; or - Congress must recognize State governments which do not recognize - either Congress or the Constitution of the United States; or there - must be an entire absence of _all_ government in the rebel States; - and that is anarchy. To recognize a government which does not - recognize the Constitution is absurd, for a government is not a - constitution; and the recognition of a State government means the - acknowledgment of men as governors, and legislators, and judges, - actually invested with power to make laws, to judge of crimes, to - convict the citizens of other States, to demand the surrender of - fugitives from justice, to arm and command the militia, to require - the United States to repress all opposition to its authority, and to - protect it from invasion—against our own armies; whose Senators and - Representatives are _entitled_ to seats in Congress, and whose - electoral votes must be counted in the election of the President of - a Government which they disown and defy!! To accept the alternative - of anarchy as the constitutional condition of a State is to assert - the failure of the Constitution and the end of republican - government. Until, therefore, Congress recognize a State government, - organized under its auspices, there is no government in the rebel - States except the authority of Congress. In the absence of all State - government, the duty is imposed on Congress ... to administer civil - government until the people shall, under its guidance, submit to the - Constitution of the United States, and, under the laws which it - shall impose, and on the conditions Congress may require, reorganize - a republican government for themselves, and Congress shall recognize - that government. - - ... Is it yet time to reorganize the State governments? or is there - not an intermediate period in which sound legislative wisdom - requires that the authority of Congress shall take possession of and - temporarily control the States now in rebellion until peace shall be - restored and republican government can be established deliberately, - undisturbed by the sound or fear of arms, and under the guidance of - law? - -After referring to the condition of the rebellion, Mr. Davis declared: -“We have occupied a vast area wrested from its power, but to this day we -have not expelled the rebels from _any State_ they ever held.” In no -portion of those States could military power “be withdrawn for a moment -without instant insurrection”; and he added, “There is no rebel State -held now by the United States enough of whose population adheres to the -Union to be intrusted with the government of the State. One tenth cannot -control nine tenths. Five tenths are nowhere willing to undertake the -control of the other five tenths.” In West Virginia, he said, such a -condition existed and had been recognized. “In no other State—the only -one in respect to which a doubt can exist is Tennessee—in no other State -is there such a portion of territory held, or any such portion of -population under our control, or any such portion of it which is in our -control inspired by such sentiments toward the Government of the United -States, so free from fear of the returning wave of rebel invasion, so -assured of the continued supremacy of the United States, that we ought -to be willing to trust them with this power. You can get a handful of -men in the several States who would be glad to take the offices if -protected by the troops of the United States, but you have nowhere a -body of independent, loyal partisans of the United States, ready to meet -the rebels in arms, ready to die for the Republic, who claim the -Constitution as their birthright, count all other privileges light in -comparison, and resolve at every hazard to maintain it.” - -Concerning the loyal masses of the South, of whom so much was heard at -the beginning of the war, he remarked: - - It is the most astounding spectacle in history that in the Southern - States, with more than half of the population opposed to it, a great - revolution was effected against their wishes and against their - votes, without a battle, a riot, or a protest in behalf of the - beneficent Government of their fathers—a revolution whose opponents - hastened to lead it, without a martyr to the cause they deserted - except the nameless heroes of the mountains of Tennessee, or a - confessor of the faith they had avowed save the illustrious Petigru - of South Carolina! - - ... There is no fact that any one has stated on authority at all - reliable that any respectable proportion of the people of the - Southern States now in rebellion are willing to accept any terms - that even our opponents on the other side of the House are willing - to offer them. - - * * * * * - - What, then, are we to do with the population in these States? To - make “confusion worse confounded” by erecting by the side of the - hostile State government a new State government on the shifting - sands of that whirlpool, to be supported by us while we are there - and to turn its power against us when we are driven out? That would - be to erect a new throne where - - “Chaos umpire sits, - And by decision more embroils the fray - By which he reigns.” - - In my judgment, it is not safe to confide the vast authority of - State governments to the doubtful loyalty of the rebel States until - armed rebellion shall have been trampled into the dust, until every - armed rebel shall have vanished from the State, until there shall be - in the South no hope of independence and no fear of subjection, - until the United States is bearded by no military power and the laws - can be executed by courts and sheriffs without the ever-present - menace of military authority. Until we have reached that point, this - bill proposes that the President shall appoint a civil governor to - administer the government under the laws of the United States in - force in the States respectively at the outbreak of the rebellion, - subject, of course, to the necessities of military occupation. - -When military opposition shall have been suppressed, continued Mr. -Davis, then call upon the people to reorganize their governments in -their own way, “subject to the conditions that we think essential to our -permanent peace, and to prevent the revival hereafter of the -rebellion....” - -To establish republican forms of government that the people of the -United States would agree to, three modes were indicated: “One is to -remove the cause of the war by an alteration of the Constitution of the -United States prohibiting slavery everywhere within its limits. That, -sir, goes to the root of the matter, and should consecrate the nation’s -triumph. But there are thirty-four States—three fourths of them would be -twenty-six. I believe there are twenty-five States represented in this -Congress, so that we, on that basis, cannot change the Constitution. It -is, therefore, a condition precedent in that view of the case, that more -States shall have governments organized within them.” - -He next noticed the calculation based on three fourths of the States -then represented in Congress, a construction held by Thaddeus Stevens, -but even that view was not without its difficulties. The States of New -Jersey, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were named as doubtful. If such -an amendment were adopted it still left “the whole field of the civil -administration of the States prior to the recognition of State -governments, all laws necessary to the ascertainment of the will of the -people, and all restrictions on the return to power of the leaders of -the rebellion, wholly unprovided for.” The constitutional amendment met -his hearty approval, but it was not a complete remedy. - -Relative to the Administration policy, he observed: - - The next plan is that inaugurated by the President of the United - States in the proclamation of the 8th of December, called the - amnesty proclamation. That proposes no guardianship of the United - States over the reorganization of the governments, no law to - prescribe who shall vote, no civil functionaries to see that the law - is faithfully executed, no supervising authority to control and - judge of the election. But if, in any manner, by the toleration of - martial law, lately proclaimed the fundamental law, under the - dictation of any military authority, or under the prescriptions of a - provost marshal, something in the form of a government shall be - presented, represented to rest on the votes of one tenth of the - population, the President will recognize that, provided it does not - _contravene_ the proclamation of freedom and the laws of Congress; - and, to secure that, an oath is exacted. - - Now you will observe that there is no guarantee of law to watch over - the organization of that government. It may combine all the - population of a State; it may combine one tenth only; or ten - governments may come competing for recognition at the door of the - Executive mansion. The executive authority is pledged; Congress is - not pledged. It may be recognized by the military power and may not - be recognized by the civil power, so that it would have a doubtful - existence, half civil and half military, neither a temporary - government by law of Congress nor a State government, something as - unknown to the Constitution as the rebel government that refuses to - recognize it. - -In examining the operation of the Executive proclamation on the -existence of slavery, Mr. Davis asked, how does it accomplish the -reorganization of the government on the basis of universal freedom? and -added: - - The only prescription is that the government shall not _contravene_ - the provisions of that proclamation. Sir, if that proclamation be - valid, then we are relieved from all trouble on that score; but if - that proclamation be not valid, then the oath to support it is - without legal sanction, for the President can ask no man to bind - himself by an oath to support an unfounded proclamation or an - unconstitutional law even for a moment, still less till it shall - have been declared void by the Supreme Court of the United - States.... If, therefore, he shall have taken the oath, he can, in - good conscience as well as in good law, disregard it the next - moment; so that, in point of fact, the law leaves us where the - proclamation does; it adds nothing to its legality, nothing to its - force. - - But what is the proclamation which the new governments must not - contravene? That certain negroes shall be free, and that certain - other negroes shall remain slaves. The proclamation therefore - recognizes the existence of slavery. It does just exactly what all - the constitutions of the rebel States prior to the rebellion did; - ... and, therefore, the old constitutions might be restored - to-morrow without _contravening_ the proclamation of freedom. Those - constitutions do not say that the President shall not have the - right, in the exercise of his military authority, to emancipate - slaves within the States.... They do not even establish slavery.... - They merely recognize it just as the proclamation recognizes its - existence in parts of Virginia and in parts of Louisiana. So that - the one tenth of the population at whose hands the President - proposes to accept and guarantee a State government, can elect - officers under the old constitution of their State in exactly the - same terms and with exactly the same powers existing at the time of - the rebellion, and may, under his proclamation, demand a - recognition.... So soon as the State government is recognized, the - operation of the proclamation becomes merely a judicial question. - The right of a negro to his freedom is a legal right divesting a - right of property, and is to be enforced in the courts; and then the - question is what the courts will say about the proclamation. Is it - valid or invalid? Does it of itself confer a legal right to freedom - on negroes who were slaves? Is it within the authority of the - Executive?... How local State courts, created by the Southern - people, will decide such a question _no one_ can doubt.... It is, - therefore, under the scheme of the President, merely a judicial - question, to be adjudged by judicial rules, and to be determined by - the courts.... I do not desire to argue the legality of the - proclamation of freedom. I think it safer to _make it law_.... Under - the act of 1862 the President is authorized to use the negro - population for the suppression of the rebellion; while the rebellion - lasts, his proclamation in law exempts the slave from the duty of - obeying his master, but after the rebellion is extinguished, the - master’s rights are in his own hands, subject only to the opinion of - the courts on the legal effect of the proclamation, without a single - precedent to sanction it, and opposed by the solemn assertions of - our Government against the principle worked to authorize it. - Gentlemen are less prudent or less in earnest than I am if they will - risk the great issues involved in this question on such authorities - before the courts of justice. - - By the bill we propose to preclude the judicial question by the - solution of a political question. How so? By the paramount power of - Congress to reorganize governments in those States, to impose such - conditions as it thinks necessary to secure the permanence of - republican government, to refuse to recognize any governments there - which do not prohibit slavery forever. Ay, gentlemen take the - responsibility to say, in the face of those who clamor for speedy - recognition of governments tolerating slavery, that the safety of - the people of the United States is the supreme law; that their will - is the supreme rule of law, and that we are authorized to pronounce - their will on this subject—take the responsibility to say that we - will revise the judgments of our ancestors; that we have experience - written in blood which they had not; that we find now, what they - darkly doubted, that slavery is really, radically inconsistent with - the permanence of republican governments; and that, being charged by - the supreme law of the land, on our conscience and judgment, to - guarantee, that is, to continue, maintain, and enforce, if it exist, - to institute and restore when overthrown, republican governments - throughout the broad limits of the republic, we will weed out every - element of their policy which we think incompatible with its - permanence and endurance.... It [the bill] adds to the authority of - the proclamation the sanction of Congress.... - - Gentlemen must deny the jurisdiction of Congress over the States - where there are no recognized governments, or place a bound or limit - to the discretion of Congress.... - - And if the sentiments of State pride and State rights be touched by - the assertion of this wide discretion, which men may deny but cannot - expunge, I would admonish those who dislike it that it is a - jurisdiction which nothing but the dereliction of the States can - wake into activity, and they who wish to exclude it from their - limits have only not to give occasion for its exercise by renouncing - obedience to the Constitution and pulling down their own State - governments. But now the jurisdiction has attached in all the rebel - States. Until Congress has assented, there is no State government in - any rebel State, and none will be recognized except such as - recognize the power of the United States; so that we come down to - this: whether we—and when I say we, I mean we upon this side of the - House, who are firmly, thoroughly, and honestly convinced that the - time has come not merely to strike the arms from the hands of the - rebels, but to strike the fetters from the arms of the slaves, and - remove that domineering and cohesive power without which we could - have had no rebellion, and which now is its animating spirit, and - which will die when it dies—.... - - And if it be time [for Congress to assert its authority] then all I - ask in conclusion is, that gentlemen will go and read that great - argument of Daniel Webster in the Rhode Island case ... where he met - this semi-revolutionary attempt to count heads and call that the - people, and maintained—and so the Supreme Court judged when it - refused to take jurisdiction of the question—that the great - political law of America is that every change of government shall be - conducted under the supervising authority of some existing - legislative body throwing the protection of law around the polls, - defining the rights of voters, protecting them in the exercise of - the elective franchise, guarding against fraud, repelling violence, - and appointing arbiters to pronounce the result and declare the - persons chosen by the people.... He [Webster] maintained it to be - the great fundamental principle of the American government that - legislation shall guide every political change, and that it assumes - that somewhere within the United States there is always a permanent, - organized legal authority which shall guide the tottering footsteps - of those who seek to restore governments which are disorganized and - broken down. - -The bill, he asserted in conclusion, was an effort to apply this great -principle of American law.[312] - -Representative Scofield, of Pennsylvania, said, April 29, 1864, when the -subject was again before the House, that the continuity of -constitutional government in the seceded States had been broken, the -regular transmission of political power interrupted. How, he inquired, -should the severed thread be joined? By the unconstrained action of the -people themselves, say the gentlemen in opposition. He indorsed that -sentiment, and added that when the people of those States should ground -the arms of their rebellion, and uncoerced take upon themselves the easy -yoke and light burden of the ever gentle Federal Government it would -mark a glad day in those uncheerful years of our history. - -For those States from which hostile armies had been excluded Congress -should legislate or leave the people in the rough hand of military law. -The bill designed to discharge that duty was generally acceptable to any -one who conceded the propriety of Congressional action, its three -prohibitions being probably the only debatable points,—that is the -assumption of Confederate debts, the prevention of Confederate officers -from voting and the prohibition of involuntary servitude. - -To assume the rebel debt, he asserted, would be to offer a high bounty -for future rebellions; if rebel officers were permitted to vote, upon -what principle of comparative justice could the privilege be denied to -ordinary criminals? These officers were guilty of the highest crime -against government. As to the third prohibition he had more to say. - -“If God shall give us victory,” continued Mr. Scofield, “and enable us -to subdue or scatter the army of the enemy, is a voluntary reunion of -the States possible? I say _voluntary_ because I suppose nobody desires -a Union always to be maintained by force; and I use the word _reunion_ -because nobody proposes a form of government different from our present -system of State brotherhood. I am not now speaking of the several plans -of reconstruction, for they are designed only as temporary devices, -looking to a reunion.... My question looks beyond the battle and beyond -reconstruction. When the victory is won, if won it shall be, and the -transition over, will the insurgent States _willingly stay_ where they -have been _forcibly put_ in their old places in the old Union?... Our -own liberties could not survive their permanent subjugation. When the -Federal Government becomes strong enough to hold eleven States as -colonies, it will be too strong, I fear, for the people’s liberties.” -All motives for those States ever to depart should be removed. - -Similarity of ideas he characterized as the bond of nationality, and -named Ireland, Hungary and Poland to show the opposite. In the United -States slavery was the one subject of estrangement. Could North and -South be brought to think alike on that subject? The theory that each -side could hold its own opinions on slavery and no evil consequences -follow was somewhat to blame. That theory failed in practice and for -that failure each side blamed the other. - -The fathers, he said, lived under that theory, that slavery and freedom -could coexist, but they expected that the institution would soon become -extinct. Hence they only tolerated it. Slavery was to recede slowly and -freedom to follow steadily. Upon _that_ basis they got along very well -and so could their descendants. Instead of consenting to go, slavery -demanded expansion and perpetuity. This was reversing the compromise of -the fathers; this change had to be discussed, the slave power took -umbrage and secession followed. If one sentiment must prevail, then -slavery, which could not stand discussion, must yield if there was to be -a reunion. To live in peace together the North must embrace slavery or -the South must abandon it. - -To adopt slavery would mean the adoption by 20,000,000 people of -sentiments favorable thereto, whereas the institution never had any -friends in the North. Those in that section so considered were only its -apologists. If, three years ago, slavery had no real friends in the -North, who would advocate it when it had attempted to destroy the most -beneficent of governments? To reconcile the free States would -necessitate a change of opinion—to adopt freedom as the dominant idea -would require simply a change of _investment_ in the sections. For the -present extinguish the conflagration, for the future remove the -inflammable material from which it was kindled. For the present seize -the mad revolutionists of the South, for the future destroy the virus -that poisoned their blood. - -All who favored emancipation he favored as co-workers for a voluntary -and peaceful reunion of the States; slavery was presented merely as an -element of discord and disunion and as such he asked for its -removal.[313] - -Mr. Williams said that the war was inaugurated on the theory that the -States were _in_, whereas the great fact of war was a proclamation that -they were _out_. Northern Democrats were willing to accept the fact that -they were _out, without war_—to adopt the principle of the _laissez nous -faire_ of the rebel authorities and to treat with them upon the idea of -a _reconstruction_; peaceful secession with _reconstruction by treaty_. -The severance of the States was complete, though the hope of recovery -remained. By releasing the crews of their privateers, by blockading -their ports the Federal authorities had recognized them as a _de facto_ -government; Federal legislation had put them under the ban as alien -enemies. In the minds of the framers of the Constitution the theory of -an indissoluble Union referred to _the right_, to its organic law. They -did not mean that it could not be ruptured by violence. If the -governments of the States were dissolved “they must, of course, be -reconstructed under the auspices of the conquering power, and that not -by the Executive, but by the Legislature of the Union, whose sword he -bears, and which only, consistently with the genius of our institutions, -the past practice of the Government, and the letter as well as spirit of -the Constitution, can venture to determine what use shall be made of the -territories conquered by it, and when and upon what terms they shall be -readmitted into full communion as members of this Government.... To -permit any executive officer to declare its law, and set it in motion, -and place it under the control of a minority—a mere tithe of its -citizens—with power to send delegates to Congress with representation -unimpaired and unaffected—even though he should reenact a part of its -abrogated Constitution—would be, as I think, a monstrous anomaly, a -violation of fundamental principles, and a precedent fraught with great -danger to republican liberty.... To come back into the Union, it must -either be born anew or come back with all its rights unimpaired, except -those material ones which have been destroyed in the progress of the -war. There is, I think, no middle ground, as there is no power either -here or elsewhere to prescribe terms which shall abridge the rights or -privileges of a State that has _not_ been out of the Union, or returns -to it in virtue of its original title.” The rebellious States, he -declared, “are in the Union for correction, not for _heirship_.” In -point of fact they were out. - -Replying to an observation of Fernando Wood, Mr. Williams said: “We are -in favor, at all events, of preserving all that is left of it [the -Union], and intend, with the blessing of God, to win back the residue, -and pass it through the fire until it shall come out purged of the -malignant element that has unfitted it for freedom. - -“... Say that they [the rebellious States] are in the Union as before, -and all your sacrifices have been idle, and all the blood spilled by you -has sunk into the earth in vain.” - -The confiscation and distribution of the great baronial possessions of -rebel leaders were in his judgment an essential element in any feasible -plan of reconstruction. He deduced from passages in Bynkershoek and -Barbeyrac that “everything belonging to the offending party is -confiscated.... _Indemnity_, _security_, and _punishment_ are all, -therefore, means of self-defense which may be legitimately used.” - -Is the forfeiture, he asked, of the estates and property of traitors, -whether they consist of lands or slaves, required for these purposes? -“_Vae Victis_” is not the maxim of a humane conqueror. Though he would -not exclude the idea of mercy, he was not clear as to “the wisdom of a -proclamation of amnesty in advance as a measure of pacification, without -limits as to time, and where submission after conquest, and when it is -no longer a virtue but a necessity, is to be rewarded with the same -impunity as a voluntary return to duty before that time.” - -Speaking of the nature, cause and fury of the war, he continued: “Its -suppression has become impossible without removing the cause of the -strife, and disabling our enemy by liberating his slaves, and arming -them against him.” - -No reparation was adequate for the injury inflicted; for, said he, -“there can be no punishment, except in the divestiture of the rights and -the seizure of the estates of the guilty leaders. There is no security -except in the distribution of the latter.” From these he would carve out -inheritances for the widow and the helpless offspring of the Northern -soldier. - -For eighteen months, he observed in conclusion, the war was conducted -upon the principle of inflicting as little injury as possible upon the -enemy.[314] - -The speech of Mr. Williams was marked by considerable fluency as well as -great elegance of diction; it was the effort of a scholar, though not -confined strictly to the question before the House. He introduced with -directness and vigor the ideas of indemnity, security and punishment; -these, it may be remarked, became important elements in determining the -mode of reinstatement that finally emerged from the chaos of resolutions -and plans submitted to Congress. - -Representative Baldwin, of Michigan, believed the bill “to be an utter -subversion of the Constitution”; even a latitudinarian construction of -that instrument would not justify it. It embraced a plan that could be -enforced by only the military arm. It was the precursor of the -establishment of a despotism. That measure, as well as the President’s -plan, was fraught with danger. - -He lamented interference with the elective franchise and the denial of -the privileges of the writ of _habeas corpus_. For eighteen months the -war had been waged for the destruction of the South, not for the -restoration of the Union. Did not wisdom, he asked, suggest that all -plans of reconstruction which tended only to intensify hate and postpone -the day of peace be abandoned? Speaking of the effect of Mr. Lincoln’s -policy he observed: “That it was intended that the amnesty proclamation -of last December would hasten the end of this strife, I do not believe. -We are told that nearly every Southern paper published it, and it only -nerved them to the performance of more earnest deeds.” The President’s -plan as well as that of Congress, he believed, were designed to -perpetuate the present dominant party by the vote of reconstructed -States. A considerable portion of his remarks was devoted to criticism -of the Administration.[315] - -Mr. Thayer, of Pennsylvania, believed that the powers delegated by the -people of the United States to the national Government were sufficient -for the great work of reconstruction, and added: “That the time has come -in which Congress, in the exercise of the great powers conferred upon -it, should settle and authoritatively declare the terms and conditions -upon which the people of the rebellious districts should be restored to -their State privileges and resume their just relations to the national -Government, does not admit of doubt.” People occupying territory wrested -from the rebellion should be restored with the least possible delay to -the privileges of representative government. “Congress alone can enact -the laws which are to reconstruct the political societies in which the -fundamental principle of loyalty to the national Government and -obedience to its laws and respect for its authority have been -obliterated by the violence of rebellion. The President of the United -States cannot enact these laws, and it is in my opinion a reproach to -Congress that by its inaction up to the present time it has rendered it -necessary that the national Executive should be obliged by a sense of -obligation to the public welfare to resort to temporary expedients for -the preservation of public order and the assertion of national supremacy -in those districts and States which the valor of our soldiers has -redeemed from the insulting domination of the rebel army.” - -Executive action, he asserted, was suggested by necessity. “What has -been done in that respect by the President I believe to have been well -done, wisely done, and patriotically done, and to have been demanded -alike by the necessity of the case and for the welfare of the Republic.” -The exclusive right over the subject, however, belonged to Congress, -which should relieve the President of all responsibility therein. - -Safeguards against the recurrence of similar outbreaks in the future -should be required. He would support the measure before the House -because of these safeguards or pledges. Unconditional and perpetual -loyalty in the new governments in the rebellious States to that of the -United States, extirpation and perpetual prohibition of slavery and -compulsory repudiation of the rebel debt were the chief among these. - -“The safety of the country,” said he, “its future repose, the -continuance of the Union, and the firm establishment of our political -system imperatively demand that in the reorganization of local -governments in the rebel States the foundations of such governments must -rest upon the principle of submission to the Constitution and laws of -the United States. - -“... It is also necessary to guard the elective franchise and the -privilege of holding office in those States against the intrusion and -treachery of all who have in any sense been leaders in the present -rebellion. For this purpose prudence requires that all who have held -office under the pretended rebel government should be excluded from -these privileges.” - -The seventh section of the bill he would like to see so modified as to -declare that no debt of the pretended Confederate States, and no debt -contracted by the State for the purpose of prosecuting the war against -the United States or of giving aid to its enemies, should be recognized -or paid by the State. - -It was a singular doctrine, he remarked in conclusion, that those who -had thrown off all restraints of the Constitution and who for years had -waged war for the purpose of overthrowing it should be entitled to -demand its protection while engaged in armed hostility to it.[316] - -Mr. Yeaman did not believe Congress had a right to legislate away the -laws and institutions of these States. The American people, he said, -would come out of the contest with a better political education, an -education having for its basis the idea that _they are a nation_, and he -added, “a war to enforce the theory of secession will end in an -increased consolidated nationality.” The theory expressed in the -Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions was the fatal blow in our political -history. His address was in the nature of an essay in political science -and not altogether germane to the measure under consideration.[317] - -“Pass a judicious enabling act,” urged Mr. Longyear, “with proper -safeguards, of which the people may avail themselves to organize civil -governments at the very earliest opportunity, and it will afford a -rallying point for the Union sentiment remaining there, and tend to -foster it and nourish it into a healthful and vigorous existence. It -will prevent perplexing and complicated irregularities and diversities -of action, and tend largely to harmony and strength in our future -deliberations. No stronger illustration of the necessity and propriety -of immediate action need be given than the case of Tennessee, Louisiana, -and Arkansas. - -“The President’s proclamation does not solve the difficulty. As a -proclamation of amnesty, as a general outline or plan for organizing new -State governments, as a prescription of safeguards and conditions -precedent to such organization, it will ever stand as a bright and -glorious page in the history of the present Administration. But it is -incomplete for lack of constitutional power. That can be conferred by -Congress alone, under the power to admit new States. - - * * * * * - -“If we succeed [in the war] we make no conquest of territory, because -that is already ours. We simply succeed, in that respect, in bringing -that which is our own again under our control.” Because of rebellion the -constitutions and laws of those States had ceased to exist, and as -slavery was established solely in State laws that also ceased to exist. -The only object of a constitutional amendment was to prohibit its -establishment forever. Freedom, he added, was being substituted for -slavery. In respect to slavery and the slave power we were in the midst -of a revolution. They proved themselves inimical to civil liberty, to -the Constitution and to republican institutions.[318] - -To the remark of Fernando Wood, of New York, that the South could not be -subdued, Ignatius Donnelly replied, “We are doing it!” and he added, if -the system of the President is deficient in the machinery that will -ensure safety “it is our duty to supply that defect. The plan of the -President, unsupported by any action on our part, hangs upon too many -contingencies. It may be repealed by his successor; it may be resisted -by Congress; it may be annulled by the Supreme Court. It rests the -welfare of the nation upon the mind of one man; it rests the whole -structure of social order upon the unstable foundation of individual -oaths.” Upon this subject Mr. Donnelly observed that General Jefferson -Thompson, C. S. A., noted in passing through those regions that men -consulted their memorandum books to see what oath they had taken last. -Thousands of rebel dead had been found on the battle field with oaths of -allegiance, sworn to and subscribed, in their pockets. Mr. Donnelly -favored the bill, and if any measure of greater security could be found -he would support that. He desired, as soon as it could be attained, an -amendment of the Constitution that would prohibit slavery. - -“I am aware, Mr. Speaker,” he continued, “of the great claims which Mr. -Lincoln has upon the people of the United States. I recognize that -popularity which accompanies him, and which, considering the ordeal -through which he has passed, is little less than miraculous. I recognize -that unquestioning faith in his honesty and ability which pervades all -classes, and the sincere affection with which almost the entire -population regard him. We must not underrate him even in our praises. He -is a great man. Great not after the old models of the world, but with a -homely and original greatness. He will stand out to future ages in the -history of these crowded and confused times with wonderful distinctness. -He has carried a vast and discordant population safely and peacefully -through the greatest of political revolutions with such consummate -sagacity and skill that while he led he appeared to follow; while he -innovated beyond all precedent he has been denounced as tardy; while he -struck the shackles from the limbs of three million slaves he has been -hailed as a conservative! If to adapt, persistently and continuously, -just and righteous principles to all the perplexed windings and changes -of human events, and to secure in the end the complete triumph of those -principles, be statesmanship, then Abraham Lincoln is the first of -statesmen. - -“If the end of the war is to be a restoration _of the appearance_ of the -old Government; a patching together of the broken shreds and fragments; -a propping up of the fabric in such style that the next Administration -may possibly get out from under it before it falls, then that -proclamation may be found all-sufficient. But for all other purposes it -will be utterly unavailing. It does not reach the heart of the -distemper.... - -“We owe more than this to ourselves; we owe more than this to the South. -We must regenerate the South.”[319] - -This discriminating tribute to the character and genius of Mr. Lincoln -was paid by no servile flatterer; it was not the eulogy of even a -supporter of the Presidential plan of reconstruction; nor was it -designed as a discharge of, or uttered in expectation of compelling, -Executive favors, but appears rather to have been the spontaneous -testimony of a keen interpreter of men and measures not less creditable -to the insight of the speaker than to the subject of his remarks. -Others, it is true, refrained from misrepresenting the President’s -attitude and cheerfully ascribed to him patriotic and enlightened -motives in his public conduct. Mr. Donnelly alone condensed into a -paragraph a panegyric with which the judgment of posterity is in -complete accord. This portion of his speech is quoted both to show that -there were men in Congress who fully appreciated the greatness of the -President, and that criticism of his measures was not in many instances -suggested by feelings of personal hostility. - -Very different were the remarks of Mr. Dennison, who declared that “The -passage of this law will be the final gathering up of the reserved -rights of States, and the last vestige of protection of the citizen -under State constitutions will be taken away, and all power centralized -in the General Government.” He opposed the bill for the additional -reason that it was intended to legalize and perpetuate the -unconstitutional acts of the President. “There does not exist on the -earth a more despotic government than that of Abraham Lincoln. He is a -despot in fact if not in name.”[320] These excerpts sufficiently -indicate the character of his invective. - -“I have offered a substitute to the bill of the committee,” said -Thaddeus Stevens, “because that does not, in my judgment, meet the evil. -It partially acknowledges the rebel States to have rights under the -Constitution, which I deny, as war has abrogated them all. I do not -inquire what rights we have under it, but they have none. The bill takes -for granted that the President may partially interfere in their civil -administration, not as conqueror but as President of the United States. -It adopts in some measure the idea that less than a majority may -regulate to some extent the affairs of a republic.”[321] The chief -objection of Mr. Stevens, however, was that it removed the opportunity -of confiscating the property of the disloyal. - -Representative Wadsworth, of Kentucky, he said, agreed with him that the -people of the South could plead none of the constitutional provisions in -their defence. Whatever rights they possessed were those of belligerents -engaged in war. “When we come to enforce the rights of conquest,” -continued the Pennsylvania member, “we should be justified in insisting -upon the _extreme rights_ of war, without yielding to the mitigations -dictated by modern usage with regard to belligerents originally composed -of foreign nations engaged in war which they deemed just.” Explaining -former recommendations which in many quarters had called forth severe -criticism, he said: “I thought that the women and children, the -non-combatants, and those who were forced by the laws of their State -into the armies, should be spared; and the property of the guilty, -morally as well as politically guilty, only should be taken. And yet we -hear a howl of horror from conservative gentlemen at the inhumanity of -the proposition.” He still further explained his sentiments on this -occasion. After stating that the people of the Confederate States were -sovereign and acted through their representatives, he asserted that they -had commenced and were continuing to wage an unjust war and therefore -their private property was liable to confiscation. The right to take -their property existed, but no one, he said, “advises the execution of -the extreme right. But the right exists and ought to be enforced against -the most guilty. To allow them to return with their estates untouched, -on the theory that they have never gone out of the Union, seems to me -rank injustice to loyal men.” Of those who denied that the Confederate -States had gone out of the Union he inquired, “What are we making war -upon them for? For seceding; for going out of the Union against law. The -law forbids a man to rob or murder, and yet robbery and murder exist _de -facto_ but not _de jure_.” Hence the Constitution does not allow the -States to go out of the Union. He referred also in his speech to a -resolution introduced by Mr. Schenck, of Ohio, which passed the House -without a division and declared the Confederate States a public enemy, -engaged in a public war.[322] - -On the same day, May 2, Representative Strouse remarked that immediately -after the disaster of Bull Run the House almost unanimously passed the -Crittenden Resolutions, which declared that “This war is not waged in -any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, -or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established -institutions of these States.” This announcement, he asserted, brought -volunteers, whereas now, 1864, county, State and Federal bounties -combined could not induce men to enlist, and the cause of the apathy was -that the war had been perverted from the purpose announced in the -resolutions referred to. The entire speech had little reference to the -bill of Mr. Davis, but seemed rather designed, by an attack on the -Administration, to please his Democratic constituents.[323] - -Mr. Cravens said that the dominant party did not distinguish between -loyalty to the Administration and loyalty to the Government. The time -for compromise had passed when the Republican party refused to accept -the Crittenden Resolutions. That organization was in all essentials an -abolition party. If there ever was a distinction it no longer existed. -He cited a rather complete list of all the measures acted upon by -Congress showing their concern for the negro; he charged neglect of the -white soldier, his widow and orphans; quoted from the speech of Thaddeus -Stevens on the admission of West Virginia, and named Representative -Julian as uttering sentiments little behind the Pennsylvania member in -boldness and exhibiting no more reverence for the Constitution. The -incapacity and dire wickedness of the President and his “courtiers” came -in for a share of criticism. - -Mr. Gooch on the following day, May 3, remarked that the rebellion was -but the military phase of the conflict of ideas which began with the -adoption of the Constitution. “When we shall have crushed the rebellion -and restored peace to all parts of the country we shall hold this -territory, not by a new title, but by the old, not as territory acquired -by conquest, but territory defended and maintained against revolt.... I -can see no reason why the President, as Commander-in-Chief, should not, -in the meantime, so use the military power as to aid and assist the -loyal people of any one of these States in the organization of a loyal -State government.... All these acts by the President, or the military -power under him, in thus aiding and assisting the loyal people in these -States, impose no obligation upon Congress to recognize them until such -time as it shall deem proper to do so, and any recognition the military -power may see fit to give to these governments can never fix their -status in the Union. Congress alone has the power to determine what -government is the legitimate one in a State, and its decision is binding -on the other departments of the Government.”[324] - -Mr. Perry, of New Jersey, spoke of the duration of the war, predicted -the general bankruptcy which its great expense would bring about, and -calculated that in eleven years the cost of the war would equal the -assessed value of property. - -Speaking of the Executive plan he said: “And here the President’s design -is perfectly evident, to secure a majority of the delegates to the -nominating convention of his party, and to provide for his own election -by the House of Representatives in the event of there not being an -election by the people. By this plan the narrow foothold maintained by -our armies in North Carolina, Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, Florida, -Arkansas, and elsewhere may send the pretended full delegations of those -States to this House. Mr. Speaker, I denominate the whole plan a -political trick worthy of the most adroit and unscrupulous wire-puller -of our ward primary meetings.” The State governments had not been -destroyed, he added, “nor can they be destroyed unless the rebels are -finally victorious, and establish their independence.”[325] - -Fernando Wood said that Mexico had a republican form of government, and -that Texas came into the Union without changing the character of her -government except to substitute a governor for President and to change -the titles of some officials. Every Southern State possessed the same -form of government which it did before secession. If, he asserted, they -were then republican in form, “they are so now.” The Confederate -constitution had all the elements of republicanism. The bill provided -that hereafter none of the States in rebellion should hold slaves. It -did not leave to the people the right to regulate their domestic -institutions. Is it republicanism to take from the people this -privilege? “To impose upon them a form of government of your own making, -under the pretext of this bill, would be the worst kind of tyranny, -whatever the provisions of your constitution might be.”[326] - -He defended himself against serious charges of General Schenck, whom he -criticised severely. These accusations, however, were reiterated by Hon. -William D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, who at this point rose to speak on -the merits of the bill. - -The proposed measure did not meet his unqualified approval. It lacked -some of the amendments suggested by Mr. Stevens. “I should like to see -his distinct declaration,” said Congressman Kelley, “that ‘The -Confederate States are a public enemy, waging an unjust war, whose -injustice is so glaring that they have no right to claim the mitigation -of the extreme rights of war which are accorded by modern usage to an -enemy who has the right to consider the war a just one.’” He would like -to see the bill of Mr. Davis provide also for the exclusion from -Congress of all those States that seceded, and every part of them. - -As more immediately important, however, he would prefer to see included -in the measure the proposition of Mr. Stevens respecting amendments of -the Constitution; he denied the immortality of a State. It has its -beginning, its transitions and may have its end. “A State may be killed, -a State may commit suicide. An act of God, by destroying its -inhabitants, might extinguish a State. A State could be conquered and -held by some strong and hostile power. The political people of each of -those States have overthrown the State. Through its corporate power each -State destroyed its corporate life, and no one of them exists.” He also -denied that a State could transfer to any foreign power territory within -the jurisdiction of the United States. The Supreme Court had decided -that the Southern States were alien enemies and entitled to only the -rights of such.[327] - -The message of the President, Representative S. S. Cox believed, “should -be welcomed, not so much for what it is as for what it pretends to be. -It is his first adventure beyond the line of force into the field of -conciliation.... - -“To test the genuineness of this amnesty: five months have gone, but we -see no signs of thousands of Southern citizens rushing to embrace this -amnesty. Indeed, it is conceded that the rebellion is now more -formidable than ever.” There was no genuine movement toward the -restoration of the seceded States. He would not take the oath of -allegiance and swear support of the negro policies. How could Southern -men be expected to take the oath? Its terms provoked or irritated them -still more. The structure, he declared, was built on the Emancipation -Proclamation. - -The bill of Mr. Davis had the same defects. That, too, was based upon -the one tenth system and the policy of forced emancipation. “In some of -its features,” he said, “it is an improvement upon the rickety -establishment proposed by the President. - -“... The emancipation act of the gentleman [Lincoln] can never be -reconciled with the normal control of the States over their domestic -institutions, so all oaths to sustain the same are oaths to subvert the -old governments, Federal and State.... The President’s plan, therefore, -whether intended or not, is an oath to encourage treason, and the plan -of the gentleman from Maryland is a plan to consummate revolution. - -“... If his [the President’s] plan of making one tenth rule in the -States should succeed, then he will have ready at hand the electoral -votes of Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, North Carolina, and -other States. He began this business in Florida the other day, and the -blood which flowed at Olustee is the result of this scheme of personal -ambition! - - * * * * * - -“There is a sort of _odium historicum_,” proceeded Mr. Cox, “attached to -all political test oaths.... They have been the bane and foil of good -government ever since bigotry began and revenge ruled. You cannot make -eight million people, nearly all in revolt at what they regard as the -detestable usurpations of abolition, forswear their hatred to abolition. -You force by this oath the freed negro into the very nostrils of the -Southern man, whose submission to law you seek. - -“The conditions of pardon only inflame but do not quench rebellion.... - -“We may yet change the war from the diabolical purposes of those in -power, by changing that power to other hands, and we are not ready to -sever our Union while that hope remains.” - -Precedents and analogies from both ancient and contemporary history were -cited to demonstrate the folly of attempting to hold the South in her -place by force. These together with censure of the Administration and -criticism of the dominant party in Congress made up a great part of Mr. -Cox’s very long speech.[328] - -Representative Boutwell, of Massachusetts, referring, May 4, to the -remarks of his colleague, Mr. Ashley, of the committee which reported -the bill, observed that “since this rebellion opened the Thirty-seventh -Congress commenced its existence and ceased to exist; that this Congress -is now closing the fifth month of its First Session, and that up to this -time no efficient, indeed no legislative steps whatever have been taken -by which the Executive is to be guided in the affairs of the people -occupying the territory that has been reclaimed from rebel domination. -Under these circumstances I think it due to the country that this House, -at least, should do nothing which conveys any reflection upon his policy -unless that policy be clearly and manifestly in contravention of the -Constitution or of the well-ascertained and admitted principles of the -Government.” - -When the populous parts of Louisiana were torn from rebel domination, -and the State of Arkansas indicated in various ways the growth of a -sentiment of loyalty and returning allegiance to the General Government, -the Executive had but one of three courses before him: either to be -silent, to govern by military authority alone, or else to establish a -civil government or at least to take initiatory steps toward such -establishment. “It was unquestionably his right and duty, in the absence -of all legislative action, to govern these territories as fast and as -far as they were reclaimed by military power.” - -He defended both the President and General Banks, who had for years been -consistent advocates of liberty. He then announced himself in favor of -the bill of Mr. Davis. - -“The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Stevens],” continued Mr. Boutwell, -“maintains, as I understand, that these States are out of the Union; -that their territory is alien territory, and that we are making war -against alien enemies. I do not admit either of these positions to be -true. I feel quite sure that these eleven once-existing States are no -longer States of the Union. The evidence on which I rely in support of -this position is found first in the declaration made by the authorities -of those States that they no longer exist as States of the American -Union. Next, we find that for three years and more they have been -resisting the authority of the Government and have been carrying on a -war against it. It is absurd to say that States or people are a part of -the Government under the Constitution, and entitled to constitutional -rights and privileges, when they have been carrying on war against the -Government. - - * * * * * - -“Nor do I admit that the people in the rebellious States are aliens. -They are not of any other country, they are not of any other legal -jurisdiction, they are within the jurisdiction of the Union. Three years -ago they were a portion of this Union, and although they have been -carrying on a war, that war has not thus far been successful, their -independence has not been acknowledged by us, nor has it been recognized -by any other nation. They, therefore, are not aliens. They are, to be -sure, public enemies, but they are not alien enemies. - -“... These States as political organizations have by their own will -ceased to exist.... The existence of a State is a fact within the -control of the people themselves, and cannot be influenced by any -extraneous power whatever, and therefore these States have by the will -of the people thereof as political organizations ceased to exist.” - -Admitting that the Government of the United States had legal -jurisdiction over this territory and over the people who occupied it, it -was an absurdity, he declared, “to say that these States still exist and -that the people there may without our consent elect officers and send -Representatives to this body and Senators to the other branch of -Congress.” - -To the taunt of the Democrats that the war had been changed from a war -to restore the Union to one for the purpose of emancipating the slave, -Mr. Boutwell replied by a denial of the fact, but added that even if it -were so, it was not the first instance of the sort in human history. Up -to 1774 every American expected to preserve the old relations with -England, yet within two years Independence was declared. The pending -measure, he asserted, had not elicited marked attention in Congress nor -any great interest throughout the country, yet in it lay the germ of a -new civilization for half a continent. - -The limitation of the elective franchise to white males did not meet his -approval; for though the suffrage is not a natural, it is the highest -political, right. Where the suffrage is denied to any large number of -men, that community is never free from the danger of intestine -commotion. - -As South Carolina and Georgia were responsible for breathing into -slavery the breath of life after it had everywhere been condemned, he -would not have them again reappear in the Union. Florida did not deserve -a place in the Union and, by giving the colored men local suffrage in -that district, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, he would invite the -blacks thither as fast as they could be spared from the industries in -which they were elsewhere engaged. He would not ask to extend this -principle to loyal Northern or to border States with a negro -population.[329] - -Mr. Pendleton, of Ohio, made by far the ablest Democratic argument -against the proposed enactment. Its details as well as its general -policy, he said, required examination. After stating quite fully the -provisions of the bill, he continued: - - The gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Davis] facetiously entitles it “a - bill to guaranty to certain States whose governments have been - usurped or overthrown a republican form of government.” - - At last the mask has been thrown off. At last the pretenses have all - been laid aside. Three years of war have done their work, and the - purposes and objects of the Republican party have been at last - acknowledged. This bill is the consummation of its statesmanship the - fruit of its experience, the demonstration of its purposes. The - gentleman from Maryland introduced it; it is understood to be - distasteful to some of his party friends; but it is a party measure; - it will be voted for by every member of the Republican organization; - it marks their policy of restoration; it defines their ideas of - Union; it interprets their construction of the Constitution. As such - I accept it. We have had double-dealing, hypocrisy and fraud for the - last three years. We have had false professions, false names, and - double-faced measures. We have had armies raised, taxes collected, - battles fought, under the pretense that the war was for the Union, - the old Union, the Union of the Constitution. These were the - catchwords for the patriotic people. In the secret council-chambers - of the party they were sneered at as devices with which to ensnare - the innocent, to deceive the ignorant, to coax the obstinate. They - were to be discarded as soon as, in the heat of war, in the - exasperation of passion, in the exultation of victory, or in the - bitterness of defeat and disaster and oppression, it would be safe - to divulge the great conspiracy against the Union, the - constitutional confederation, the principles of free government. - - That time has come. The veil is drawn aside. We see clearly. The - party in possession of the powers of the Government is - revolutionary. It seeks to use those powers to destroy the - Government, to change its form, to change its spirit. It seeks under - the forms of law to make a new Government, a new Union, to ingraft - upon it new principles, new theories, and to use the powers of the - law against all who will not be persuaded. It is in rebellion - against the Constitution; it is in treasonable conspiracy against - the Government. It differs in nothing from the armed enemies except - in the weapons of its warfare. They fight to overthrow its authority - over them, while it seeks to destroy that authority at home. They - would curtail the limits of the jurisdiction of the Federal - Government; it would extend those limits, but change the basis and - principles upon which it rests. If revolt against constituted - authority be a crime, if patriotism consist in upholding in form and - spirit the Government our fathers made, those in power here to-day - are as guilty as those who in the seceded States marshal armed men - for the contest. - - “Revolutions move onward.” That is true. But call things by their - true names. Admit you are in revolution; admit you are - revolutionists; admit that you do not desire to restore the old - order; admit that you do not fight to restore the Union. Take the - responsibility of that position. Avow that you exercise the powers - of the Government because you control them; that you are not bound - by the Constitution, but by your own sense of right. Avow that - resistance to your schemes is not treason, but war. Dissolve the - spell which you have woven around the hearts of our people by the - cunning use of the words conservatism, patriotism, Union. And we - will cease all criminations, we will hush all reproaches for oaths - violated, pledges falsified, faith betrayed. We will meet you on - your own ground, we will fight you with your weapons, and by the - issue of that contest, whether of argument or of arms, we will - abide. - - Am I to be told that I misrepresent the Republican party? The - gentleman who has just taken his seat [Mr. Boutwell], an able and - honored member of that party, has said in your hearing, “If I could - direct the force of public sentiment and the policy of this - Government, South Carolina as a State and with a name should never - reappear in this Union. Georgia deserves a like fate. Florida does - not deserve a name in this Union.” - - The gentleman from Maryland felt that this charge could be - truthfully made. He sought to answer it in advance. He denied that - the provisions of the bill contravened any clause of the - Constitution. Where is the authority for it? Where is the authority - to declare State governments overthrown? Where is the authority to - reconstruct them? Where is the authority to appoint a governor; to - call a convention to remodel their constitutions; to fix the - qualifications of its members; to prescribe the conditions of their - organic law; and until a _new_ constitution shall be made, to - administer by Federal officers such parts of the old constitution - and laws as the governor, or the President, or Congress may - select?... - -At this point he quoted Madison on the guaranty clause, a subject -elaborated in the Senate by Carlile, of Virginia. Mr. Pendleton observed -that if slavery, which, with one possible exception, existed in all the -States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, was not -inconsistent with a republican form of government then it was not -inconsistent with it in 1864. - - And yet the advocates of this bill [continued Mr. Pendleton] propose - to deprive the States of power over the question of slavery, power - over their own indebtedness, power to regulate the elective - franchise, and the right to hold office, under the pretense that - they thereby execute the provision that the United States must - guaranty a republican form of government to the States. - - The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Boutwell] has shown how he - would execute it. South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida should never - again appear as State[s] or in name in this Confederation. Is their - exclusion a guarantee to them of a republican government? - - ... If Congress may insist upon the three fundamental conditions - prescribed in this bill, ... by a parity of reasoning it ought to - insist upon their incorporation into the constitution of the States - remaining steadfast by the Union. If they are essential to - republicanism in the one class of States they are equally so in all. - - * * * * * - - ... Gentlemen must not palter in a double sense. These acts of - secession are either valid or they are invalid. If they are valid, - they separated the State from the Union. If they are invalid, they - are void; they have no effect; the State officers who act upon them - are rebels to the Federal Government; the States are not destroyed; - their constitutions are not abrogated; their officers are committing - illegal acts, for which they are liable to punishment; the States - have never left the Union, but so soon as their officers shall - perform their duties or other officers shall assume their places, - will again perform the duties imposed and enjoy the privileges - conferred by the Federal compact, and this not by virtue of a new - ratification of the Constitution, nor a new admission by the Federal - Government, but by virtue of the original ratification, and the - constant, uninterrupted maintenance of position in the Federal Union - since that date. - - Acts of secession are not invalid to destroy the Union, and valid to - destroy the State governments and the political privileges of their - citizens. We have heard much of the two-fold relation which citizens - of the seceded States may hold to the Federal Government—that they - may be at once belligerents and rebellious citizens. I believe there - are some judicial decisions to that effect. Sir, it is impossible. - The Federal Government may possibly have the right to elect in which - relation it will deal with them; it cannot deal with them at one and - the same time in inconsistent relations. Belligerents being captured - are entitled to be treated as prisoners of war; rebellious citizens - are liable to be hanged. The private property of belligerents, - according to the rules of modern war, shall not be taken without - compensation; the property of rebellious citizens is liable to - confiscation. Belligerents are not amenable to the local criminal - law, nor to the jurisdiction of courts which administer it; - rebellious citizens are, and the officers are bound to enforce the - law, and to exact the penalty of its infraction. The seceded States - are either in the Union or out of it. If in the Union, their - constitutions are untouched, their State governments are maintained; - their citizens are entitled to all political rights, except so far - as they may be deprived of them by the criminal law which they may - have infracted. This seems incomprehensible to the gentleman from - Maryland. In his view the whole State government centers in the men - who administer it; so that when they administer it unwisely, or put - it in antagonism to the Federal Government, the State government is - dissolved, the State constitution is abrogated, and the State is - left, in fact and in form, _de jure_ and _de facto_, in anarchy, - except so far as the Federal Government may rightfully intervene. - This seems to be substantially the view of the gentleman from - Massachusetts [Mr. Boutwell]. He enforces the same position, but he - does not use the same language. - - ... If by a plague or other visitation of God every officer of a - State government should at the same moment die, so that not a single - person clothed with official power should remain, would the State - government be destroyed? Not at all. For the moment it would not be - administered, but as soon as officers were elected and assumed their - respective duties it would be instantly in full force and vigor. - - If these States are out of the Union their State governments are - still in force unless otherwise changed. And their citizens are to - the Federal Government as foreigners, and it has in relation to them - the same rights, and none other, as it had in relation to British - subjects in the war of 1812, or to the Mexicans in 1846. Whatever - may be the true relation of the seceded States, the Federal - Government derives no power in relation to them or their citizens - from the provision of the Constitution now under consideration, but - in the one case derives all its power from the duty of enforcing the - “Supreme law of the land;” and in the other from the power “to - declare war.” - - * * * * * - - The gentleman [Mr. Davis] states his case too strongly. The duty - imposed on Congress is doubtless important, but Congress has no - right to use a means of performing it forbidden by the Constitution, - no matter how necessary or proper it might be thought to be. But, - sir, this doctrine is monstrous. It has no foundation in the - Constitution. It subjects all the States to the will of Congress; it - places their institutions at the feet of Congress. It creates in - Congress an absolute unqualified despotism. It asserts the power of - Congress in changing the State governments to be “plenary, supreme - and unlimited”—“subject only to revision by the people of the whole - United States.” The rights of the people of the State are nothing, - their will is nothing. Congress first decides, the people of the - whole Union revise. My own State of Ohio is liable at any moment to - be called in question for her constitution. She does not permit - negroes to vote.... From that decision of the Congress there is no - appeal to the people of Ohio, but only to the people of - Massachusetts, and New York, and Wisconsin, at the election of - Representatives; and if a majority cannot be elected to reverse the - decision, the people of Ohio must submit. Woe be to the day when - that doctrine shall be established, for from its centralized - despotism we will appeal to the sword! - -The rights of the States, he said in conclusion, had reconciled liberty -with empire, the freedom of the individual with increase of the public -domain; by the proposed measure these were all swept instantly away. It -substituted “despotism for self-government; despotism the more severe -because vested in a numerous Congress elected by a people who may not -feel the exercise of its power.... It maintains integrity of territory -but destroys the rights of the citizen.” Finally he declared that he -preferred separation to the unity which the bill would create.[330] - -Debate was concluded by Henry Winter Davis, who rose for the purpose of -perfecting the pending measure by moving as a substitute a bill -essentially the same as that under consideration in the House; from that -plan, however, it differed in two not unimportant particulars. First, it -excluded what his friend Mr. Cox had objected to, the rule of one tenth, -and required a majority to concur in forming a government. The other -softened the operation of the clause excluding officers of the State and -Confederate government, by saving merely ministerial officers and the -inferior military officers; so that the exclusion merely affected -persons of dangerous political influence. By an arrangement with -Thaddeus Stevens, instead of having a direct vote on his substitute, a -portion of it was proposed as a preamble to this bill, which, of course, -would be voted on separately and take whatever fate the House might -assign to it. With these observations Mr. Davis said, “I offer this as a -substitute, and move the previous question upon it.” The substitute was -agreed to, and the amendment to the preamble adopted, the preamble -itself being rejected. By 73 yeas to 59 nays, the bill passed the House, -May 4, 1864.[331] - -This important measure authorized the President, by and with the advice -and consent of the Senate, to appoint for each of the States declared in -rebellion a provisional governor, with pay and emoluments not to exceed -that of a brigadier-general of volunteers, and who was to be charged -with the civil administration of such State until a government was -recognized as existing therein. As soon as military resistance to -Federal authority had been suppressed, and the people had sufficiently -returned to their obedience to the Constitution and the laws, it was -made the duty of the governor to direct the United States marshal to -enroll all white male citizens of the United States, resident in the -State, in their respective counties; and wherever a majority of them -took the oath of allegiance, the loyal people of the States were, by -proclamation, to be invited by the governor to elect delegates to a -convention to act upon the reëstablishment of a State government, the -proclamation to prescribe the details of the election. Qualified -electors in the army could vote at the headquarters of their respective -commands. No person who had held or exercised any civil, military, State -or Confederate office under the rebel occupation, and who had -voluntarily borne arms against the United States, could either vote or -be eligible as a delegate. The convention was required to insert in the -constitution the following provisions: - - First. No person who has held or exercised any office, civil or - military, except offices merely ministerial and military offices - below colonel, State or Confederate, under the usurping power, shall - vote for or be a member of the Legislature, or Governor. - - Second. Involuntary servitude is forever prohibited, and the freedom - of all persons is guaranteed in said State. - - Third. No debt, State or Confederate, created by or under the - sanction of the usurping power, shall be recognized or paid by the - State. - -Upon the adoption of such a constitution by the convention and its -ratification by the voters of the State the provisional governor should -so certify to the President, who, after obtaining the assent of -Congress, was empowered by proclamation to recognize the government so -established, and none other, as the constitutional government of the -State; from the date of such recognition, and not before, Senators and -Representatives as well as electors for President and Vice-President -could be legally chosen in such State. Until reorganization the -provisional governor was to enforce the laws of the Union, and of the -State before rebellion. - -The remaining provisions were as follows: - -Section 12 declared that “all persons held to involuntary servitude or -labor in the States referred to, are emancipated and discharged -therefrom, and they and their posterity are declared to be forever free. -And if any such persons or their posterity shall be restrained of -liberty, under pretense of any claim to such service or labor, the -courts of the United States shall, on _habeas corpus_, discharge them.” - -Section 13 provided that “if any person declared free by this or any law -of the United States, or any proclamation of the President, be -restrained of liberty; with intent to be held in or reduced to -involuntary servitude or labor, the person convicted before a court of -competent jurisdiction of such act shall be punished by a fine of not -less than $1,500, and be imprisoned not less than five nor more than -twenty years.” - -By section 14 it was declared that “every person who shall hereafter -hold or exercise any office, civil or military, except offices merely -ministerial, and military offices below the grade of colonel, in the -rebel service, State or Confederate, is declared not to be a citizen of -the United States.”[332] - -On the following day the proposed measure came up in the Senate, was -read twice by its title and referred to the Committee on Territories. On -May 27 Mr. Wade reported the bill with amendments, and on June 30 -succeeding moved to postpone all prior orders and proceed to its -consideration. His motion, however, was not agreed to, and it was not -till July 1, when the session was drawing rapidly to a close, that its -discussion began. To save time the amendments proposed by the committee -were voted down. Senator Brown, of Missouri, believed that the subject -of reconstruction could and should be postponed to a later day, and -offered for the bill, by way of amendment, a substitute which declared -incapable of voting “for electors of President or Vice-President of the -United States, or of electing Senators or Representatives in Congress,” -until the rebellion was abandoned, the inhabitants of all those States -hitherto proclaimed in a state of insurrection. That question he -regarded as the necessity of the hour.[333] - -Mr. Wade hoped this amendment would not prevail; there was nothing, he -asserted, in the argument that sufficient time did not remain for its -careful consideration, because it was early and thoroughly debated in -the House and had been fully discussed by the Senate Committee. It was -five months on their desks and the attention of Senators had often been -called to it. On Republicans at least its consideration had frequently -been urged by himself. More than ordinary care had been taken in this -matter, and if the bill was not then understood it never would be. - -The question would arise in the ensuing campaign. Senators, he said, had -been refused admission to Congress, and the principles on which they -would be received should be declared. They were announced in the bill -which had passed the House. It protected the Government against -Confederate sympathizers and guarded the interests of loyal Southerners -during the period of transition. - -The status of the seceded States was a question upon which men differed -widely. It was a question to be ascertained and declared by Congress, -“for the Executive ought not to be permitted to handle this great -question to his own liking. It does not belong, under the Constitution, -to the President to prescribe the rule, and it is a base abandonment of -our own powers and our own duties to cast this great principle upon the -decision of the executive branch of the Government.... I know very well -that the President from the best motives undertook to fix a rule upon -which he would admit these States back into the Union. It was not upon -any principle of republicanism; it would not have guarantied to the -States a republican form of government, because he prescribed the rule -to be that when one tenth of the population would take a certain oath -and agree to come back into the Union they might come in as States. When -we consider that in the light of American principle, to say the least of -it, it was absurd. The idea that a State shall take upon itself the -great privilege of self-government when there are only one tenth of the -people that can stand by the principle is most anti-republican, -anomalous, and entirely subversive of the great principles that underlie -all our State governments and the General Government. Majorities must -rule, and until majorities be found loyal and trustworthy for State -government, they must be governed by a stronger hand.... - -“... I hold that once a State of this Union, always a State; that you -cannot by wrong and violence displace the rights of anybody or -disorganize the State.” It was marvellous to him how gentlemen could -fancy that States forfeited their rights because more or less of the -people had gone off into rebellion, and he added, “This bill proceeds -upon that idea and discards absolutely the notion that States may lose -their rights and that they may be abrogated and may be reduced to the -condition of Territories. It denies any such thing as that. No sound -principle can be adopted that warrants any such thing.” - -Noticing the imposition of conditions on the admission or on the -readmission of a State, he remarked that this feature of the bill would -probably receive more criticism than any other, and declared, “that the -great Union party of the country are altogether convinced that slavery -mixed up in a Government is so unsafe, so liable to overthrow that it -cannot be admitted as an element in a State government.... Therefore -this bill has taken special pains to say that the new government shall, -in its constitution, proclaim emancipation as a condition upon which it -shall be permitted to come into the Union.” There was a time, he -admitted, when it would have been deemed unconstitutional in Congress to -prescribe any particular principle for a constitution when a State was -seeking to come into the Union. “We have done so, however,” he asserted, -“in every State that we have ever admitted,” and yet perhaps the -question was never entirely settled. “Would it be wise for us,” he -asked, “in admitting States back into this Union to permit them to come -with the very element that carried them out, with the very seeds of -destruction which had destroyed them already? The framers of this bill,” -he continued, “have sedulously shut it out, and made it a condition on -which the seceded States shall come back that it shall be a fundamental -principle of their constitution that slavery is excluded.” - -The amendment of Senator Brown he characterized as a bare negative; it -did not inform the people of the seceded States upon what principle they -were to be again admitted into the Union.[334] - -Mr. Carlile, of Virginia, observed on entering into the discussion that -everything the bill proposed to do in the way of remedying existing -evils would be accomplished by adopting the amendment offered by the -Senator from Missouri. The provisions of the bill were not to be -enforced and were not to have any life until after the suppression of -the rebellion, and, therefore, there could be no pressing necessity for -action at that time, when a large majority of Senators expected in three -or four days to leave Washington for their homes. Senator Wade -interrupted him to point out that there was provided a military governor -whose duties could be performed in any stage of the rebellion, from the -time Federal forces obtained a foothold in any State until it was in the -Union again. The Virginia Senator agreed with Mr. Wade as to the extent -of the President’s power in the matter, and in the belief that once a -State in the Union always a State; but the bill, he said, not only -maintained that State governments were overthrown, but so far as it -could do so, recognized and assumed the right to overthrow the State -governments if that work was not already accomplished. If the President -had not the right to prescribe rules for the return of rebellious -States, where was the constitutional provision which authorized Congress -to do so? The title of the bill was an insult, he declared, to the -understanding of every enlightened man in the nation and the bill itself -one of the most revolutionary that ever was proposed in a deliberative -body claiming to be the representatives of a free people. - -The question mooted in Congress forty years before, he continued, was -insignificant compared to the present. That was a proposition to impose -upon the inhabitants of a Territory seeking admission into the Union a -restriction upon their right of self-government when they became a -State. After one of the most exhaustive and learned debates that ever -graced the Capitol of the nation that assumption for Congress was -abandoned. It was permitted to rest as the settled law of the land that -Congress had no power to impose limitations affecting the right of the -people of a State to regulate their own domestic affairs, even when -sought to be applied to the inhabitants of a Territory seeking admission -to the Union. This continued the settled action of Congress until -reversed at the preceding session by assuming to create an independent -State out of a portion of the Commonwealth which he represented. - -“No State can have a Republican form of government,” he declared, “no -State has a republican government, when that government, no matter what -are its provisions, is prescribed to them by another outside of their -limits. A republican form of government must emanate and emanate alone -from the people that are to be governed. It belongs not to the Congress -of the United States; it belongs not to the thirty-three States of this -Union to prescribe for the smallest State within its folds a -constitution or form of government. If you have a right to impose a -limitation upon this power as to one subject of domestic legislation you -have a right to impose it upon every subject. If you have a right to -make one provision of a constitution for a people you have the right to -make the entire instrument itself.” - -An interruption of his argument by Mr. Wade drew from the Virginia -Senator a query rather embarrassing to the Ohio statesman. “Where,” -asked Carlile, “does the Senator derive the power to appoint a governor -for a State, a State which he acknowledges to be in existence, a State -government that he acknowledges to be in existence, a State government -that he acknowledges it to be his duty to protect and maintain? By what -provision of the Constitution does the Senator derive the authority to -appoint for such a State an executive head?” Mr. Wade replied that when -the Constitution imposed the duty of guaranteeing a republican form of -government it conferred the power to do so, and he in turn inquired, “Is -not that good law?” “No, sir,” answered Carlile, who proceeded: “Now, -Mr. President, I will satisfy the Senator himself, I think; and really -it is not necessary for me to attempt to satisfy him, for he is too good -a lawyer not to know the meaning of the word ‘guaranty.’ What is it? -Does the authority to ‘guaranty to each State in this Union a republican -form of government’ authorize this Union to set up a government, to -create a government, or to make a government? Is the maker of a note the -man who guaranties its payment? There is no man in the Senate who knows -better the definition and legal significance of the word ‘guaranty’ than -the Senator from Ohio, and none, I am sure, is more familiar, too, with -the power that was intended to be conferred by this provision of the -Constitution.” After admitting that he would bring the power of the -Government to bear on a faction who undertook to establish a monarchical -form of government, Mr. Wade put this hypothetical case: “Suppose now -that we have conquered them and the people are still bent on their -monarchy, shall we not guaranty a republican government to them by -putting one over them?” “If the Senator be right,” answered Carlile, -“Mr. Madison, the author of the Constitution, was wrong.” He then quoted -from the forty-third number of the Federalist: - - “To guaranty to every State in the Union a republican form of - government; to protect each of them against invasion; and on - application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the - Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.” - - In a confederacy founded on republican principles and composed of - republican members, the superintending government ought clearly to - possess authority to defend the system against aristocratic or - monarchical innovations. - -“The very case put by Senator Wade,” observed Carlile; “and how it is to -be done is stated:” - - The more intimate the nature of such a Union may be, the greater - interest have the members in the political institutions of each - other; and the greater right to insist that the forms of government - under which the compact was entered into should be _substantially_ - maintained.... It may possibly be asked, what need there could be of - such a precaution, and whether it may not become a pretext for - alterations in the State governments, without the concurrence of the - States themselves. These questions admit of ready answers. If the - interposition of the General Government should not be needed, the - provision for such an event will be a harmless superfluity only in - the Constitution. But who can say what experiments can be produced - by the caprice of particular States, by the ambition of enterprising - leaders, or by the intrigues and influence of foreign powers? To the - second question it may be answered that if the General Government - should interpose by virtue of this constitutional authority, it will - be, of course, bound to pursue the authority. But the authority - extends no further than to a _guaranty_ of a republican form of - government, which supposes a _preëxisting government_ of the form - which is to be guarantied. - -Sustained in his position by Madison’s commentary Carlile resumed: “Now, -sir, is the Senator answered?... It is not claimed or pretended, I -suppose, by the Senator from Ohio, or by any advocate of this bill, that -under any other provision of the Constitution can a pretext be afforded -for the assertion of such a power as this bill proposes to assert.” To -Senator Wilkinson’s inquiry, what would the Government of the United -States do if the people of South Carolina determined that they would not -have a republican form of government in that State, the Virginia Senator -answered: - -“I would have the Government of the United States do nothing that it has -not the power under the Constitution to do, because I believe that the -Government of the United States is a Government of limited powers. I -believe it to be its duty under the grant of power in the Constitution -to guaranty the existence of a preëxisting republican government. That -government existed in South Carolina; the people have not determined, at -least before this war they had not determined, to have any other than a -republican form of government. We had recognized that government as a -republican form of government by the recognition of the State in all its -departments and the admission of all its national representatives. It is -made the duty of the Government of the United States, not of Congress; -and I desire to call the attention of the Senator to that, because it -bears upon his assumption for Congress of power which does not belong to -the Executive. It is not alone the duty of Congress to guaranty a -republican form of government to the people of the several States; the -extent of that guarantee is not limited alone to the means which -Congress may employ; but the words of the Constitution are ‘the United -States shall guaranty.’ Hence every department of the Government is -equally bound; and Congress being the legislative branch of course -participates to a greater extent in the discharge of that duty.” - -After a discussion with Mr. Clark, Carlile proceeded in his argument: -“But, sir, the Senator from Ohio says the Union is to be preserved. So -say I. Upon what principle are these States to come back into the Union? -The people, says the Senator from Ohio, will meet you with that inquiry. -Sir, when was ever such an inquiry suggested to the brain of any loyal -man in this Union? When was such an inquiry ever put? Never until after -a policy different from that which characterized the commencement of -this struggle was entered upon by the party in power. All said the Union -was to be restored; all accepted the struggle as the use of the military -power of the Government in the restoration of the Union. What Union? The -Union of the Constitution. The Union into which new States are to be -admitted. It is not into ‘a Union’ but into ‘this Union’ that the States -are admitted. What Union? The Union of the Constitution, none other; and -he who seeks to preserve the Union can only do it by an observance of -the Constitution and of the constitutional means to restore it, not -reconstruct it. - -“... In this Union, created by this Constitution, of limited and -delegated powers, all prescribed and written in the instrument, you -propose to exercise your legislative power by usurping the rights and -liberties of the people, a power which all the people you represent -could not use or could not exert without the destruction of the Union -which the Constitution formed. There is no power in this Government, -there is no power in the parties to this Government, there is no power -in all the States of this Union to prescribe a constitution for the -little State of Rhode Island. If every other State in the Union, the -adhering as well as the rebellious States, if every man, woman, and -child in them were to meet and prescribe a constitution for the people -of Rhode Island, they would have no power or authority to do so under -the Union; and tell me where the people’s representatives derive the -power to do that which all the people in their collective capacity, save -the small minority which constitutes that State, cannot do?”[335] - -Mr. Carlile emphasized the fact that the bill under consideration was -not a war measure. In a running argument with several Senators he showed -both a ready and comprehensive knowledge of the Constitution and made -some telling points against the bill as well as against the radical -tendencies in Congress. His speech was, perhaps, the very ablest -delivered by any Senator in opposition to the proposed measure. At its -conclusion Mr. Brown’s amendment was agreed to. - -An amendment offered by Charles Sumner to enact the Emancipation -Proclamation into a law was rejected by a vote of 21 to 11. The -Massachusetts statesman did not wish, he said, to see the edict of -freedom “left to float on a Presidential proclamation.”[336] - -The bill concerning States in insurrection against the United States -then passed the Senate by 26 yeas to 3 nays.[337] When the vote was -taken 20 Senators were absent. On the succeeding day, July 2, 1864, a -message announced the disagreement of the House to the Senate amendment -and requested a committee of conference. A subsequent motion of Mr. Wade -that the Senate recede from its amendment and agree to the bill of the -House was carried after some discussion by a vote of 18 to 14, thus -passing the bill on the same day.[338] The names of Doolittle, -Henderson, Ten Eyck and Trumbull voting with the Democrats in opposition -foreshadowed that division in the Republican ranks which afterwards -occurred. - -The history of this famous bill from the moment of its passage by -Congress until the publication a week later of the President’s -proclamation concerning it is best related in the Life of Mr. Lincoln by -his private secretaries, Messrs. Nicolay and Hay. These writers -possessed an unusual opportunity for ascertaining the sentiments of the -President upon nearly every question of public interest. - -“Congress,” says the diary of Mr. Hay, “was to adjourn at noon on the -Fourth of July; the President was in his room at the Capitol signing -bills, which were laid before him as they were brought from the two -Houses. When this important bill was placed before him he laid it aside -and went on with the other work of the moment. Several prominent members -entered in a state of intense anxiety over the fate of the bill. Mr. -Sumner and Mr. Boutwell, while their nervousness was evident, refrained -from any comment. Zachariah Chandler, who was unabashed in any mortal -presence, roundly asked the President if he intended to sign the bill. -The President replied: ‘This bill has been placed before me a few -moments before Congress adjourns. It is a matter of too much importance -to be swallowed in that way.’ ‘If it is vetoed,’ cried Mr. Chandler, ‘it -will damage us fearfully in the Northwest. The important point is that -one prohibiting slavery in the reconstructed States.’ Mr. Lincoln said: -‘That is the point on which I doubt the authority of Congress to act.’ -‘It is no more than you have done yourself,’ said the Senator. The -President answered: ‘I conceive that I may in an emergency do things on -military grounds which cannot be done constitutionally by Congress.’ Mr. -Chandler, expressing his deep chagrin, went out, and the President, -addressing the members of the Cabinet who were seated with him, said: ‘I -do not see how any of us now can deny and contradict what we have always -said, that Congress has no constitutional power over slavery in the -States.’ Mr. Fessenden expressed his entire agreement with this view. ‘I -have even had my doubts,’ he said, ‘as to the constitutional efficacy of -your own decree of emancipation, in those cases where it has not been -carried into effect by the actual advance of the army.’ - -“The President said: ‘This bill and the position of these gentlemen seem -to me, in asserting that the insurrectionary States are no longer in the -Union, to make the fatal admission that States, whenever they please, -may of their own motion dissolve their connection with the Union. Now we -cannot survive that admission, I am convinced. If that be true, I am not -President; these gentlemen are not Congress. I have laboriously -endeavored to avoid that question ever since it first began to be -mooted, and thus to avoid confusion and disturbance in our own councils. -It was to obviate this question that I earnestly favored the movement -for an amendment to the Constitution abolishing slavery, which passed -the Senate and failed in the House. I thought it much better, if it were -possible, to restore the Union without the necessity of a violent -quarrel among its friends as to whether certain States have been in or -out of the Union during the war—a merely metaphysical question, and one -unnecessary to be forced into discussion.’ - -“Although every member of the Cabinet agreed with the President, when, a -few minutes later, he entered his carriage to go home, he foresaw the -importance of the step he had resolved to take and its possibly -disastrous consequences to himself. When some one said to him that the -threats made by the extreme radicals had no foundation, and that people -would not bolt their ticket on a question of metaphysics, he answered: -‘If they choose to make a point upon this, I do not doubt that they can -do harm. They have never been friendly to me. At all events, I must keep -some consciousness of being somewhere near right. I must keep some -standard or principle fixed within myself.’”[339] - -A perusal of the preceding abridgment of debates shows clearly that the -bill was designed by Congress as a measure of reconstruction and -intended by many of its leading advocates as a rebuke of the President. -He was not, however, a statesman whom even the deliberate censure of a -coördinate branch of Government could hurry into an act of rashness; he -had never been precipitate; indeed, the burden of radical criticism was -that Mr. Lincoln was provokingly slow. This was the opinion which -Charles Sumner expressed in confidential correspondence with his English -friends[340] and which Secretary Chase entered in the pages of his -diary.[341] The President was, it is true, the most cautious of men, and -the fact goes far to explain the absence during his eventful -administration of even a single serious blunder; the discovery of a -gross error of judgment seldom or never rewarded the researches of his -ablest critics. Though his modesty was scarcely less than his prudence, -he entertained a just conception of the dignity of his office; long -reflection upon constitutional questions, which made him familiar with -the extent of executive power, taught him likewise to recognize those -limitations which the fundamental law had imposed upon legislative -action. Another characteristic which made him a formidable adversary in -every controversy was a constant purpose to be always, as he expressed -it himself, “somewhere near right.” - -The measure had been so long under consideration that none of its -provisions could have taken him by surprise, and we are justified in -concluding that when the bill was presented for his approval he had -already determined on his course of action. Indeed there is evidence -that some of his supporters in Congress had written to their friends in -Louisiana predicting the very fate that afterward befell the bill. Their -outline of the President’s course admits of no other explanation than -that he had communicated to them his intentions respecting it. The -progress of the measure in the Senate was to be so retarded that the -adjournment of Congress would relieve him of the necessity of exercising -the veto, and that is precisely what happened. In the very last hour of -the session it was submitted for his approval; his disposal of the bill -on that occasion has already been noticed; his approval was withheld and -Congress rose before the expiration of the ten days which would enact -the bill into a law without his signature. Though an interested view had -not been overlooked, he disregarded in discharge of his duty every -personal consequence of the important step which he purposed to take. -His hostility to the measure had long been suspected, but when knowledge -of his failure to approve it had become a certainty the anger of the -more radical members of his party became extreme. They had clearly been -outwitted by the President and many of them, eager for retaliation, -returned to their homes meditating schemes of revenge. - -For the present, at least, anything like adequate discipline of Mr. -Lincoln was not within their power, for the Baltimore convention, which -renominated him for the Presidency, had adjourned nearly a month before. -This at least was secure. His election, though not entirely a foregone -conclusion, was reasonably assured; few of the discomfited members even -imagined the thought of injuring their party to embarrass the President. -It is easy to believe, however, that they intended such criticism of his -policy as would be consistent with party success. But even here he -resolved to dispute with them a field of operations which they believed -entirely their own. The President, it is true, could not, even if so -inclined, justify his conduct in person before the voters of every State -in the Union; he could, however, and did forestall expected criticism -from Congressmen by publishing a proclamation vindicating his “pocket” -veto, thus destroying whatever hope remained to radical Republicans of -diminishing his popularity by ascribing to him base or selfish motives -for opposing the sense of the Legislative department of Government. As -on other critical occasions so on this he found no precedent to guide -him, but with characteristic firmness proceeded deliberately to -establish one. When some of the Congressmen reached their States they -found their constituents already pondering the proclamation of July 8, -1864. Its importance requires that it be quoted in full: - - Whereas, at the late session, Congress passed a bill to “guarantee - to certain States, whose governments have been usurped or - overthrown, a republican form of government,” a copy of which is - hereunto annexed; - - And whereas the said bill was presented to the President of the - United States for his approval less than one hour before the _sine - die_ adjournment of said session, and was not signed by him; - - And whereas the said bill contains, among other things, a plan for - restoring the States in rebellion to their proper practical relation - in the Union, which plan expresses the sense of Congress upon that - subject, and which plan it is now thought fit to lay before the - people for their consideration: - - Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, - do proclaim, declare, and make known, that, while I am (as I was in - December last, when by proclamation I propounded a plan for - restoration) unprepared, by a formal approval of this bill, to be - inflexibly committed to any single plan of restoration; and, while I - am also unprepared to declare that the free-State constitutions and - governments already adopted and installed in Arkansas and Louisiana - shall be set aside and held for naught, thereby repelling and - discouraging the loyal citizens who have set up the same as to - further effort, or to declare a constitutional competency in - Congress to abolish slavery in States, but am at the same time - sincerely hoping and expecting that a constitutional amendment - abolishing slavery throughout the nation may be adopted, - nevertheless I am fully satisfied with the system for restoration - contained in the bill as one very proper plan for the loyal people - of any State choosing to adopt it, and that I am, and at all times - shall be, prepared to give the Executive aid and assistance to such - people, so soon as the military resistance to the United States - shall have been suppressed in any such State, and the people thereof - shall have sufficiently returned to their obedience to the - Constitution and laws of the United States, in which cases Military - Governors will be appointed, with directions to proceed according to - the bill.[342] - -This unexpected publication was very differently received by the various -elements composing the Republican party; a large majority of those -acting with that organization still confided in Mr. Lincoln; by the -radical wing, however, he was sharply censured. Notwithstanding the -necessity for harmony in the approaching campaign two of the boldest -leaders, disregarding every consideration of prudence, arraigned the -President in language which for severity was never surpassed by the -invectives of his ablest political opponents. In the entire experience -of the Republic no Executive had ever assumed to reject those provisions -in a legislative measure which he disliked and adopt those that were -acceptable. This is precisely what Mr. Lincoln did, and the reasons for -his action he declared to the people with a confidence which forcibly -recalls the direction of Andrew Jackson to the editor of his official -organ: “Speak out to the people, sir, and tell them that instead of -supporting me and my policy Congress is engaged in President-making.” -There was, however, this difference: Abraham Lincoln addressed the -people directly and ventured no criticism of their representatives. Like -his more impulsive though not less popular predecessor he was not -deceived in the reliance which he placed in the patriotic instincts of -the multitude, which cared little for nice metaphysical distinctions; by -the masses of the people he was trusted to the end. - -By Henry Winter Davis and Benjamin F. Wade, chief authors of the bill, -its progress had been watched with feverish anxiety; when convinced that -their labor was lost they became greatly agitated and made no effort to -conceal their indignation at the conduct of the President. Their joint -protest, printed in the _New York Tribune_ of August 5, was, perhaps, -the most bitter attack made upon Mr. Lincoln during his Presidential -career. Their fierce manifesto, addressed “To the supporters of the -Government,” declares that the writers had “read without surprise, but -not without indignation, the proclamation of the President of the 8th of -July, 1864. - -“The supporters of the Administration are responsible to the country for -its conduct; and it is their right and duty to check the encroachments -of the Executive on the authority of Congress, and to require it to -confine itself to its proper sphere.” - -The paper then related the history of the bill. Its treatment by the -President, they declared, indicated a persistent though unavowed purpose -to defeat the will of the people by the Executive perversion of the -Constitution. They insinuated that only the lowest personal motives -could have dictated this action. “The President,” they said, “by -preventing this bill from becoming a law, holds the electoral votes of -the rebel States at the dictation of his personal ambition. - -“If those votes turn the balance in his favor, is it to be supposed that -his competitor, defeated by such means, will acquiesce? - -“If the rebel majority assert their supremacy in those States, and send -votes which elect an enemy of the Government, will we not repel his -claims? - -“And is not that civil war for the Presidency inaugurated by the votes -of the rebel States? - -“Seriously impressed with these dangers, Congress, ‘_the proper -constitutional authority_,’ formally declared that there are no State -governments in the rebel States, and provided for their erection at a -proper time; and both the Senate and the House of Representatives -rejected the Senators and Representatives chosen under the authority of -what the President calls the free constitution and government of -Arkansas. - -“The President’s proclamation ‘holds for naught’ this judgment, and -discards the authority of the Supreme Court, and strides headlong toward -the anarchy his proclamation of the 8th of December inaugurated. - -“If electors for President be allowed to be chosen in either of those -States, a sinister light will be cast on the motives which induced the -President to ‘hold for naught’ the will of Congress rather than his -government in Louisiana and Arkansas. - -“The judgment of Congress which the President defies was the exercise of -an authority exclusively vested in Congress by the Constitution, to -determine what is the established government in a State, and in its own -nature and by the highest judicial authority binding on all other -departments of the Government.” - -They ridiculed the President’s expressed hope that the constitutional -amendment abolishing slavery might be adopted. “We curiously inquire,” -continue Messrs. Wade and Davis, “on what his expectation rests, after -the vote of the House of Representatives at the recent session, and in -the face of the political complexion of more than enough of the States -to prevent the possibility of its adoption within any reasonable time; -and why he did not indulge his sincere hopes with so large an -installment of the blessing as his approval of the bill would have -secured? - - * * * * * - -“A more studied outrage on the legislative authority of the people has -never been perpetrated. - -“Congress passed a bill; the President refused to approve it, and then -by proclamation puts as much of it in force as he sees fit, and proposes -to execute those parts by officers unknown to the laws of the United -States, and not subject to the confirmation of the Senate. - -“The bill directed the appointment of provisional governors by and with -the advice and consent of the Senate. - -“The President, after defeating the law, proposes to appoint, without -law and without the advice and consent of the Senate, military governors -for the rebel States! - -“He has already exercised this dictatorial usurpation in Louisiana, and -defeated the bill to prevent its limitation.” - -Scarcely an expression of the proclamation, which was examined in -detail, escaped its share of censure or of ridicule. To suppose that the -President was ignorant of the contents of the bill was out of the -question, for it had been discussed, they asserted, during more than a -month in the House of Representatives, by which it was passed as early -as the 4th of May. It passed the Senate in absolutely the form in which -it came from the House. Indeed, at the President’s request, a draft of a -bill substantially the same in material points, and almost identical in -those features objected to by the proclamation, was submitted for his -consideration during the winter of 1862–1863. - -The “Protest” included also a sharp contrast between the Executive plan -of December 8, 1863, and that embodied in the bill which had passed -Congress. That measure, said Messrs. Wade and Davis, required a majority -of the voters to establish a State government, the proclamation was -satisfied with one tenth; “the bill requires one oath, the proclamation -another; the bill ascertains voters by registering, the proclamation by -guess; the bill exacts adherence to existing territorial limits, the -proclamation admits of others; the bill governs the rebel States _by -law_, equalizing all before it, the proclamation commits them to the -lawless discretion of military governors and provost marshals; the bill -forbids electors for President (in the rebel States), the proclamation -and defeat of the bill threaten us with civil war for the admission or -exclusion of such votes....” - -This arraignment of the President’s course concluded with the language -of admonition, if not indeed of absolute menace: “The President has -greatly presumed on the forbearance which the supporters of his -Administration have so long practised, in view of the arduous conflict -in which we are engaged, and the reckless ferocity of our political -opponents. - -“But he must understand that our support is of a cause, and not of a -man; that the authority of Congress is paramount and must be respected; -that the whole body of the Union men of Congress will not submit to be -impeached by him of rash and unconstitutional legislation; and if he -wishes our support, he must confine himself to his Executive duties,—to -obey and execute, not make the laws,—to suppress by arms armed -rebellion, and leave political reorganization to Congress. - -“If the supporters of the Government fail to insist on this, they become -responsible for the usurpations which they fail to rebuke, and are -justly liable to the indignation of the people whose rights and -security, committed to their keeping, they sacrifice. - -“Let them consider the remedy for these usurpations, and, having found -it, fearlessly execute it.”[343] - -The authors of this remarkable paper were eminent in the councils of -their party and stood high in the estimation of Union men everywhere. -Senator Wade was distinguished no less for his physical than for his -moral courage—qualities impaired somewhat, it is true, by a temper -fierce and vindictive. Henry Winter Davis, whose zeal for civil liberty -will constitute his best claim to the gratitude of posterity, possessed -literary gifts scarcely surpassed by any statesman then in public life. -Though treated with extreme fairness, not to say generosity, by the -President, he pursued toward the Administration a course of consistent -hostility. This opposition, which even Mr. Lincoln’s tact could never -disarm, has been ascribed to disappointment at his failure to obtain a -place in the Cabinet. While the selection of Montgomery Blair from his -own State of Maryland may have been a cause of estrangement, a sense of -what Mr. Davis regarded as public duty contributed, doubtless, to -intensify this feeling, which led him ultimately to think the President -scarcely entitled to courteous treatment. With the Ohio Senator the -pitiless maxim, _vae victis_, had an undoubted influence. Both were -gentlemen of wide experience and acknowledged ability, and yet their -vigorous and fearless arraignment of the President revealed an -astonishing lack of political sagacity. They inquired, for example, on -what foundation he rested his expectation of an adoption of the -constitutional amendment abolishing slavery. The incorporation, soon -after, of such a provision in the fundamental law shows their want of -insight into the tendencies of the times. The fire of the prophet, -indeed, was present in the protest; his inspiration was altogether -wanting. Their absurd assertion that the electoral votes of Louisiana, -Arkansas and Tennessee were the prime consideration with the President -must be attributed to the passion rather than to the reason of his -critics, for few men of that generation were more familiar with the -Constitution in all its relations. Better than most of their readers -they knew that the duty of counting such votes was entrusted not to a -possibly interested Executive, but to a joint convention of both Houses. -If the Maryland member believed the President had committed the -misdemeanors charged and insinuated it was his duty to bring before the -House the question of impeachment. Far less than was expressed in the -protest would have been ground for investigation. If tenderness to -Lincoln, a weakness of which Mr. Davis at least was never suspected, or -a concern for party welfare prevented such a step, then he was himself -guilty of a gross neglect of duty. Doubtless this consideration, -together with the want of moderation shown in the manifesto, subjected -its authors to a suspicion of insincerity. Indeed, one does not read a -dozen lines of their arraignment without discovering the chief if not -the sole cause of its publication. “The President,” they say, “did not -sign the bill ‘to guarantee to certain States whose governments have -been usurped, a republican form of government’—passed by the supporters -of his Administration in both Houses of Congress after mature -deliberation.” In brief, the political departments of Government had -entered upon a struggle for power; Congress had been defeated, and its -discomfited leaders sought to relieve their feelings by railing at the -President. - -Except that it probably defeated the renomination of Mr. Davis for -Congress, their protest was followed by no political result of -moment.[344] In it the mass of Republicans perceived only the seeds of -dissension within their ranks. In this view it was a source of delight -to Democrats, though they felt little sympathy with either the defeated -bill or the purposes of its chief authors. - ------ - -Footnote 309: - - See p. 23, _ante_. - -Footnote 310: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 33. - -Footnote 311: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 34. - -Footnote 312: - - Appendix, Part IV., Globe, 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 82–85; also - Speeches and Addresses of Henry Winter Davis. New York: Harper & - Brothers, 1867, pp. 368–383. - -Footnote 313: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1970–1972. - -Footnote 314: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1974–1981. - -Footnote 315: - - Ibid., pp. 1981–1983. - -Footnote 316: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2002–2006. - -Footnote 317: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 2008. - -Footnote 318: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2011–2014. - -Footnote 319: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 2038. - -Footnote 320: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2039–2041. - -Footnote 321: - - Ibid., p. 2041. - -Footnote 322: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2041–2042. - -Footnote 323: - - Ibid., p. 2043. - -Footnote 324: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 2071. - -Footnote 325: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 2073. - -Footnote 326: - - Ibid., p. 2074. - -Footnote 327: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess 38th Cong., p. 2078. - -Footnote 328: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2095–2102. - -Footnote 329: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2102–2105. - -Footnote 330: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 2105–2107. - -Footnote 331: - - Globe, Part III., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 2108. - -Footnote 332: - - Globe, Part IV., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 3448–3449. - -Footnote 333: - - Ibid., p. 3449. - -Footnote 334: - - Globe, Part IV., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp 3448–3450. - -Footnote 335: - - Globe, Part IV., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 3451–3453. - -Footnote 336: - - Ibid., p. 3460. - -Footnote 337: - - Globe, Part IV., 1 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 3461. - -Footnote 338: - - Ibid., p. 3491. - -Footnote 339: - - Diary of John Hay, quoted in Abraham Lincoln, A History, Vol. IX. pp. - 120–122. - -Footnote 340: - - Pierce’s Memoir of Sumner, Vol. IV. pp. 57, 60, 83, 84, 106, 108, 130, - etc. - -Footnote 341: - - Shuckers’ Life of Chase, pp. 440n, 442, 453, 495. - -Footnote 342: - - Letters and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 545; - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 318–319. - -Footnote 343: - - Ann. Cycl., 1864, pp. 307–310n. - -Footnote 344: - - Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 44. - - - - - VIII - AN ATTEMPT TO COMPROMISE - - -When Congress met in December, 1864, Mr. Lincoln, who received the -electoral votes of twenty-two of the twenty-five States participating in -the contest, had again been chosen President. In the struggle for power -he had refrained with his usual prudence from improving his advantage -over the Legislative department. The annual message omitted all -reference to the controversy occasioned by his failure to sign, and his -proclamation concerning, the bill of Messrs. Wade and Davis; the -question of reconstruction was noticed in only the most casual manner. A -statement of the satisfactory condition of foreign relations introduced -the Executive communication; the subject of finance received the -consideration that its importance required. The vast proportions and the -efficient state of the navy were mentioned as matter of congratulation. -General Sherman’s projected march of three hundred miles through hostile -regions was characterized as the most remarkable feature in the military -operations of the year. This with other evidences of approaching -disruption in the Confederacy led logically to a summary of what had -been accomplished toward reorganization in those States already wrested -from insurgent armies. On this subject the message observed: “Important -movements have also occurred during the year to the effect of molding -society for durability in the Union. Although short of complete success, -it is much in the right direction that twelve thousand citizens in each -of the States of Arkansas and Louisiana have organized loyal State -governments, with free constitutions, and are earnestly struggling to -maintain and administer them.”[345] Movements in the same direction, he -said, more extensive though less definite, were in progress elsewhere -and should not be overlooked. No plan of reconstruction was proposed, or -even alluded to in the message. - -Among questions beyond Executive authority to adjust was specified the -admission of members to Congress. In disclaiming power over this subject -he anticipated the criticism of those Senators and Representatives who -later in the session ascribed to him a design to usurp important -functions of the Legislative branch of Government. - -From its concluding paragraphs we are enabled to collect the sentiments -of the President relative to his offer, a year before, of a general -pardon to designated classes upon specified terms. In this connection he -said: “But the time may come—probably will come—when public duty shall -demand that it [the door open to repentant rebels] be closed; and that, -in lieu, more rigorous measures than heretofore shall be adopted.” This -seems to establish beyond question the fact that Mr. Lincoln feared some -measures more stringent than he had been hitherto pursuing might be -rendered necessary by the failure of a policy of clemency to recall any -large number of insurgents to their obedience to the Constitution and -the laws. - -He ventured to recommend a reconsideration of the proposed -constitutional amendment abolishing slavery throughout the United -States, which at the preceding session had passed the Senate, but failed -to receive in the House the requisite two thirds vote. Though the -present, he reminded them, was the same Congress and composed of nearly -the same members, their judgments were, no doubt, influenced by an -intervening election, which, though it imposed on them no obligation to -change their views, made it reasonably certain that if they did not -submit the amendment to the States the succeeding Congress would. He -inquired, since its passage was merely a question of time, whether they -would not agree that the sooner the better? The voice of the people, he -added, had for the first time been heard on that question.[346] - -As the President believed, the House had been so far converted to his -views that a joint resolution adopting the amendment was passed early in -the session by a vote of 119 to 56.[347] - -When Congress assembled the public was occupied chiefly in watching the -progress of naval and military operations. The sinking of the _Alabama_ -and the capture of the _Florida_ practically ended Confederate -privateering, for any expectations based upon the escape of the -_Albemarle_ were frustrated by the enterprise and daring of Lieutenant -Cushing. One army had been destroyed by Sheridan, another crippled by -Thomas. Tidings of telling blows inflicted by General Sherman gave -something like assurance of his safety. Though not without heavy loss, -Grant had forced Lee within the defences of Richmond and Petersburg. -Some of the lesser Union advantages had, it is true, been offset by -Southern victories; signs of disintegration within the Confederacy, -however, were multiplying, and this condition forced upon Congress the -inevitable question of reconstruction. - -By unanimous consent of the House Thaddeus Stevens, on December 8, -offered resolutions distributing the President’s message. To the -Committee on the Rebellious States was referred so much of it as was -alleged to relate “to the duty of the United States to guaranty a -republican form of government to the States in which the governments -recognized by the United States have been abrogated or overthrown.”[348] - -Nothing whatever in the message or the accompanying documents related to -any such duty on the part of the United States, and the resolution -assumed such a recommendation, no doubt, for the purpose of bringing the -subject before Congress. One week later, Mr. Ashley, of Ohio, reported a -bill, on the subject of Stevens’s resolution, which was read twice, -ordered to be printed and returned to the Committee. On January 12 -succeeding Representative Eliot, of Massachusetts, gave notice of his -intention to offer at the proper time an amendment to the bill in charge -of Mr. Ashley. No objection having been made, it was ordered to be -printed. This was, in fact, a substitute for the bill reported by the -Ohio member, and provided “that no State engaged in rebellion against -the Government of the United States shall be allowed to resume its -political relations with the Government of the United States until by -the action of the loyal citizens within the limits of the same a State -constitution shall be ordained and established, republican in form, -forever prohibiting involuntary servitude within the State, and -guarantying to all persons freedom and equality of rights before the -law.” Its second section provided “that the State of Louisiana shall be -permitted to renew its political relations with the Government of the -United States under the constitution adopted by the convention assembled -at New Orleans on the 6th of April, 1864.”[349] - -That some of the more influential among the radical members desired to -avoid, if possible, a controversy with the President may be fairly -inferred from a letter of Charles Sumner, written December 27, 1864, to -Doctor Lieber. Among other things the Senator says: “I have presented to -the President the duty of harmony between Congress and the Executive. He -is agreed. It is proposed to admit Louisiana (which ought not to be -done), and at the same time pass the reconstruction bill for all the -other States, giving the electoral franchise to ‘all citizens’ without -distinction of color. If this arrangement is carried out, it will be an -immense political act.”[350] A communication to John Bright, written a -few days after the above, January 1, 1865, confirms this view. On that -occasion Mr. Sumner said: “The President is exerting every force to -bring Congress to receive Louisiana under the Banks government. I do not -believe Louisiana is strong enough in loyalty and freedom for an -independent State. The evidence on this point seems overwhelming. I have -discussed it with the President, and have tried to impress on him the -necessity of having no break between him and Congress on such questions. -Much as I am against the premature recognition of Louisiana, I will hold -my peace if I can secure a rule for other States, so that we may be -saved from daily anxiety with regard to their condition.”[351] These -passages explain the amendment to the revived bill. Sumner was willing -to remain a neutral spectator of the debates on the recognition of -Louisiana provided the reorganization of the remaining States should be -made on the lines indicated by Congress. - -On January 16, Ashley’s bill was reached in the regular order of -business; by direction of the Committee on the Rebellious States, it was -offered as a substitute for the original measure, from which it differed -in one very important particular. It expressly recognized the loyal -governments of both Louisiana and Arkansas. By unanimous consent the -proposed enactment, considered as an original bill, was offered for the -plan submitted by Henry Winter Davis at the preceding session. - -Representative William D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, would amend the -clause providing for the enrollment of “all the white male citizens of -the United States” by inserting the words “and all other male citizens -of the United States who may be able to read the Constitution thereof.” -Mr. Eliot then introduced the amendment of which he had previously given -notice. By Representative Arnold another amendment was offered to that -of Eliot. - -Judge Kelley opened the debate by declaring that indemnity for the past -the victors in the war could not hope to obtain; they could, however, -demand security for the future. In a very long speech he discussed the -status of the negro in the early days of the Republic; this portion of -his address was concluded with the remark that his amendment did not -contemplate that the entire mass of people of African descent, degraded -and brutalized by laws and customs, be immediately clothed with all the -rights of citizenship, but only those so far fitted by education for its -judicious exercise as were able to read the Constitution and the laws of -the United States. This, indeed, he admitted, was only an entering wedge -and was to be regarded as an aid to their improvement; when sufficiently -advanced they were to be endowed with every right necessary to their -protection. A strong plea was made to confer the suffrage on the colored -man; otherwise, asked the Pennsylvania member, how will it be possible -to prevent his subjugation? He would not rely on men’s abstract sense of -justice, for that had not prevented outrages in the past. Justice should -be embodied in laws and constitutions while it was in the power of -Congress to do so. That body was to determine who should select -delegates to the conventions that were to frame governments for the -insurgent States. The Union minorities in the South required the -political support of every loyal man in their communities. It was the -power, he reminded Representatives, not the spirit of the rebellion that -Federal armies were overthrowing. In conclusion he declared himself in -favor of conferring the suffrage on “every man who fights or pays,” a -doctrine which he ascribed to Jefferson, in whose party he said he had -been trained.[352] - -Mr. Eliot, who spoke on January 17, regretted that he had not been able -to support the amended bill reported from the select committee. Partly -because of the interest, he said, which his friend Henry Winter Davis -took in the subject he came to its consideration prepossessed in its -favor. The provisions of the measure passed at the preceding session, -however, were not then discussed. There were strong reasons for action -at that time which no longer existed to the same extent. There was time -enough on the present occasion, January, 1865, to make it more perfect -and more practicable than the plan offered by the committee. - -Entering upon an examination of the bill he declared that its terms were -peremptory; eleven States were in rebellion, and by the first section -the President was called upon to appoint for each of them a provisional -governor. Such appointments were to be made when the measure became a -law. Except in Louisiana, Arkansas and Tennessee these appointments -would be not only useless but a needless source of expense, and though -section _fifteen_ recognized the governments established in the two -former, the machinery of the bill would be applied to all the States in -rebellion. - -It imposed upon the several governors proposed to be appointed executive -duties which they could not assume until the power of the United States -had vindicated itself within those States; there were other duties which -they should not be required to perform. They were to see that the laws -which were in force in that section in 1860 should be faithfully -executed, with no knowledge on the part of the House of the import of -those laws. Why should Congress assume responsibility for enforcing the -black code? Why demand the enforcement, he asked, of minute police -regulations in States where complexion appointed or reduced punishment? -Other laws were specified, such as those punishing the circulation of -books or writings advocating human rights, laws requiring the removal -from those States of free persons of color, prohibiting them from -engaging in business, and punishing by the lash upon suspicion of false -testimony and before conviction. There was a law, he said, in one of -those States requiring the imprisonment of free colored sailors in her -ports.[353] These provisions and many others of the same tenor were -contained in the statute books of those States in 1860 and had been -enforced. The penalty differed according to color; offences when -committed by a white man were punished in one way, and when committed by -colored men in another way. The provisional governor was charged with -the faithful execution of such laws. - -The provision for the assessment and collection of taxes he -characterized as a remarkable proposition; they were to be imposed -without representation, without any persons at the national capital to -enlighten Congress on the subject; they were to be laid without the -knowledge of the parties concerned or the parties to be affected. - -The sixth section, he continued, provided that every person who should -thereafter hold certain offices in the Confederacy was “declared not to -be a citizen of the United States.” That, Mr. Eliot contended, was -applying the punishment before the offence had been committed. If -Congress declared that a man should for a certain offence be deprived of -citizenship, could he, then, be indicted for treason subsequently -committed? - -The question of electing delegates to constitutional conventions -presented a practical difficulty. Colored soldiers and sailors in the -service were made voters by the bill; but they were not enrolled, they -were not registered or credited to any county or parish; they were -aggregated. They had no legal local habitation. They may have belonged -to men owning plantations in several districts. The bill did not -designate. With the white soldier the case was different, for he was -known to belong to a certain district. If colored men entitled, because -of military or naval service, to participate in the choice of delegates -should be out of the service before the election occurred, and others -should have taken their places, which class could vote, those in the -service of the Government when the election for delegates took place, or -those serving when the bill passed Congress? - -Whether the difficulties pointed out were inseparable from any bill on -the subject, he would not undertake to say. But in his judgment it would -be unsafe for Congress to permit a measure containing such provisions to -become a law. “Why,” he asked, “is it not more wise to take the States -as they shall present themselves for admission?” Arkansas had acted in -one way, Louisiana in another, and Tennessee was proceeding in still a -different manner. - -Notwithstanding his objections to some features of the Louisiana -constitution, he favored her recognition. From information derived from -the highest sources, he had no doubt that her Legislature would supply -such deficiencies. There were influences bearing on that body which he -believed could not be resisted. - -Thaddeus Stevens inquired, “If Louisiana and those other States are in -the Union, by what authority do we legislate for their internal police?” -This provoked laughter on the Democratic side of the House. “If they are -in the Union,” answered Mr. Eliot, “just as Pennsylvania is, we ought -not to; but the difficulty is that they are not in the Union in that -sense, to that extent, thus fully. They are not out of the Union -territorially, and yet rebellion has overthrown their governments for a -time, and it is needful that the Congress of the United States should -intervene and should legislate.” To this the Pennsylvania leader further -observed, “I understand the gentleman to say that they are partly in the -Union, and partly out. About how much are they in the Union and about -how much out?” This keen thrust was greeted by more laughter from the -Democratic members.[354] - -On his motion to postpone further consideration for two weeks Mr. Wilson -demanded the previous question. Henry Winter Davis appealed to him to -withdraw the motion. This Mr. Wilson declined to do, upon which the -Maryland member observed, “a vote to postpone is equivalent to a vote to -kill the bill.” By 103 yeas to 34 nays, however, further debate was -postponed till the 1st of February succeeding.[355] - -Though Representative Washburne, of Illinois, moved on February 7 a -further postponement of two weeks, the subject was before the House -again on the following day, when it went over informally. Debate was not -resumed till the 20th, when Mr. Dawes, of Massachusetts, took the floor. - -The Thirty-eighth Congress, he said, was in the last days of its last -session; a bill containing the main features of the measure under -consideration, though it passed both Houses, failed at the preceding -session to become a law; this circumstance led him to make a careful -examination of the subject. The proposed enactment was not designed to -invigorate the army, the navy or the Executive; it was intended rather -to follow the army. It was intended to be applied to the condition in -which the army left the State. “it is an attempt,” he said, “to gather -up the ‘_disjecta membra_’ of those States, the broken and torn -fragments of those communities, and out of the chaos, as well as the -ruins and _debris_ that are left in the march of those armies, to create -a State capable of discharging the functions, exercising the authority, -and invoking the recognition of this Government, and of the people under -which it lives.... - -“... The bill proceeds upon the supposition not only that there are -States still existing, but that their old constitutions and laws are -still in full force and operation”; for it imposed upon the provisional -governor the faithful execution of those laws in force when rebellion -overthrew their State governments, with the single exception of the -provision touching the enforcement of laws against slavery and the mode -of trial and punishment of colored people. Two remarkable features of -the bill, he asserted, were those empowering the Executive in -Washington, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint -governors in every one of those States; then, no matter what provisions -for their election existed in the State law, the President was -authorized to appoint just as many and just as few officers as he -pleased. It might be a judge of the highest court of judicature in the -State; or it might be the humblest road-master; it might be any one or -all of the countless corps between them. There was no provision in the -bill that they should be even residents of the State. “An army of -officers,” he continued, “in one paragraph of four lines, is here -created, subject to the sole authority and control of the President of -the United States.” In a Confederate report Mr. Dawes noticed that there -were 13,000 of them in a single State. - -“What,” he asked, “is the effect to be on the people over whom, from -every quarter of this Union, broken-down politicians, men without place, -foot-loose, are to be placed? Sir, it is a reproach to our Government at -this hour that there are, about this capital and in the Northern States, -men who have been appointed to the judgeships of district and other -courts of the rebel States and Territories, drawing quarterly the -salaries of those offices, although they have never been able, from the -hour they received their commissions to the present moment to set foot -in the States over whose courts they have been appointed. They could not -go one rod into the State, positions in whose highest courts they have -held for more than a year, without being hung on the first tree.... But -my friend [Mr. Ashley] has reported a bill here which authorizes an army -of thousands of these officeholders to go into those States, with -commissions from this capital in their pockets, to lord it over the -poor, miserable inhabitants left behind the army there. These rebel -States may be thus converted into asylums for broken-down politicians.” - -In the language of indignation he entered into a criticism of that -policy which proposed to levy on the houseless and homeless wanderers in -the South, even then only saved from starvation by the charity of the -North, precisely the same amount of taxes raised in 1860 when, by -comparison, the people were in a princely state. “Sir,” he declared, -“there is not an army, great as our army is, that has power enough to -accomplish that one single feat provided for in this bill, for the very -plain reason that there is not money enough left in any one of these -States outside the Government with which to pay that round sum for one -single year.... This wise, efficacious policy is resorted to in this -bill to hasten on, I suppose, that other day mentioned in it, when a -majority of these people, molded by this process, won by its benignity -‘shall voluntarily take the oath of allegiance.’” - -He asserted, as Eliot had done, that the committee were calling upon -Congress to sanction all the black codes of those States, save only that -part which held men in bondage, and that was allowed to enforce itself. - -The omissions, he asserted, were not less remarkable than the provisions -of the bill. The state of things established by it was of indefinite -duration. There was no provision for the peculiar conditions existing -there. “There is no attempt at any adaptation of these laws to the new -state of things consequent upon the rebellion, and consequent upon our -constitutional action here. Not only is there no provision for the new -wants and necessities of this wasted and wretched people who have been -involved in the rebellion, but for that other people who have now passed -into freedom by our legislation, and by the military consequences of -this rebellion, who are now without food, without subsistence, without -knowledge, and without opportunity to support and maintain themselves; -yes, sir, without homes, literally without where to lay their heads.” -There were 3,000,000 of these people, he added, whose very existence was -ignored by the bill; there was no provision for schools; no provision -for even a poorhouse; no provision to teach them the arts of -civilization, no provision for kindling in them hope, for holding up -before them incentives to industry or securing to them its reward. Under -the operations of the bill they were the objects of free plunder; they -were to go forth to be hunted, despoiled and persecuted: outcasts in the -land. - -By the bill it was left in the discretion of the provisional governor, -he asserted, to terminate the system set over them. He, as well as the -army of officeholders under him, would be interested in prolonging the -period until the people had _sufficiently_ returned to their obedience. -Before the initiatory steps could be taken, even if the provisional -governor were willing, a majority of the people in each State must of -their own choice signify their loyalty by taking the oath of allegiance. -This made the matter dependent not upon the wish of the loyal, but of -the disloyal persons who constituted the majority in those States. - -The plan, he further stated, ignored the principle that the American -people have the right to shape and alter for themselves the rules by -which they are to be governed. If the matter was left in the hands of -the disloyal, the time would be far distant when Union governments would -be instituted in those States. The only wise policy was to establish a -government among the loyal; even though it might be weak and inefficient -at first, it would finally win back those who desired to be reconciled. -The other numerous class, those who deserved to be hanged, were not -provided for in the bill. He was opposed to the provision which would -turn over to insurgents the loyal minorities in those States, and was -not less opposed to prescribing a fixed iron rule by conformity to which -alone out of chaos and anarchy might be made a loyal government. - -Further, the bill proceeded upon the assumption that there was no power -in these people, except what was conferred on them by Federal -legislation, to establish State governments. This he denied, and the -authors of the proposed measure, by offering to recognize the -establishments otherwise organized in Arkansas and Louisiana had -conceded as much. In the people, he said, and in them alone, existed the -authority to form an organic law subject to the constitutional provision -that the government should be republican in form. He favored a -recognition of the Louisiana government not because it was formed under -the guidance of General Banks, but because it was made by the loyal -people of that State, was acquiesced in by them, and because under it -they were building up a loyal government. - -Governors Hahn and Murphy and the officials chosen in Louisiana and -Arkansas who had been exercising their functions for a year would be -dispossessed by foreigners sent amongst them by the President, who was -empowered to do so by the bill; bickerings, heartburnings and discontent -would follow any attempt to enforce this policy. Sooner or later the -people of those States must be allowed to form governments for -themselves, protected by the parental care of the central -authority.[356] - -Fernando Wood declared that he had listened with interest and pleasure -to words of conciliation for the South; little but subjugation, -devastation and annihilation had thus far been heard from the party, the -Administration and the people represented by Mr. Dawes. - -The seceding States, Mr. Wood contended, had republican forms of -government which the treason of individuals did not affect. Nor did -individual crimes destroy the rights of the people to regulate their -domestic institutions. The forms of government were the same as those -that existed in the rebellious States six years before. Even admitting -that they had not such governments in existence among them, the bill did -not provide a _republican_ form of government for those States.[357] - -He was followed in opposition to the proposed enactment by Mr. LeBlond, -of Ohio, who discussed both the status of the rebellious States and -their form of government. His speech on the former question added -nothing of value to what Representative Pendleton had said at the -preceding session, nor did he enter upon so able an examination of the -clause guaranteeing a republican form of government as did Senator -Carlile on that occasion. - -Henry T. Blow, of Missouri, made an appeal for the admission of Arkansas -and Louisiana to prevent destructive military raids into those States as -well as his own. He would support any measure that would restore them -and strengthen their loyal population. However, he did not favor negro -suffrage. His remarks scarcely touched the measure before the -House.[358] - -Joseph K. Edgerton, of Indiana, who followed in a lengthy speech in -opposition, said: - - The forerunner of this measure of legislation, so far as this House - is concerned, may be found in the territorial bill reported by the - gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ashley] from the Committee on Territories - in the Thirty-seventh Congress, in March, 1862. It was aptly termed - at the time by the gentleman’s colleague from the Cincinnati - district of Ohio [Mr. Pendleton] “A bill to dissolve the Union and - abolish the Constitution of the United States.” The bill was - summarily, if not indignantly, rejected by the House without a - second reading. But, sir, men and events have since changed, if the - Constitution of the United States has not changed, and the stone of - revolutionary reconstruction then rejected by the master-builders in - this House bids fair to become the head of the corner. Then the - Constitution was not altogether repudiated as the foundation of our - legislation; now revolutionary opinions and plans override it as a - thing of the past. Not many are there in this Congress, and fewer - there will be in the next, I fear, to do reverence to the - Constitution and obey its commands. - -The President’s proclamation of December 8, 1863, was then noticed, and -his usurpation of authority denounced; the subject of the Louisiana -government was also entered upon and fully discussed. He next referred -to the introduction early in the preceding session of a resolution by -Henry Winter Davis providing for the appointment of a special committee -authorized to report a bill guaranteeing a republican form of government -to the rebellious States. The fate of that bill, President Lincoln’s -proclamation concerning it, and the protest of Wade and Davis were -successively dwelt upon. - -The question between the President and his two Congressional friends, -Wade and Davis, was to Mr. Edgerton’s mind “one between two usurping -powers, the Executive and the Legislative”; but, he continued, “I am -free to say my sympathies were with the legislators and not with the -President. Executive edicts have done more than acts of Congress during -the last four years to sap the foundations and remove the landmarks of -the Constitution.” The majority in Congress, he asserted, by consenting -to recognize the governments of Louisiana and Arkansas, kissed the hand -that smote them. - -He opposed a recognition of the Louisiana government because of its -unconstitutional origin; Arkansas, he said, differed from it in no -material respect. After stating the provisions of the bill he gave the -following summary of its effects: - - 1. To take from the people of the State all power to initiate - proceedings to reorganize their own State government in harmony with - the Constitution of the United States, or even to prescribe the - qualifications of suffrage. The bill ignores the idea that there is - any vital power in the people to restore their State government—not - only taken from them by rebellion but kept from them by Federal - power—.... - - 2. The effect is to exclude from the reorganization the entire white - population of the State who shall have held office or voluntarily - borne arms against the United States, or who shall not take the oath - of July 2, 1862. - - 3. To confine the right of suffrage and power of reorganization to - enrolled men and Federal soldiers taking the oath; and the law - affords no guaranty that even the enrollment shall embrace a - majority of males over twenty-one years of age. The majority - required as a basis of action is so many of enrolled persons taking - the oath as, with the soldiers, shall constitute a majority of the - persons enrolled; that majority, through defect or fraud in - enrollment, may be not even one tenth of the males of the State over - twenty-one years of age. - - 4. The effect is the absolute disfranchisement of eleven States and - their continuance in a state of war until they accept “the - abandonment of slavery,” as dictated to them by the United States, - and until by organic law they declare that all persons shall have - “equality of civil rights before the law” of the State; a - well-seeming phrase of broad import; the precise meaning of which I - do not understand. A woman is a person, a negro is a person, an - alien is a person, and the right of suffrage is a civil right. Does - this high-sounding phrase of the bill mean that women, negroes, and - aliens shall have equal right to vote in a regenerated State with - white male citizens? What does “equality of civil rights before the - law for all persons” mean? - - * * * * * - - In fact and in purpose, then, the bill before the House is one to - abolish slavery in the United States, and to enfranchise and elevate - negroes, and to disfranchise and degrade white men; a bill to change - the social and industrial systems and internal policy of eleven - States; a bill to take from those States their inherent reserved - constitutional right to regulate in their own way their internal - policy, not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. - It is a bill to punish treason without trial or conviction; a bill - to confiscate private property without adequate compensation; in - short, a bill to reconstruct States and make State constitutions, - when in truth no States or their constitutions have been destroyed, - or need reconstruction, unless by the voluntary action of their own - people. - - * * * * * - - If this is a revolutionary Congress, you have a revolutionary power - to pass this bill; but if it be, as I am bound by my oath of office - to believe and assert, a Congress sitting under the Constitution of - the United States, and having no powers outside of or unknown to it, - then you cannot constitutionally pass this bill. - -He stated further that the bill “embodies a spirit and purpose toward -the Southern people which, if impolitic and vindictive one year ago, -when the bill first came before the House, and when our enemy was far -stronger and more defiant than now, is still more impolitic and -vindictive at this time, when the minds of all good men are searching -diligently for ways of reconciliation and peace.” - -In conclusion he declared: “The Congress of the United States, the -legislative power of the Union, and the Constitution, is asked by this -bill to be the minister and executioner of the great revenge of section -upon section, States North upon States South. For one, sir, I wash my -hands of the deed.”[359] - -The passages quoted convey no adequate idea of the able and -comprehensive character of Mr. Edgerton’s speech. It was concerned not -only with the subject under discussion, but extended to a rather -searching examination of Republican professions in 1861 and the -revolutionary practices of a later time. It was marked throughout by -perfect temper, but was not on that account less effective. Any -extension of time, however, even twenty minutes, was denied him by the -majority. - -At this point, February 21, Ashley withdrew a motion he had previously -made to recommit the bill, and by authority of his committee withdrew -the measure which was the original text and, in lieu thereof, introduced -another. With this substitution the pending amendments fell. -Representative Wilson desired his substitute to hold its original place. -Messrs. Wilson, Kelley and Eliot then modified their amendments to the -measure hitherto under discussion, and Ashley explained his action in a -brief address. - -He referred to the bill which at the preceding session failed to receive -the President’s approval. Since then he had labored earnestly to -conciliate members on his side of the House who had scruples about the -measure as it originally passed, and, if possible, obtain a united vote -in its favor. For that purpose he consented to a compromise in providing -for the recognition of Louisiana, Arkansas and Tennessee. The conditions -were not such as he would prescribe if those States stood alone. But in -order to secure what he thought of paramount importance—universal -suffrage to the liberated black men of the South—he consented to insert -in the bill which he had proposed a few days previously, a conditional -recognition of existing governments in the States of Louisiana and -Arkansas, and the government then being organized in Tennessee. - -Disappointed in his efforts to win the coöperation of Representatives -who entertained practically the same opinions which he did in favor of -universal suffrage for the colored man, and in favor of the early -recognition of every Confederate State with a population sufficient to -maintain a government, he now declined to offer his substitute. At the -request and with the concurrence of his committee the bill of the -preceding session was offered with some modifications. These alterations -were to strike out all that the bill contained to which gentlemen had -raised objection, in that it seemingly authorized the execution of State -laws as they existed at the commencement of the rebellion. To make it -perfectly clear what the committee intended, they had inserted a -provision that the governor should execute only such laws as related to -the protection of persons and property; that all laws inconsistent with -the proposed enactment, and all laws recognizing the relation of master -and slave, should not be enforced. The section which authorized the -collection of taxes had been omitted. He preferred not to commit himself -to a recognition of the Louisiana and Arkansas governments, unless he -could secure what he thought of paramount importance in reorganizing the -other States. - -“It is very clear to my mind,” he asserted, “that no bill providing for -the reorganization of loyal State governments in the rebel States can -pass this Congress. I am pretty sure that this bill and all the -amendments and substitutes offered will fail to command a majority of -this House.” - -The course of debate had shown on the Republican side, he said, so -strong an individuality that no compromise could bring them together on -the great question of reconstruction. Many on his side were capital -leaders in the minority; they were good at pulling down, but not so good -at leading majorities and building up. He admitted their utter inability -to agree on the subject, and had consented to a conditional recognition -of certain State governments because he knew they could be upheld by -military power until the rebellion should be crushed. Republicans were -so nearly unanimous at the preceding session, he said, that he felt the -concessions embodied in his substitute would enable them to agree -without much discussion or without consuming the valuable time of the -House so late in the session. His remarks not only showed disappointment -at the attitude of his party, but clearly revealed the existence of a -schism in its ranks.[360] - -Henry Winter Davis then rose to state the case for the House. The bill, -he said, to which amendments were pending was the same as that which at -the preceding session received the assent of both Houses of Congress, -with some modifications to suit the tender susceptibilities of gentlemen -from Massachusetts: “first, the sixth section, declaring rebel officers -not citizens of the United States, has been stricken out; second, the -taxation clause has been stricken out; third, the word ‘government’ has -been inserted before ‘trial and punishment,’ to meet the refined -criticisms of the two gentlemen from Massachusetts who suppose that -penal laws would be in force and operative when the penalties were -forbidden to be enforced; that discriminating laws could survive the -declaration that there should be no discrimination between different -persons in trial or punishment. There has been one section added to meet -the present aspect of public affairs; that section authorizes the -President, instead of pursuing the method prescribed in the bill in -reference to the States where military resistance shall have been -suppressed, in the event of the legislative authority under the -rebellion in any rebel State taking the oath to support the Constitution -of the United States, annulling their confiscation laws and ratifying -the amendment proposed by this Congress to the Constitution of the -United States, before military resistance shall be suppressed in such -State, to recognize them as constituting the legal authority of the -State, and directing him to report those facts to Congress for its -assent and ratification. With these modifications, the bill which is now -the test for amendment is the bill which was adopted by this House at -the last session.” - -He need not be at the trouble, he said, to answer the arguments of -gentlemen who at the preceding session voted for the bill, and who, in -the repose of the intervening period, had criticised in detail the -language and, not stopping there, had found in its substance that it -violated the principles of republican government and sanctioned the -enormities of those laws with which slavery had covered and defiled the -statutes of every Southern State. - -With increasing severity Mr. Davis proceeded: - - That these discoveries should have been made since the vote of last - session is quite as remarkable as that they should have been - overlooked before that vote. But they were neither overlooked before - nor discovered since. The vote was before a pending election. It is - the will of the President which has been discovered since. - - It is not at all surprising, Mr. Speaker, that the President, having - failed to sign the bill passed by the whole body of his supporters - by both Houses at the last session of Congress, and having assigned, - under pressure of events, but without the authority of law, reasons, - good or bad, first for refusing to allow the bill to become a law, - and therefore usurping power to execute parts of it as law, while he - discarded other parts which interfered with possible electoral - votes, those arguments should be found satisfactory to some minds - prone to act upon the winking of authority. - - The weight of that species of argument I am not able to estimate. It - bids defiance to every species of reply. It is that subtle, - pervading epidemic of the time that penetrates the closest argument - as spirit penetrates matter that diffuses itself with the atmosphere - of authority, relaxing the energy of the strong, bending down the - upright, diverting just men from the path of rectitude, and - substituting the will and favor of power for the will and interest - of the people as the rule of legislative action. - - * * * * * - - All I desire now to do is to state the case and predict results from - one course or the other. The course of military events seems to - indicate that possibly by the 4th of next July, probably by next - December, organized, armed rebellion will cease to lift its brazen - front in the land. Disasters may intervene; errors or weaknesses may - prolong the conflict; the proverbial chances of war may interpose - their caprices to defer the national triumph; but events now point - to the near approach of the end. But whether sooner or later, - whenever it comes, there is one thing that will assuredly accompany - it. If this bill do not become a law, when Congress again meets, at - our doors, clamorous and dictatorial, will be sixty-five - Representatives from the States now in rebellion, and twenty-two - Senators, _claiming_ admission, and, upon the theory of the - honorable gentleman, _entitled_ to admission beyond the power of - argument to resist it; for peace will have been restored, there will - be no armed power but that of the United States; there will be - quiet, and votes will be polled under the existing laws of the - State, in the gentleman’s view. Are you ready to accept that - consequence? For if they come to the door of the House they will - cross the threshold of the House, and any gentleman who does not - know that, or who is so weak or so wild as to suppose that any - declaratory resolution adopted by both Houses as a condition - precedent can stop that flood, had better put his puny hands across - the flood of the flowing Mississippi and say that it shall not enter - the Gulf of Mexico. - - There are things, gentlemen, that are possible at one time and not - possible at another. You can now prevent the rise of the flood, but - when it is up you can not stop it. If gentlemen are in favor of - meeting that state of things, then do as has been already so - distinctly intimated in the course of this debate, vote against this - bill in all its aspects; leave the door wide open; let “our brethren - of the South,” whose bayonets are now pointed at our brothers’ - hearts, drop their arms, put on the seemly garb of peace, go through - the forms of an election, and assert the triumph of their beaten - faction under the forms of political authority after the sword has - decided against them. I am no prophet, but that is the history of - next December if this bill be defeated; and I expect it not to - become a law. - - But suppose the other course to be pursued; suppose the President - sees fit to do what there is not the least reason to suppose that he - desires to do; suppose that after he has destroyed the armies in the - field he should go further, and do, as I think he ought to do, what - the judgment of this country dictates, treat those who hold power in - the South as rebels and not as governors or legislators; disperse - them from the halls of legislation; expel them from executive - mansions, strip them of the emblems of authority, and set to work to - hunt out the pliant and supple “Union men,” so-called, who have - cringed before the storm, but who will be willing to govern their - fellow-citizens under the protection of United States bayonets; - suppose that the fruitful example of Louisiana shall spread like a - mist over all the rest of the southern country, and that - Representatives like what Louisiana has sent here, with such a - backing of votes as she has given, shall appear here at the doors of - this Hall; whose representatives are they? I do not mean to speak of - the gentlemen now here from Louisiana in their individual character, - but in their political relations to their constituency. Whose - representatives are they? In Louisiana they are the representatives - of the bayonets of General Banks and the will of the President, as - expressed in his secret letter to General Banks. If you admit such - representatives, you must admit, on the same basis and under the - same influences, Representatives from every State from Texas to - Virginia; the common council at Alexandria—which has just sent two - Senators to the other House and has ratified the amendment to the - Constitution abolishing slavery in all the rest of Virginia, where - none of them dare put his portly person—would be entitled to send - ten Representatives here and two Senators to speak for the - indomitable “Old Dominion.” If the rebel Representatives are not - here in December next you will have here servile tools of the - Executive who will embarrass your legislation, humble your Congress, - degrade the name of republican government for two years, and then - the natural majority of the South, rising indignantly against that - humiliating insult, will swamp you here with rebel Representatives - and be your masters. These are their alternatives and there is no - middle ground. - -To Mr. Eliot’s objection the Maryland member replied that provisional -governors “are appointed _now without law_, and all we propose is that -they shall be _under the responsibility of law and subject to the -control and confirmation of the Senate_.” Having in mind this condition -and the Executive appointments to judicial places in Louisiana, Mr. -Davis added: - - Sir, when I came into Congress ten years ago, this was a Government - of law. I have lived to see it a Government of personal will. - Congress has dwindled from a power to dictate law and the policy of - the Government to a commission to audit accounts and to appropriate - moneys to enable the Executive to execute his will and not ours. I - would stop at the boundaries of law. When I look around for them I - seem to be in a waste; they are as clean gone as the division fences - of Virginia estates from here to the Rapidan. - -After explaining the efforts of Mr. Ashley and himself to remove the -objectionable features of the bill as pointed out by the two members -from Massachusetts [Messrs. Dawes and Eliot] he again criticised both -with some severity, and continued: - - Sir, my successor may vote as he pleases. But when I leave this Hall - there shall be no vote from the third congressional district of - Maryland that recognizes anything but the body and mass of the - people of any State as entitled to govern them, and to govern the - people that I represent. And they who may wish to substitute one - tenth, or any other fractional minority, for that great power of the - people to govern, may take, and shall take, the odium. Ay! I shall - brand it upon them that in the middle of the nineteenth century, in - the only free Republic that the world knows, where alone the - principles of popular government are the rules of authority, they - have gone to the dark ages for their models, reviving the wretched - examples of the most odious governments that the world has ever - seen, and propose to stain the national triumph by creating a - wretched, low, vulgar, corrupt, and cowardly oligarchy to govern the - freemen of the United States—the national arms to guaranty and - enforce their oppressions. Not by my vote, sir; not by my vote! - - If the majority of the people will not recognize the authority of - the Constitution of the United States, what does the gentleman say - who proposes these declaratory resolutions? That they shall come - here without it? No, sir; but I would govern them for a thousand - years first by the supreme authority of the Constitution which they - have defied and will not acknowledge. And govern them how? Not by - the uncontrolled will of this or any other President that ever - lived, George Washington included. I would govern them by the laws - that in the hours of their sanity they enacted, unaltered excepting - so far as the progress of events require that they should be - altered; to the extent that we have proposed to alter them in our - bill, and no further. I leave their own rules for their government, - make the President appoint, under his official and public - responsibility, the officers who are to execute them; and if they do - not like to be governed in that way, let us trust that the prodigal - will come one day to his senses, and humbly kneeling before the - Constitution that he has vainly defied, swear before Almighty God - that he will again be true to it. - -That is my remedy for the grievance. That is what we propose....[361] - -Though not his last word on the subject of reconstruction, this was the -last great speech of Mr. Davis in Congress on the question of restoring -political power to the rebellious States. His alliance with Stevens, a -somewhat unnatural union, had brought him only disaster. As noticed in -the preceding chapter, he had been defeated for renomination in his -district. It is thought that disappointment hastened somewhat his early -death, which occurred toward the close of the year, December 30, 1865. -Though a touch of pathos may be discerned in his concluding remarks, his -was not the craven spirit that was ready, in the words of Edgerton, to -kiss the hand that smote him. - -Representative Mallory, of Kentucky, on his motion to lay the bill and -amendments on the table, called for the yeas and nays. The question -being taken was decided in the affirmative; 91 voting to lay the bill -and amendments on the table; 64 were opposed, and 27 did not vote.[362] -The Democratic members were a unit against the measure, and in a body -voted to lay it on the table. - -The defeat of Davis now appeared complete, but the struggle was not to -be abandoned without another effort. On the following day, February 22, -1865, Mr. Wilson from the Committee on the Judiciary reported House Bill -No. 740, to establish the supremacy of the Constitution in the -insurrectionary States, with a substitute which provided that neither -the people nor the legislature of any rebellious State should elect -Representatives or Senators to Congress until the President had -proclaimed that armed hostility to the United States within such State -had ceased; nor until the people of such State had adopted a -constitution not repugnant to the Constitution and laws of the United -States; nor until by law of Congress such State had been declared -entitled to representation in the Congress of the United States. - -The authority for this bill he professed to find in the fourth section -of Article I. of the Constitution, which reads as follows: - - 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. - -Mr. Wilson was somewhat embarrassed in defending his bill. Dawes and -Mallory exposed its weakness, and Representative Kernan, of New York, -believed it would put it in the power of the Executive to say whether -States should be represented in Congress. Fernando Wood observed that -neither by that bill nor any other could either House of Congress be -deprived of the right to pass upon the election, returns and -qualifications of members.[363] - -Mr. Ashley at this point moved to amend the substitute offered by the -Committee on the Judiciary by striking out all after the enacting clause -and inserting the reconstruction bill that was tabled the day before. -When a point of order was raised against its introduction the Speaker -said that there was an important amendment; the word “white” having been -inserted before the expression “male citizen,” thus restricting the -class to be enrolled by the United States marshal. Mr. Kelley would -amend it by striking out the word “white.” To this the Ohio member had -no personal objection; indeed, he was abreast of Mr. Kelley in the -matter of the suffrage: the only restriction he would impose being that -of intelligence. Ashley appears, however, to have regarded himself as -but the mouthpiece of his committee by whose authority he had only a few -months before inserted a provision in his reconstruction bill to -recognize the Louisiana and Arkansas governments, though he expressly -declared on a subsequent occasion that he was opposed to such -recognition. - -By a vote of 80 to 65 the bill and its amendments was again laid on the -table. Thirty-seven members abstained from voting; fourteen Republicans -voted with the Democrats.[364] This action was taken on the 22d of -February, 1865; the session closed on the 4th of March following without -any further attempt to pass the bill. Before the vote was taken Ashley -stated his sentiments candidly. He wanted a record made on the question. -“I do not expect,” said he, “to pass this bill now. At the next session, -when a new Congress fresh from the people shall have assembled, with the -nation and its Representatives far in advance of the present Congress, I -hope to pass even a better bill. Sir, I know that our loyal people will -never be guilty of the infamy of inviting the blacks to unite with them -in fighting our battles, and after our triumph—a triumph which we never -could have achieved but for their generous coöperation and aid—deny -those loyal blacks political rights while consenting that pardoned but -unrepentant white rebels shall again be clothed with the entire -political power of these States.”[365] The desire to obtain negro -suffrage explains the inconsistent course of Representative Ashley -throughout these debates. - -By a singular method of abridging history Mr. Blaine in his _Twenty -Years of Congress_ passes without observation the attempt to revive the -“pocketed” bill, though it was during its discussion that there was for -the first time unmistakably revealed the existence of a schism in the -Republican party. - ------ - -Footnote 345: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 557. - -Footnote 346: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 555–558. - -Footnote 347: - - Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, Vol. III. p. 452. - -Footnote 348: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 12–13. - -Footnote 349: - - Ibid., p. 234. - -Footnote 350: - - Pierce, Memoir of Charles Sumner, Vol. IV. p. 205. - -Footnote 351: - - Ibid., p. 221. - -Footnote 352: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 281–291. - -Footnote 353: - - An interesting account of the imprisonment of colored seamen in the - ports of South Carolina is given in The Rise and Fall of the Slave - Power in America, Vol. I. pp. 576–586. - -Footnote 354: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 298–301. - -Footnote 355: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 356: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 934–937. - -Footnote 357: - - Ibid., pp. 937–939. - -Footnote 358: - - Appendix to Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 73–75. - -Footnote 359: - - Appendix to Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 75–83. - -Footnote 360: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 968–969. - -Footnote 361: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 969–970. - -Footnote 362: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 970–971. - -Footnote 363: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 997–1001. - -Footnote 364: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1002. - -Footnote 365: - - Ibid. - - - - - IX - THE ELECTORAL VOTE OF LOUISIANA - - -A preceding chapter has noticed the result of the Presidential election -of 1864. It was thought proper, however, to reserve for separate -treatment the various questions presented by the participation in that -contest of Louisiana and Tennessee, two States reorganized under -Executive auspices. On the introduction by Mr. Wilson of a joint -resolution declaring certain named States not entitled to representation -in the Electoral College, the entire subject came before the House soon -after the meeting of Congress in December. - -The proposed resolution was read twice and referred to the Committee on -the Judiciary. On the following day, December 20, 1864, it was reported, -ordered to be printed and recommitted. Under the operation of the -previous question it passed the House on January 30 succeeding. Its -preamble, which was favorably considered at the same time, declared that -“the inhabitants and local authorities of the States of Virginia, North -Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, -Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Tennessee rebelled against the -Government of the United States, and have continued in a state of armed -rebellion for more than three years, and were in a state of armed -rebellion on the 8th of November, 1864.” - -The joint resolution provided that these States were not entitled to -representation in the Electoral College for the choice of President and -Vice-President for the term of office beginning March 4, 1865, and that -no electoral votes from them, relative to the choice of said officers -for that term, should be received or counted.[366] - -In a modified form the measure subsequently passed the Senate, which -proposed that there be stricken from the preamble the words “and were in -such condition of armed rebellion for more than three years,” and that -there be inserted in lieu thereof, “and were in such condition on the -8th day of November, 1864, that no valid election for electors of -President and Vice-President, according to the Constitution and laws -thereof, was held therein on said day.” In this amendment the House -promptly concurred, February 6, 1865. - -In the Senate, February 1, Mr. Trumbull asked consideration of the -measure inasmuch as the electoral votes were to be counted a week later. -When the amendment was under discussion, Senator Ten Eyck, of New -Jersey, moved to strike out the word “Louisiana” in the preamble, and -added that it was a matter of history that the State had reorganized, or -at least attempted to do so, and in the opinion of many, and perhaps -most, of her loyal citizens had reorganized as a State. It was matter of -history that they had elected State officers and a State Legislature; -that they had elected members to a constitutional convention and framed -a new constitution for that State; that the Legislature passed a law -authorizing the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of -the United States in the last Presidential election, and that such -electors had met and cast their votes. “Under these circumstances,” said -Mr. Ten Eyck, “I think there is a striking distinction between the State -of Virginia and the State of Louisiana.” The object of his amendment, he -stated, was to afford opportunity to a loyal people who had suffered all -the horrors of the rebellion, who had got the better of it, and put it -under foot, of coming back and resuming their place in the councils of -the nation. He did not then desire to make any further remarks.[367] - -Senator Trumbull then took up the discussion of Ten Eyck’s amendment to -the amendment. The electoral votes, he said, were to be opened and -canvassed a week later, and it was known to all that no rules for action -had ever been adopted in that joint convention. He recalled the fact -that in 1856 there arose a question over the counting of the electoral -vote of Wisconsin. A severe snow storm had prevented the electors from -meeting at their State capital on the day fixed by law, and it was not -until the day following that they were able to cast their votes for -President and Vice-President. The question was not then decided, for -Buchanan and Breckenridge were the successful candidates in either -event, and were so declared. - -He believed a similar question was likely to arise when the electoral -votes would be counted on February 8. It was a matter of public -notoriety, he continued, that several of the States included in the -President’s proclamation of 1861, Arkansas, Tennessee and Louisiana, had -cast electoral votes. There was a question as to their authority to do -so in consequence of the insurrection which prevailed there on the 8th -of November, when the election took place, and the House of -Representatives had passed the joint resolution declaring that the votes -of certain named States should not be counted. The motion of the Senator -from New Jersey would have the effect of counting the vote of Louisiana. -“If we decide to receive the vote from Louisiana,” declared Mr. -Trumbull, “it will be a decision by the Congress of the United States -that the State of Louisiana was in such a condition as to vote for -President and Vice-President on the 8th of November last.” - -The alteration proposed by the Committee on the Judiciary, said he, was -for the purpose of avoiding any such committal on the subject as the -motion of the Senator from New Jersey brought up. If the preamble “is -adopted and the resolution passed, Congress will not have decided -whether Louisiana is in the Union or out of the Union, whether she is a -State or not a State.” It would be time enough, he believed, to decide -that question when it was presented to the Senate. No statement of -facts, he asserted in reply to Senator Howe, accompanied the joint -resolution from the Committee on the Judiciary; it was a House -resolution, and no report accompanied it from the House Committee. - -A large part of Louisiana, he added, was on the 8th of November -preceding in the possession of a hostile force. In a very considerable -portion of the State there was no opportunity to vote for President or -Vice-President, and it might be a very serious question whether, when -half a State or the third of a State was overrun by an enemy, an -election held under such circumstances and under the auspices of Federal -guns would be an election which would authorize the Congress of the -United States, when in joint convention it came to canvass the votes for -President and Vice-President, to count ballots cast under such -circumstances. - -In acting upon the resolution he did not mean to commit the Senate one -way or another relative to the organization which had been formed in -Louisiana. A decision to strike out Louisiana would be to decide that -her electoral vote would be received and that on November 8th there was -a State government there. That he did not believe. No evidence, he -asserted, had been submitted to show how many votes were cast. - -Pursuant to an act of Congress the President had declared the -inhabitants of Louisiana in insurrection against the United States. That -proclamation had not been recalled. “Sir,” concluded Mr. Trumbull, -“until there shall be some action by Congress recognizing the -organization which has been set up in Louisiana, we ought not in my -judgment to count electoral votes from the State.” Whether Congress -would recognize it, he could not say; that had not yet been done, and, -until it had been, the electoral vote ought not to be counted. He hoped, -therefore, that Ten Eyck’s amendment would not prevail.[368] - -Mr. Ten Eyck said it was with great diffidence that he undertook to -propose an amendment to the resolution; but he held the doctrine that -these commonwealths having taken up their lot and part with their sister -States when admitted into the Union were not legally out of it; their -governments had been in abeyance; they had been overrun by the feet of -hostile armies, and many of their citizens, by usurpation and in -violation of their duty to their fellow-men and to their God, had -attempted to carry these States out of the Union. - -That being his opinion, whenever these States, by the aid of the General -Government, or by the efforts of their own people, or by the act of both -combined, reëstablished themselves, or set their State governments in -action anew, and had commenced again to revolve in their old orbits, he -should feel it his duty, so far as he was concerned, to extend to them -all the privileges and all the rights to which the loyal people of a -loyal State were entitled at the hands of their sister States, whether -upon the floor of the Senate or anywhere else. It was to exclude -Louisiana from the operation of the resolution that he made his motion. -As to those States manifestly in the condition described in the preamble -there was propriety in passing the resolution. - -In reply to an observation of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, -that the majority desired to avoid a committal on this subject, Mr. Ten -Eyck suggested that it would not, perhaps, be amiss to insist that a -committal should not be had against the interest of the State any more -than in its favor, and if his amendment involved the question whether -Louisiana was in a condition to perform all the functions of a State -government and to appoint State officers and Senators and members of the -national House of Representatives, the same question was involved in the -resolution and it would be determined against her if the joint -resolution passed as it stood; for that would decide that Louisiana was -in a state of rebellion such as to deprive her of all the powers, rights -and privileges of a member of the Union. He was not prepared to go to -that extent. - -From various memorials, papers and documents that had come into -possession of the Senate, he continued, and were published by its order, -as well as from information derived from other sources, it appeared that -nearly, if not quite, a year before an election for State officers was -held in Louisiana and a very large number of votes cast, about two -thirds or approximating two thirds of the largest number that had been -cast at any former election for State officers. Trumbull interrupted to -remark that no such statements had been received by the committee. In -those localities which voted, perhaps two thirds of the former vote had -been cast, but not two thirds of that cast in the entire State. Ten Eyck -replied that the vote was 11,414; it was alleged that a large number of -former voters had entered the rebel army and a great many had been -killed. He might be in error concerning the whole vote of the State. All -these elections were free and uninterrupted and without the interference -of any military power whatever. A person on the ground had declared that -“no effort whatever was made on the part of the military authorities to -influence the citizens of the State, either in the selection of -candidates or in the election of officers, and that the direct influence -of the Government of the United States was less in Louisiana than in the -elections probably of any State of the Union; that the officers -representing the Government, both civil and military, were divided, so -far as they entertained or expressed opinions, on the question of -candidates and upon the policy pursued in the organization of the -government.” If any military interference was exerted it was in aid of -the loyal people, and the civil authority was not at all in -subordination to the military. - -In view of the invitation that had been held out by the Government to -all the loyal people of those States to come back and to endeavor to -organize themselves anew and, when they had gained sufficient strength, -to present themselves civilly and quietly at the ballot-box to choose -their own State officers and to choose delegates to form a new State -constitution, and when they claim the rights of other States, are they -to be met by the plea that upon certain out-bounds of the State there -may still be heard the tread of rebel feet? It appeared by all the -testimony that the population, the business and the property of -Louisiana were confined to the cities and regions of country immediately -bordering upon the river, and that the residue of the State was very -sparsely settled indeed. That portion not submerged was used for -planting purposes. The wealth and population of the State were confined -within a small space and this contracted area was chiefly under control -of the United States. The Presidential electors were chosen by the State -Legislature, and he did not think that method legal. That is why the -vote cast in the election did not appear in the testimony submitted to -the Committee on the Judiciary. - -As to the withdrawal by the President of his proclamation declaring the -inhabitants of Louisiana in a state of insurrection, if that were the -test either the present incumbent or his successor could keep the loyal -people of those States from returning to the Union during the remainder -of his administration, and, if reëlected, for the following term. This -even if every soul within the State were loyal and anxious to -return.[369] - -Mr. Howe announced his intention of voting for the amendment of Ten -Eyck, though for reasons very different from those which influenced the -New Jersey Senator. His support would not be controlled by the number of -citizens who participated in the choice of electors. “I am governed,” -said he, “by the single fact that a statute of your own, existing at the -time of that election, declared that the people of that State had the -right to choose electors, and that certain of them did participate in -making that choice. The Senator from Illinois [Trumbull] says but a -small portion of the people of the State participated in that choice. -Your statute said that all might. Does the refusal of a large portion or -a small portion of the people of a State to participate in an election -deprive the minority, if you please, no matter how small, of their right -under your statute?” Besides Louisiana he understood that two other -States had made choice of electors. He would vote for an amendment to -strike them out of the resolution also.[370] - -Trumbull argued that a mere refusal to count the electoral vote of -Louisiana did not settle the question against the existing organization. -Wisconsin had a right to vote in 1856, and nobody supposed otherwise; -but many opposed the counting of that vote. The State organization may -be perfect and yet its electoral vote rejected. If the Senate had -refused to count Wisconsin’s vote, it would not therefore have decided -that there was no such State. Ten Eyck promptly indicated the weakness -of this reasoning by pointing out that the preamble of the pending -resolution declared Louisiana in such a condition of rebellion that no -election could be had. Senator Trumbull then put the case of a foreign -enemy having such possession of Louisiana that no election could be held -throughout the State, and asked whether the Senator from New Jersey -would count the electoral vote of Louisiana when not twenty men could -have assembled in the State and voted for President and Vice-President. -If the Senate refused to count her vote under such circumstances, would -it decide that the organization of the State of Louisiana was not to be -recognized, and was repudiated? Whether the organization established in -Louisiana was a valid one was a question which would come before the -Senate when they inquired into the right to seats of those gentlemen who -had presented themselves as Senators. - -Replying to an assertion of Senator Howe, who was not in his seat, Mr. -Trumbull said he would like to see the statute which gave Louisiana a -right to vote in the Presidential election of 1864. If any such existed -it would be repealed by the act of Congress which empowered the -President to declare the people of certain commonwealths in a state of -insurrection. - -In referring to the objection of Mr. Ten Eyck that the President, if he -desired, could keep a State out during his entire administration, -Senator Trumbull observed that it was only necessary for Congress to -repeal the act upon which the proclamation was based and then the -proclamation itself would fall. - -The refusal of a State to vote when she had an opportunity to do so, -said Mr. Trumbull, would be no reason for excluding her electoral vote; -but the people of Louisiana did not have an opportunity unawed by -hostile armies and unrestrained by military authority to vote for -President and Vice-President. This, he said, was not the real point at -issue; the question for the Senate to consider and determine was whether -the Legislature of Louisiana was a lawful assembly, for it was by that -body that electors of President and Vice-President were chosen in the -election of 1864. - -Mr. Trumbull believed that on November 8 about three fourths of the area -of Louisiana was in possession of the Confederates. No person could have -voted within that jurisdiction. Eleven or twelve thousand was the -largest vote ever cast under these organizations; while the vote of the -State, when all her legal voters had the privilege of going to the -polls, was more than 60,000. - -Mr. Ten Eyck stated that 51,000 was the highest vote ever cast, and that -the average was but 34,000. Trumbull believed the Senate should concur -in the House resolution and that it need not commit itself one way or -the other on the Louisiana organization. The counting of the electoral -vote, which pressed for settlement, should soon be determined.[371] - -Mr. Harris thought the question of counting the votes could be disposed -of without committing the Senate or deciding the matter of admitting -Senators, as was done in the case of Wisconsin in 1856. “If we count the -votes of these States,” said he, “the number of votes for Mr. Lincoln -and Mr. Johnson will be so many; if we reject these votes the number of -votes will be so many; and in either case these candidates are elected.” -By this or a similar declaration, the phraseology of which was suggested -by the precedent of 1856, the question could be passed over. He asked -the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary why Congress had not the -power to declare that New York should not vote. He opposed the preamble -because he did not believe it true, and he denied that the local -authorities in Louisiana, Arkansas and Tennessee were in rebellion on -the 8th of November preceding. - -When, on February 2, Senator Harris resumed his remarks he observed that -the question as to the power of Congress to legislate in relation to the -counting of votes for President and Vice-President was not considered by -the committee. Reflection had led him to doubt the competence of -Congress to legislate on the subject. That body could fix the time for -choosing electors and specify the time when they should perform the -functions of their office. That, he contended, was the extent of the -power of Congress over the subject. He could find no authority in the -Constitution, however, which empowered Congress to pass a law, for the -resolution amounted to that, excluding any votes returned to the -Vice-President. Even if Congress had the authority it was inexpedient to -exercise it. Why should such extreme power be exercised when the -necessity did not exist? The result, it was conceded, would be the same -whether Congress counted the votes of Louisiana, Tennessee and Arkansas -or not. The power was not contained in the Constitution. Those States -specified in the preamble did certainly rebel, but that Louisiana, -Arkansas and Tennessee were in that condition on November 8 was at least -open to question.[372] - -Senator Doolittle believed that Congress by legislation could provide in -advance for the manner of counting electoral votes; but that, he -insisted, was very different from passing a law which declared certain -votes null and void after they had been cast. That would be retroactive -legislation. He doubted the power of Congress over the subject of -counting the electoral votes, beyond that contained in the Constitution. - -“The Congress,” he continued, quoting the fourth clause of section one -of the second article, “may determine the time of choosing the electors, -and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the -same throughout the United States.” Pursuant to this provision Congress -passed the act of January 23, 1845. It was not for the president of the -Senate to open such as Congress told him to open, but he should “open -all the certificates” which were sent to him, “and the votes shall then -be counted.” Here, said the Senator, arose the grave question whether -the president of the joint convention was made the sole judge as to what -votes should be counted. The question practically came up in 1856, but -it was not then necessary to decide it, and it was waived as not being -essential to the result. On the present occasion, 1865, it was the same, -the result of the election would not be affected by the matter of -counting or not counting the votes of Tennessee and Louisiana; but it -was not necessary for Congress to assert a doctrine which in some future -time might be the very destruction of the Government, namely, “That a -political party in Congress can decide that certain votes of certain -States shall be canceled and others shall be received. It will never do -to set that precedent.” It would be time enough, he said in conclusion, -to meet the question when it came up in the joint convention.[373] - -Mr. Hale said that he had foreseen the difficulty and at the preceding -session had introduced a joint resolution directing in advance what -should be done; but the pressure of other business, certainly not more -important, prevented action thereon. If the result of the Presidential -election had depended upon the votes of Louisiana, Tennessee and -Arkansas would the party have submitted against which their votes had -been cast? The rebellion then existing was caused, he believed, by -nothing at all in comparison with such a question. - -He denied the assertion of Senator Doolittle that Congress had no power -over the counting of the electoral votes. Suppose, he argued, that, -contrary to the constitutional provision, a member of Congress or any -officer of the Federal Government holding an office of profit or trust -happened to be an elector, would not Congress have power to say that -such vote of Federal officer should not be counted? - -The framers of the Constitution, he declared, made the most ample -provision for just such a case. That instrument confers on Congress the -power “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying -into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this -Constitution in the Government of the United States.” Was not the power -to choose a President one vested in the Government of the United States? - -Mr. Hale contended that then, when action by Congress would not affect -the result of the election, was the time to settle the principle, and -the precedent could be pointed to showing the action and sentiment of -Congress at a time when there was no inducement to anything but an -honest and straightforward decision of the case. - -Suppose, he went on, that Nevada while in the territorial condition had -grown restless under her provincial state and had sent certificates -signed by her electors, would Congress have no authority to say whether -they should be counted? In Washington’s first election the vote of New -York State was not counted. Now her Senator, Mr. Harris, doubted the -competence of Congress either to exclude, or refuse to count, the votes -of a State.[374] - -Mr. Doolittle objected to being quoted quite so strongly as to say that -Congress had no power over this subject. Congress had power over the -subject, but that power was limited. When the Constitution says that the -States shall do certain things, such as directing the appointment of -electors, that is a limitation on the power of Congress over the matter. -What he maintained was that after the ballots had been cast there was no -power in Congress as a legislative body to declare certain votes valid -or invalid. The tribunal to which the question was referred was the -president of the Senate presiding over the joint convention of both -Houses. The power in the first instance was with that officer to count -or not to count the votes. He was to decide whether they were from -States or from Territories.[375] - -Senator Trumbull maintained that so far from being empowered to decide -disputes, the president of the joint convention was not authorized to -even count the votes. In the practice of the Government the -Vice-President had never since the days of Washington counted the votes. -The Constitution says that he shall “open all the certificates and the -votes shall then be counted.” It does not state by whom, but it does -state that Congress has power to pass all laws necessary to carry the -instrument into effect. Congress, he said, had exercised such power from -the beginning. - -There was no legal difference, he asserted, between South Carolina and -Louisiana. An individual trading in the latter State, except under a -particular license, could be taken up and tried as a felon, and yet “we -are told that we cannot determine by act of Congress that they cannot -elect a President for us!” - -Mr. Trumbull contended that if a question arose upon the counting of the -vote of any State, the joint convention could not decide upon it. The -bodies would have to separate and, by passing a concurrent resolution, -each act independently. There was no popular election, he said, in the -State of Louisiana, but a body assuming to be its Legislature had -appointed electors of President and Vice-President. He did not know -whether the new constitution of Louisiana authorized that method. - -The purpose of the Senate, he continued, in amending the joint -resolution of the House was to avoid declaring that the people of -Louisiana were on the 8th of November in a state of armed insurrection. -The preamble, even as it was amended, did not wholly satisfy him; he -believed that he would be better pleased if it was altogether omitted. -He was informed that Tennessee had sent a vote as well as Louisiana. The -object of the committee was to settle the question before the meeting of -the joint convention.[376] - -Senator Collamer thought that any law honestly intended to carry into -effect the provisions of the Constitution could not be objected to. It -could if it opposed or was inconsistent with that instrument. There had -been legislation on the subject and additional action by Congress might -be necessary. For the resolution he offered the following substitute: - - That the people of no State, the inhabitants whereof have been - declared in a state of insurrection by virtue of the fifth section - of the act entitled “An act further to provide for the collection of - duties on imports, and for other purposes,” approved July 13, 1861, - shall be regarded as empowered to elect electors of President and - Vice-President of the United States until said condition of - insurrection shall cease and be so declared by virtue of a law of - the United States.[377] - -By Mr. Howard the question was regarded as of very great importance not -only as a precedent for the future, but “as indicating the opinion of -Congress on the subject, to use a familiar term, of ‘reconstruction,’ or -rather the rights of the States in rebellion.” He believed it clear that -the Vice-President was to open the certificates and that the duty of -counting devolved upon the two Houses thus assembled. The act of 1792 -seemed so to construe the Constitution. - -“The power of counting the votes,” he asserted, “and of rejecting votes -which are void for fraud or illegality, is, under the Constitution, in -the joint convention thus assembled.” There was no doubt about it, he -declared, because the Houses convened for a great and protective -purpose; they were exercising the tutelary authority of the people, in -protecting the nation from the imposition of false and fraudulent -ballots and certificates. The inhabitants of the States mentioned in the -proclamation of the President were public enemies; therefore they had no -political rights under the United States. - -“I look upon this measure as necessary,” continued Mr. Howard, “as one -form in which the sense of Congress ought to be expressed against any -hasty attempt to readmit these rebellious States into the Union.” For -one, he would require the loyalty and friendliness of a majority of the -people of the rebellious States to be proved before readmitting any of -them. “The theory of our Government,” he went on, “is different from -that of almost every other government on earth. It is that the will of -the majority shall govern; in common phrase, the majority of the people, -but practically the majority of the voting population.” - -In conclusion he declared that it was “the bounden duty of Congress, in -every case, to keep out of the Union every one of these eleven seceded -States until, in pursuance of our laws, passed or to be passed, it has -become perfectly evident to us that there is in such a State a clear, -absolute majority of its voting population friendly to the Government of -the United States, and willing to proceed in the discharge of their -functions as a State; and, until that is done, you may be perfectly -sure, so long as I hold a seat in this body, my vote will be given -against any such proposal. I never will consent to admit into this Union -a State a majority of whose people are hostile and unfriendly to the -Government of my country. I prefer to hold them in tutelage (for that is -really the word) one year, five years, ten years, even twenty years, -rather than run the risk of a repetition of this rebellion, which has -cost us so much blood and treasure.”[378] - -Ten Eyck, considering Louisiana as the strongest case, mentioned it in -preference to Arkansas or Tennessee, and, from a paper furnished by a -gentleman who was familiar with the situation there, was able to state -that “eleven thousand four hundred and fourteen votes were polled at -this election. The average vote for ten years prior to the rebellion in -these parishes was fifteen to sixteen thousand.” The same parishes cast -their highest vote, 21,000, in 1860. He expressed a wish to save -Tennessee also from the effect of the resolution, and declared that he -did not see how the Vice-President-elect, an alien, could preside over -the Senate. Further, a vote in favor of the resolution prejudged the -case of the Senators and the legality of the Legislature which sent -them.[379] - -Senator Pomeroy did not suppose that States unrepresented in either -House could be represented in the Electoral College. He criticised the -correctness of the preamble so far as it related to Arkansas. The rebel -governor as well as the rebel legislature, he said, was driven out long -ago. - -“Arkansas,” he continued, “has not voted at all in the Presidential -election.... Under the instructions and impressions that the members -from Arkansas received here last session, they distinctly understood -that States not represented in either branch of Congress would have no -right to vote at the Presidential election. They returned to Arkansas -and so reported, and they never had any election; there are no votes -here from that State. They have been in suspense awaiting the action of -Congress.” The resolution itself did not, of course, affect Arkansas, -for there were no votes from that State to be counted.[380] - -Mr. Cowan, probably adopting a hint dropped by Senator Ten Eyck, noticed -the fact that the proclamation of January 1, 1863, exempted from its -operations thirteen named parishes of Louisiana because no rebellion -existed in them. The validity of that decree had been recognized, while -the proclamation of December 8 following invited the people of Louisiana -and other States to resume their rights. The question was whether the -arrangements of the President were to be executed in good faith. - -It was the duty of the Executive, he continued, “to put down this -rebellion, to relieve the people from its oppression, and to restore -them precisely to where they were when the rebellion found them. If that -is done, in ten days after his proclamation, _eo instanti_, the people -resume their rights and functions; and in this case I understand they -are not only in possession of the right, but are actually in the -enjoyment of it, having a regularly organized government with all the -machinery necessary and proper to a government.” He believed that men -and money were furnished the President to sustain State governments and -make them supreme within their own limits. - -Concluding this portion of his remarks he said: “Mr. President, this -involves a direct conflict between the Legislative and Executive bodies -of this Government, and at this time I am of opinion that we cannot -afford to enter into that conflict.”[381] - -Senator Powell, of Kentucky, said that when it was asserted that General -Banks did not interfere in the Louisiana election the statement was not -true, for there could be no greater interference in the elections of a -State than to alter the qualifications of voters. He declared himself -“opposed to admitting on this floor persons who are elected under the -bayonet influence in any way whatever. I very well know that there was -no free expression of the people of Louisiana in these elections. I know -that they but obeyed the behests of the military, whatever commanders -may say about it.... But for its tragical results upon republican -liberty it [the election] would be the greatest of farces.” - -The Kentucky member believed that the rebellious States were still in -the Union, and when a majority of the people in any of them returned to -loyalty, when their governments were organized, their Senators and -Representatives should be received.[382] - -Cowan, entering again into the discussion, said: “We are bound by the -Constitution to preserve the Union and to preserve the rights of the -people under the Union; not merely the rights of a majority, but the -rights of the people, of all the people, and of any number of the people -however small. What are we to do? A minority of the people come forward -and say, ‘If you aid us for a while we can preserve this State and keep -her in the Union.’ ‘But no,’ according to the doctrine advanced here, -‘there must be a majority of you before we can recognize you as in the -Union.’... That will be very poor encouragement for the loyal men of the -rebel States to try and bring back their people to reason.” The -Pennsylvania Senator was one of the few who adhered to the opinion that -the masses of men at the South were not disloyal; that it was a leaders’ -rebellion.[383] - -Sherman, of Ohio, described the scene in the joint convention of 1856 -when Humphrey Marshall wanted to speak and Mr. Mason, president of the -Senate, refused to recognize him. Speaker Banks, however, did recognize -him; upon this, Mason and others left the convention, and confusion -ensued; that, Mr. Sherman believed, was a reason why the resolution -should be disposed of.[384] - -Mr. Wade said: “About a year ago Congress, anticipating that such -questions as this might arise, in my judgment very wisely framed a law -and passed it through both branches with the hope of settling this -matter in advance. That law was made upon great deliberation in both -bodies of Congress: it received a very large vote in each House. It was -very proper in my judgment that Congress should fix the matter then, -because everybody could anticipate that a question of the most serious -danger to the Republic might arise in the then approaching Presidential -election, which might endanger the stability of our Union, and which -might under certain circumstances precipitate these Northern States into -a civil war. Apprehending that such a question might arise, Congress -wisely, in my judgment, provided against it; but the President did not -agree with them, and he vetoed their bill, leaving the question open -with all its dangers, which, thank God, have not arisen.” - -The President, added Mr. Wade, chose to pocket the bill, “and, as I -suppose, he did it in defence of the proclamation which he had put -forth, declaring that whenever a tenth part of the people of a State -would come back, he would recognize them as the State and as part and -parcel of this Government—a proposition which, with all my respect for -the Chief Magistrate, I am bound to say is the most absurd and -impracticable that ever haunted the imagination of a statesman.... And I -must say of that proclamation of the President that it was the most -contentious, the most anarchical, the most dangerous proposition that -was ever put forth for the government of a free people. - -“... I had a conversation with the now Vice-President-elect of the -United States on that subject, and with other gentlemen on the Union -side in the Southern States, and I do not know of one of them who was -not filled with the deepest apprehension that if this principle should -prevail they would be annihilated by the nine tenths.”[385] - -As to permitting citizens of Louisiana who were serving in the army and -navy to vote in the election of February 22, 1864, Mr. Doolittle -observed: “We have done the same thing in Wisconsin, in Ohio, in -Pennsylvania, in New York, all growing out of exigencies which have -occurred since this rebellion began, passing laws, authorizing men, -although in the Army of the United States, still to take part in the -elections, providing that they should not be deprived of their rights of -citizenship because they had enlisted in the Army to bear all the -sacrifices which are necessary to defend their country in this struggle. -And, sir, I maintain that there was nothing wrong in this.”[386] Even if -it were wrong, only 808 soldiers, he asserted, participated in the -election. A separate registry of this vote had been kept by General -Banks. So far, therefore, from being a military usurpation it was an -attempt of the President to lay down the military power. This he was -endeavoring in good faith to do. - -After a somewhat excited defence of the Administration by Senator -Doolittle, and severe attacks on both President Lincoln and General -Banks by Mr. Powell and others, Ten Eyck’s motion to strike out -Louisiana from the joint resolution was defeated, February 3, 1865, by a -vote of 22 to 16.[387] Lane’s motion immediately after to strike out the -preamble, which would leave only an unmeaning resolution, was lost by a -vote of 30 nays to 12 yeas.[388] - -Senator Harris proposed to amend Mr. Collamer’s substitute by resolving, -“That it is inexpedient to determine the question as to the validity of -the election of electors in the said States of Tennessee and Louisiana, -and that in counting the votes for President and Vice-President the -result be declared as it would stand if the votes of the said States -were counted, and also as it would stand if the votes of the said States -were excluded, such result being the same in either case.” By nearly the -same majority this proposition also was voted down without much -discussion.[389] - -Reverdy Johnson, who favored the House resolution as amended by the -Committee on the Judiciary, did not think the rebellious States were out -of the Union, and asserted that there was no power in any branch of -Government to declare war against a State. Referring to the Whiskey -Insurrection in Washington’s administration, he said that Congress -passed no act declaring it at an end. The President declared it. It -ended itself. The insurrectionists laid down their arms, and expressed -willingness to yield obedience to the United States; that ended the -insurrection and disbanded the Federal forces, “and that happening, the -State of Pennsylvania, every part of it, stood exactly in the relation, -for all purposes, in which the State and every part of it stood before -the insurrection was commenced.”[390] - -Mr. Collamer said that the real point in Senator Johnson’s argument was -whether Congress had anything to do in the reorganization or -reëstablishment of those States. Mr. Johnson, continued the Senator from -Vermont, seemed to think not. On resuming his speech, February 4, 1865, -he inquired: “When will, and when ought, Congress to admit these States -as being in their normal condition? When they see that they furnish -evidence of it. It is not enough that they stop their hostility and are -repentant. They should present fruits meet for repentance. They should -furnish to us by their actions some evidence that the condition of -loyalty and obedience is their true condition again, and Congress must -pass upon it; otherwise we have no securities. It is not enough that -they lay down their arms. Our courts should be established, our taxes -should be gathered, our duties should be collected in those States; and -before they come here to perform their duties or privileges again as -members of this Union, they should place themselves in an attitude -showing to us that they have truly taken that position, and we should -pass upon it; and I insist that the President, making peace with them, -if you please, by surceasing military operations, does not alter their -status until Congress passes upon it.... I believe that when -reëstablishing the condition of peace with that people, Congress, -representing the United States, has power, in ending this war as any -other war, to get some security for the future.” - -The guaranty clause, Mr. Collamer asserted, implied that States were to -be kept in the Union; it was inserted for the security of the minority -in a State, though there might be but one man there to redeem Sodom. No -one State could discharge the United States from a performance of that -obligation. To keep it Congress, if it was essential to maintaining a -republican form of government, could abolish slavery if that institution -stood in the way of performing the guaranty. Before restoring the -States, he added in conclusion, the President would need the assistance -of Congress, else how could he get rid of the confiscation act.[391] - -Collamer’s substitute, which shared the fate of the amendment offered by -Ten Eyck, could be construed only by an examination of the President’s -proclamation to ascertain what States were in insurrection. - -To the preamble, which stated that four years earlier certain designated -States had rebelled, and on the 8th of November preceding were in such -condition of rebellion that no valid election for the choice of electors -of President and Vice-President could be held there, Senator Pomeroy -objected that the rebel governor of Arkansas had been killed, and the -entire disloyal government destroyed. When the election was held the -real local authorities in that State were Union men. It would not be -true, as the preamble declared, that these authorities were in rebellion -on November 8. The terms of the disloyal officials in Arkansas had -expired by limitation; the chief men in that government were not alive -to exert any influence if they were disposed to do so. It was not true -to say that they made war on the United States on the 8th of November, -1864, or that they were then in condition to do so. Since the rebellion -began they never had but one election. - -Pomeroy’s amendment to substitute for “state of rebellion” the word -“condition” was carried by a vote of 26 to 13. The preamble, as thus -perfected, declared that certain States had rebelled four years before, -and on November 8 were in such “condition” that no valid election was -held.[392] - -Mr. Lane believed that for the protection of Union men in those States a -loyal government was indispensable, and that it did more to demoralize -the insurgents and to close out the rebellion than any other act that -could be accomplished. It would be worth more than all the victories -that could be gained in the field.[393] - -Senator Howe in closing the debate observed that four days had been -spent in discussing not the passage of the joint resolution, but the -reason to be assigned in its preamble for excluding the vote of certain -States. It belonged to the legislatures of those commonwealths, he -maintained, to declare whether valid elections had been held there. He -distrusted that sort of legislation, and in conclusion said: “If you -will take hold of the question of the political relations of these -communities, and if you will tell what is the truth, and has been the -truth since 1861, that there are no State organizations there, no State -governments, I am with you. When you establish that, you know what they -may and what they may not do.”[394] - -By a vote of 29 to 10 the joint resolution was passed on February 4. In -the record the names of Cowan, Doolittle, Harris, Howe, Lane of Kansas, -Nesmith, Saulsbury, Ten Eyck, Van Winkle and Willey appear in -opposition.[395] - -For the purpose of canvassing the electoral votes, both Houses assembled -in joint convention four days later, February 8, 1865. The -Vice-President in discharge of his duty proceeded to open and hand to -the tellers the votes of the several States, beginning with Maine. No -one dissenting it was agreed on a suggestion by Senator Wade to dispense -with the reading of everything in the certificate except the result of -the vote. - -When all the votes had been recorded, Cowan said: “Mr. President, I -inquire whether there are any further returns to be counted.” The -Vice-President replied in the negative. To his former question Mr. Cowan -then added, “And if there be, I would inquire why they are not submitted -to this body in joint convention, which is alone capable of determining -whether they should be counted or not.” The Vice-President acknowledged -that he had in his possession returns from the States of Louisiana and -Tennessee, but in obedience to the law of the land “the Chair holds it -to be his duty not to present them to the convention.” The Pennsylvania -Senator thereupon inquired whether the joint resolution had been signed -by the President, and was informed that while the official communication -of its approval had not been received by either House, the Chair had -been apprised that the resolution had received the Executive approval. - -Cowan then suggested that, as a motion was not in order, the votes of -Louisiana and Tennessee be counted, and that the convention determine -the fact. Representative Cox immediately recommended the reading of the -joint rule under which both Houses were then acting. On being directed -by the Vice-President the secretary complied with this suggestion. - -Thaddeus Stevens did not think any question had arisen which required -the two Houses to separate, for that, according to the language of the -joint resolution, could only occur upon the reading of those returns -which had been opened by the president of the convention. - -Mr. Cowan did what he could to bring the question before the two Houses, -and failing, withdrew it. The result, after some further effort to call -up the returns from Louisiana and Tennessee, was then announced. The -tellers reported that for President of the United States Abraham Lincoln -had received 212, and George B. McClellan 21 votes; that for -Vice-President Andrew Johnson had received 212, and George H. Pendleton -21 votes.[396] - -On February 10 the president _pro tempore_ laid before the Senate the -following communication from Mr. Lincoln: - - _To the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives_: - - The joint resolution entitled “Joint resolution declaring certain - States not entitled to representation in the Electoral College” has - been signed by the Executive, in deference to the view of Congress - implied in its passage and presentation to him. In his own view, - however, the two Houses of Congress, convened under the twelfth - article of the Constitution, have complete power to exclude from - counting all electoral votes deemed by them to be illegal; and it is - not competent for the Executive to defeat or obstruct that power by - a veto, as would be the case if his action were at all essential in - the matter. He disclaims all right of the Executive to interfere in - any way in the matter of canvassing or counting electoral votes, and - he also disclaims that, by signing said resolution, he has expressed - any opinion on the recitals of the preamble, or any judgment of his - own upon the subject of the resolution.[397] - -Except for a brief speech by Reverdy Johnson this message was received -in silence by the Senate. Mr. Johnson commented upon the extraordinary -course of the President, whose duty, he said, was clearly to approve or -to disapprove, not virtually to read a lecture to the Senate as he had -done. The Maryland member did not doubt that the motives of the -President were perfectly correct and patriotic, but it was not the first -time, he asserted, that that had been done. The bill for the -reconstruction of the seceded States passed both Houses by an -overwhelming majority; but it was defeated by the President’s failure to -approve, and the adjournment of Congress before ten days elapsed. In his -manifesto or proclamation he approved portions and disapproved -others.[398] - -Short as this paper was, however, it was entirely characteristic of the -President. This little lesson in constitutional law is only another -proof that Mr. Lincoln possessed in an eminent degree the faculty of -seeing clearly through the most intricate question. His disposal of this -difficulty as well as his reflections on Congress remind one of the -facility with which he straightened out for General Butler the liquor -problem at Norfolk. The succeeding chapter will describe another phase -of the controversy between the political departments of the Government. - ------ - -Footnote 366: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 505. - -Footnote 367: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 533. - -Footnote 368: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 534–535. - -Footnote 369: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 535–536. - -Footnote 370: - - Ibid., p. 536. - -Footnote 371: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 535–537. - -Footnote 372: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 537, 548. - -Footnote 373: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 548–549. - -Footnote 374: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 549–550. - -Footnote 375: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 550. - -Footnote 376: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 550–551. - -Footnote 377: - - Ibid., pp. 551–552. - -Footnote 378: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 553–554. - -Footnote 379: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 554–555. - -Footnote 380: - - Ibid., pp. 555–556. - -Footnote 381: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 556. - -Footnote 382: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 557–558. - -Footnote 383: - - Ibid., p. 558. - -Footnote 384: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 385: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 576–582. - -Footnote 386: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 575. - -Footnote 387: - - Ibid., pp. 576–582. - -Footnote 388: - - Ibid., p. 582. - -Footnote 389: - - Ibid., p. 583. - -Footnote 390: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 585. - -Footnote 391: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 591. - -Footnote 392: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 593. - -Footnote 393: - - Ibid., p. 594. - -Footnote 394: - - Ibid., pp. 594–595. - -Footnote 395: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 595. - -Footnote 396: - - The subject of the counting of the electoral votes will be found in - the Congressional Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 668–669. - -Footnote 397: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 711. - -Footnote 398: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 711. - - - - - X - SENATE DEBATE ON LOUISIANA - - -At the opening of its second session, December 5, 1864, the Speaker of -the Thirty-eighth Congress laid before the House the credentials of W. -D. Mann, T. M. Wells, Robert W. Taliaferro, A. P. Field and M. F. -Bonzano, who claimed seats as Representatives from the State of -Louisiana. A petition, signed by numerous citizens of that commonwealth, -protesting against the admission of these claimants, was referred at the -same time on motion of Henry Winter Davis to the Committee of Elections -in connection with their credentials, which had already received the -same direction. On the 13th this remonstrance was ordered to be printed. - -Mr. Dawes on February 11 following reported that “M. F. Bonzano is -entitled to a seat in this House as a Representative from the First -Congressional District of Louisiana.” Six days later he presented a -report and resolutions from his committee to the effect that Messrs. -Field and Mann from the Second and Third Districts, respectively, were -also entitled to seats. These reports with the accompanying resolutions -were laid on the table and ordered to be printed. - -No further action was taken on the question of their admission, but on -March 3, 1865, Chairman Dawes by unanimous consent reported from the -Committee of Elections a resolution that there be paid to each of the -Louisiana claimants for compensation, expenses and mileage the sum of -$2,000 and a like amount to T. M. Jacks, J. M. Johnson and A. A. C. -Rogers, claimants from Arkansas. - -The House, however, was not nearly so unanimous as its committee. Mr. -Washburne remarked that Congress, by allowing at the last session the -sum of $1,500 to one gentleman who claimed a seat, had fixed a sort of -rule in such cases. That amount he would, probably, not object to paying -to the present applicants; but if large payments, such as the -compensation proposed by the resolution, were made to men coming to the -Capitol it was feared they might not soon stop. - -Representative Johnson, of Pennsylvania, believed that regardless of -their right to seats they should be compensated because they had been -encouraged to come; they appeared at the Capitol, he asserted, with an -honest expectation of getting seats, and in an honest effort to restore -popular government to their States. - -Mr. Dawes declared that they came not as adventurers but under what they -supposed was the policy of the General Government; hence the favorable -recommendation of the committee. When he demanded the previous question, -Representative Brandegee moved to lay the resolution on the table. -Thaddeus Stevens asked to strike out the words “claimants for seats.” To -this the Massachusetts member offered no objection. “I do not want to -recognize the idea,” added Stevens, “that anybody on earth thinks that -these men are entitled to seats.”[399] This request, however, was -denied, and the resolution was then adopted. - -It was during their three months’ sojourn in Washington that one of the -claimants, A. P. Field, committed an assault upon Representative William -D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, whom he regarded as the chief obstacle to -their admission. This occurrence, which took place on February 20 at the -Willard Hotel, was due, no doubt, to the artificial excitement of the -Louisiana claimant, but was without influence upon the action of the -House.[400] - -The General Assembly of Louisiana, as previously related, had chosen -Charles Smith and R. King Cutler as United States Senators. With the -Representatives-elect these gentlemen also appeared in Washington as -claimants for seats. On December 7, two days after Congress assembled, -the president _pro tempore_ presented certain proceedings of the -Louisiana Legislature declaratory of the election of Smith and Cutler. -The papers, it was announced, would lie on the table unless otherwise -ordered. Just as Henry Winter Davis had done in the House, Senator Wade -offered a memorial from Louisiana citizens remonstrating against their -admission, and also against the reception of any electoral vote from -that State. On his motion it was agreed that all documents pertaining to -the subject be printed. On the following day, December 8, the -credentials as well as the remonstrance were referred to the Committee -on the Judiciary. - -Senator Trumbull on February 17 succeeding made a report from his -committee, and offered a joint resolution relative to the credentials of -Smith and Cutler. At the request of Charles Sumner the resolution was -read at length and was as follows: - - That the United States do hereby recognize the government of the - State of Louisiana, inaugurated under and by the convention which - assembled on the 6th day of April, A. D., 1864, at the city of New - Orleans, as the legitimate government of the said State, and - entitled to the guarantees and all other rights of a State - government under the Constitution of the United States.[401] - -This resolution was limited to Louisiana because the facts, while in -many respects similar, were not identical with those in the case of -Arkansas. Besides, when the subject first came up in committee the -Arkansas case had not been presented, though it arose before Louisiana -had been disposed of. Trumbull believed it the intention of the -committee to act immediately upon Arkansas when the case of Louisiana -had been considered.[402] - -Sumner moved, February 23, to strike out all of the joint resolution -except the enacting clause, and to substitute the following: - - That neither the people nor the Legislature of any State, the people - of which were declared to be in insurrection against the United - States by the proclamation of the President, dated August 16, 1861, - shall hereafter elect Representatives or Senators to the Congress of - the United States until the President, by proclamation, shall have - declared that armed hostility to the Government of the United States - within such State has ceased; nor until the people of such State - shall have adopted a constitution of government not repugnant to the - Constitution and laws of the United States; nor until, by a law of - Congress, such State shall have been declared to be entitled to - representation in the Congress of the United States of America.[403] - -To this amendment Senator Trumbull objected that it would put it in the -power of the President, by refusing to issue his proclamation, to keep a -State out forever. Sumner’s substitute was promptly defeated by a vote -of 29 to 8.[404] - -Of the members of the committee Powell alone opposed the resolution -offered by Mr. Trumbull. The chief object in recognizing the government -of Louisiana at that time, said the Kentucky Senator, was to allow that -State to vote for the proposed amendment of the Constitution; to do that -effectually those favorable to the resolution desired first to admit her -Senators and Representatives; their admission would be the immediate -effect of its passage. - -A just conclusion on that subject could be reached only by information -concerning the action of the President, of the military, and of the -people of Louisiana in connection with the election. He opposed the -loyal government because it was not formed by the people of that State; -however, he did not want to be classed with those who thought Louisiana -out of the Union. He believed that something approximating a majority of -her people should indicate a willingness to return to the Union, and -should participate in the movement for reorganization. The formation of -the existing government, he asserted, was controlled and influenced by -persons who were not citizens of Louisiana, and, he added, “It is a -government formed really and virtually by the military power of the -United States, using as instruments delegates who were elected under and -by force of the bayonet.” - -Before Senators could vote for the resolution, he continued, they must -maintain the doctrine announced in the President’s proclamation of -December 8, 1863, when he proposed that one tenth of the loyal voters in -a State who would comply with the conditions therein prescribed, could -form a State government; they must further maintain that the President, -of his own volition, had power by decretal order to alter the -constitution of a State; that the President had power to prescribe the -qualifications both of voters and candidates for office in the States; -finally they must believe that not only did the President possess these -powers, but that Major-General Banks, in virtue of his office, possessed -them in Louisiana. - -Mr. Powell proposed to show that not only did Louisiana people not act -of their own volition, but that “they were coerced to do what they did.” -The constitution of that State, he asserted, was not made by the free -suffrage of the people. - -The creation of a State government is a purely civil act; the people -must act without restraint. He had never heard any Senator say that the -President could legitimately exercise the power assumed in his -proclamation of December 8, 1863. Mr. Powell objected to the oath which -was to be taken as a condition precedent to becoming a qualified elector -in one of the revolted States, especially to that portion which promised -support of all future proclamations of the President on the question of -slavery. “Why, sir,” he exclaimed, “the President may proclaim that the -negro shall be the master and the white man the slave; that the negro -shall be the voter and the white man deprived of the right of suffrage; -and yet this oath requires the man taking it to swear in advance that he -would support even such a measure as that.... - -“At the very threshold, then,” he continued, “you repudiate the great -principle of republican government that majorities shall rule. Here you -propose to say not that majorities, but that less than one tenth shall -rule.” It was intimated by the President that when they made a -constitution it must not recognize African slavery. General Banks, -carrying out the suggestion of the President, as well as what had been -distinctly stated to General Steele in relation to Arkansas, took it -upon himself to alter the constitution of Louisiana in that respect. - -Whence does the President, it was asked, derive the power to prescribe -qualifications for either electors or candidates? The proclamation, the -Kentucky Senator asserted, was the basis of the whole proceeding, and -those who voted for the resolution endorsed the proclamation. - -Mr. Powell then reviewed the acts and read the proclamation of General -Banks, whose conduct he denounced for presuming to declare certain parts -of the Louisiana constitution no longer applicable to any class of -persons in that State, and, therefore, inoperative and void. - -He further objected that Banks had no authority to call the convention, -for the constitution of Louisiana could be lawfully amended in only the -mode pointed out by itself. The President’s proclamation, he added, -would allow only those to vote who were qualified electors under the -fundamental law of the State; those in the army and navy were not, but -General Banks in his ukase of February 13, 1864, allowed them to -participate in the election. - -He also invited attention to the action of the Department Commander in -designating provost marshals to take care that the polls were properly -opened, in the absence of the sheriffs, and that suitable persons were -appointed judges of election and so forth. Of the 11,414 votes he -asserted that 808 were cast by soldiers who under the President’s -proclamation were not legal voters. The fact, added Mr. Powell, that -General Banks after the inauguration of Hahn as governor continued to -issue proclamations shows that the civil was controlled by the military -authority. - -Passing on to a discussion of the statement of Banks before the -Committee on the Judiciary that the military did not interfere in the -election of February 22, Senator Powell quoted the following passages -from a proclamation of the Department Commander: - - Those who have exercised or are entitled to the rights of citizens - of the United States will be required to participate in the measures - necessary for the reëstablishment of civil government.... It is - therefore a solemn duty resting upon all persons to assist in the - earliest possible restoration of civil government. Let them - participate in the measures suggested for this purpose. Opinion is - free and candidates are numerous. Open hostility cannot be - permitted. Indifference will be treated as a crime, and faction as - treason. - -“Talk to me,” exclaimed Mr. Powell, “of freedom of election under such -military orders! Why, sir, there was but one free man, in my opinion, in -all Louisiana at that time, and that was Major-General Banks; and I do -not know that he was free, for he was serving his master at the White -House.” The fundamental law there was martial law, which is but the will -of the commander-in-chief, and under that law he could have beheaded -them if they did not vote. - -From beginning to end, he continued, the coercive finger of the military -was engaged in the establishment of that government. Under the various -proclamations even Unionists, men who had always been loyal, could not -vote unless they took the oath required in the President’s proclamation. -There was a large class of loyal men in Louisiana, he said, who refused -to take that oath, for there had been presented to the Judiciary -Committee an earnest protest signed by Thomas J. Durant and thirty-one -others, influential Union men of that State, against the admission of -Senators and Representatives and against counting its electoral vote. -Those Senators, he added toward the conclusion of his remarks, who only -a few days before opposed the counting of Louisiana’s electoral vote -should now vote against the resolution acknowledging the government -which appointed the Senators that are claiming seats.[405] - -Sumner and Davis referred to the resolution as a shadow. To this Mr. -Doolittle replied that the vote of Louisiana might be necessary to -secure the constitutional amendment, and that the new constitution of -that State had struck the shackles from 90,000 slaves not reached by the -Emancipation Proclamation. - -Mr. Henderson, who favored the resolution, secured the floor, and -observed, among other things, that Louisiana and Arkansas did not claim -that they were yet strong enough to maintain their governments without -the military aid of the nation; but neither was Maryland, West Virginia, -Kentucky or Missouri; even Ohio, Indiana or Illinois, he said, could not -without national assistance maintain their State organizations for sixty -days against the Confederate armies. - -“If we would have State governments,” said Mr. Henderson, “we must begin -somewhere and at some time.” It was nonsensical, he argued to talk of -restoring the Union, while keeping the loyal people in those States for -all time to come under military domination. “We must declare the right -in Congress,” he added, “to make and establish these governments for the -States, or permit the President, under military law, to set them up, or -we must recognize such as the loyal people may set up for themselves.” -If, as Madison thought, Congress cannot make them, but can only -guarantee such as already exist and are found to be republican in form, -it must be left with the President, under his power as the head of the -army, or to the people of the respective States. If left entirely with -the President he might by military force impose upon the State a -constitution against the wishes of both the loyal and disloyal. The -Senator frankly admitted that neither House would be under any -obligation to receive members sent from a State so constituted. - -“But,” he went on to say, “if the people—the loyal masses, whether a -majority or a minority of the whole voting population as formerly -known—participated in its creation and acquiesce in the revival of the -State government, the case though inaugurated by the President in my -judgment would be very different. According to the theory of our -Government, and its practice in all its past time in analogous cases, it -would seem that whether Congress or the President inaugurated the -proceeding, the constitution can only receive its validity and authority -from the approval or acquiescence of the people to be affected; and that -brings me to consider how the people in the seceded States shall revive -their governments, and who are the legally qualified voters for that -purpose in these States. - -“At the threshold of the inquiry we are met with the objection that the -States are now without officers of any kind legally elected, and that of -themselves they are powerless to inaugurate any movement to set up a -loyal government. It is said they have no officials to superintend the -election, to count the votes, and grant certificates of election. -However desirable these formalities may be, it has not been the uniform -practice of Congress to require them.” - -In the case of California, continued Mr. Henderson, the first election -was called by the military order of a subordinate officer of the army, a -delegate convention was chosen, a constitution was framed by that -assembly and submitted to Congress. It was accepted as republican in -form, and under it a State government was inaugurated that for fifteen -years had been administered with the greatest success. The territory, he -said, was wholly without civil authorities recognized by the United -States. Congress had passed no enabling act, had prescribed no forms of -proceeding, had failed to fix the qualifications of voters, had -appointed no judges of election or other officers to count and certify -the votes; yet the act, however informal, was ratified because the -constitution on its face was unobjectionable in form, and it was -believed that the people interested acquiesced in the government it -established. - -If the people of Rhode Island, added Mr. Henderson, had acquiesced in -the government set up under Dorr, Congress and the Executive would have -recognized it as legitimate. The Senator from Kentucky contended that -although a majority of the legal and qualified voters of Louisiana -should acquiesce in the new constitution Congress could not admit the -State. In support of his view Mr. Henderson pointed to the State -government of Missouri, which was the offspring of a movement purely -revolutionary. - -In the States whose representatives were seeking admission to Congress -but one government asked recognition, and what if these organizations -were of revolutionary origin?—the revolution was on the side of loyalty. -Revolutionary governments had been accepted in time of peace—governments -springing up in the midst of anarchy, without the sanctions of -regularity; why, he asked, should they be rejected now when they were -needed to protect the loyal inhabitants of the respective States and to -aid the nation in vindicating its lost authority? - -The assertion that on the face of these constitutions they were -republican in form Senator Sumner denied. They did not follow out the -principles of the Federal Constitution. This general answer was -unsatisfactory, and Mr. Henderson said that the only question with him -was how could he best get these States performing their legitimate -functions in the Union again. If, as the Massachusetts Senator -maintained, the act of secession took the States out, why could not the -act of loyal men bring them back? If secession, he argued, was potent -enough to take a State out, and that was mere revolution, why could not -the loyal men perfect a revolution on the side of Government as well as -rebels perfect a revolution on the side of secession, outrage and wrong? - -The doctrine that secession took the States out of the Union, Sumner -objected to have imputed to him. A subsequent remark indicated one -ground of his opposition to the government of Louisiana. “If the loyal -men, white and black, recognize it, then,” he declared, “it will be -republican in form. Unless that is done, it will not be.” - -When asked whether Congress could interfere with the right of suffrage -in one of the States, Sumner evaded a candid reply, and concealed his -meaning under these words: “It is the bounden duty of the United States -by act of Congress to guarantee complete freedom to every citizen, and -immunity from all oppression, and absolute equality before the law.” No -government that does not guarantee these things, he added, can be -recognized as republican in form according to the theory of the Federal -Constitution, if the United States are called upon to enforce the -constitutional guaranty. - -Senator Henderson, interpreting this answer in the affirmative, observed -that if under the guaranty clause the national Legislature could -regulate the suffrage in the States, there was no limitation except the -mere discretion of Congress. In support of this position he cited -Madison in No. 43 of _The Federalist_, and of course had this part of -the argument his own way, for the test of a republican form satisfactory -to the Massachusetts Senator would leave few representatives in -Congress. - -Mr. Henderson denied that the admission of Senators and Representatives -from these commonwealths would be a precedent for other States to demand -recognition, even with the institution of slavery, thus bringing back -the germs of a new rebellion against the Government; because in the -constitutions presented involuntary servitude was abolished. With -slavery remaining any restoration would be utterly useless. It was -against union with the free States that the Southern people had taken up -arms, and against restoration that they continued to use them. In that -struggle they would employ every moral and material force, including the -slave himself, stimulated by the boon of freedom, to resist the return -of their States. Whatever the future might bring, it would fail to bring -to the doors of Congress seeking admission a State constitution without -a positive interdict of slavery. - -To the objection that a majority of the people of these States were in -rebellion and that to recognize the loyal minority would be to subvert -the whole republican system Senator Henderson replied that if it were -strictly true that a majority in a particular community “not only shall -but must govern,” then a majority of legal voters in a State desiring to -secede would have the undoubted right to do so. As no principle of the -General Government authorized such action, it was not true, he said, -that a majority of citizens in a State can govern themselves except in -strict obedience to the Constitution of the United States. If a majority -proved derelict and undertook to destroy the very Government of which -the State is a part, it is right that the minority, who sustain the -Government in its entirety, State and national, should institute -government for their protection. He admitted that General Banks did a -great many things for which there was no legal authority; but the -question was whether this constitution was the will of the loyal men of -Louisiana. If it was, their representatives had a right to seats on the -floor of Congress. - -In reply to Sumner, Senator Henderson said he favored the idea that the -loyal men should govern a State, and he added, if that be the government -of the few it results from the voluntary disloyalty of the many. They, -of their own will, had relinquished the right to govern themselves under -the Constitution, and as they had no right to govern themselves -otherwise they could not govern at all. As to the oligarchy of skin, to -which Sumner had referred, Henderson believed that the regulation of the -suffrage was a question for the consideration of the States; if they -conferred the franchise on the negro, he did not object. - -As to the Louisiana constitution the question was whether it embodied -the will of those legally entitled to exercise the functions of the -State government. If the casting of illegal votes vitiated elections, -but few elections, he asserted, would be valid. - -If those States were admitted, they could immediately settle all -questions of suffrage, and Congress would be relieved of the difficulty -in future. He put clearly the difference of opinion prevailing among -Senators on this subject when he stated that Mr. Powell objected to the -new constitution of Louisiana because negro soldiers were permitted to -vote, while Mr. Sumner opposed it because negroes at home did not vote. -Concluding this part of his speech, he declared that the Federal -Government by recognizing the old organization in Rhode Island against -Dorr expressed its preference for a constitution of restricted suffrage. - -Without naming his authority Henderson then read from a private letter -the opinion of a gentleman whom he regarded as one of the ablest jurists -in the United States.[406] The correspondent said in part: - - It must be observed that the civil society, and the political - society so to speak, of a State need not necessarily do [be] the - same. In other words the basis of _representation_ may be the whole - population, but the basis of _suffrage_ be property, adult years, - &c. The power to choose rulers is lodged in the voters, and they may - not exceed one tenth of the population.... That portion of the - population in which political power is lodged, determines who shall - fill the respective offices, make laws, etc. Although the members of - that society may have possessed every requisite therefor, yet the - moment they ceased to be citizens of the United States they ceased - to belong thereto. - - That rule holds good with respect to every member, and the political - society may, by death, disqualification of members, &c., be reduced - to a very few persons. To state an extreme case, for illustration of - the principle, Massachusetts formerly had a property qualification, - and although her population entitled her to, say, thirteen - Representatives in the United States House, her voters may not have - exceeded fifty thousand. Suppose while that qualification remained, - by some financial or other disaster, only one thousand or one - hundred citizens retained the necessary income or property, would - not the persons chosen to Congress by the few and only remaining - voters be duly elected? So with regard to any other element of - suffrage, as United States citizenship, if by its loss the voters - are reduced to very few in number, do not those few constitute the - political or voting power? As to the policy or impolicy of - restricted suffrage, we are not now concerned, but are endeavoring - to reach a constitutional and legal analysis of our governmental - system. - - But here is encountered the startling and practical difficulty, - “Shall a few persons be permitted to govern a State, despite the - wishes of its inhabitants, and without giving them all a voice? Is - that republican?” - - But it must be remembered that the few voters, say one seventh, or - one tenth of the whole population, have always been intrusted with - that power. Wisdom has fixed the basis of suffrage, without regard - to relative numbers; that is, it has endeavored, under our popular - system, to give the right or privilege to as many citizens as were - supposed competent to exercise it intelligently. The rules - prescribed as to age, sex, citizenship, &c., were deemed essential, - right, and proper. Whether many or few come within the rules does - not affect their validity.... If persons heretofore entitled to a - vote chose to commit a felony, and incur thereby, as a penalty, the - deprivation of their former right of suffrage, it is not supposed - that the loss of such votes is anti-republican. If, then, a majority - choose to perpetrate treason, or to expatriate themselves, or in any - other way become disqualified, how does that action vitiate the - rule? If they, after becoming disqualified, remain in the State, are - they not bound to submit to its rulers and laws? If their rulers are - chosen without their voice, is it not in consequence of their own - voluntary action? Indeed, it often happens that the persons elected - to office receive only a meager minority of the votes which could - have been lawfully polled, yet that fact has no influence upon the - legal result. So a person is often chosen by a minority of the votes - actually cast, and is not the majority bound to submit? - -The author of this letter appears to have been more familiar with the -Constitution, as it was understood by its framers, than almost any -member of either House, notwithstanding the presence in Congress of many -distinguished statesmen. In the following eight propositions Mr. -Henderson then gave a masterly summary of the Presidential plan of -reconstruction: - - 1. I hold that the seceded States are still in the Union and cannot - get out of it except through amendment of the Constitution - permitting it. - - 2. The seceded States being still in the Union are entitled to claim - all the rights accorded to other States. - - 3. That each State now in the Union has the right to stand upon the - form of its constitution as it existed at the time of its admission. - The people of such State may change its constitution, provided they - retain a republican form of government; but neither the President - nor Congress can reform, alter, or amend such constitution, nor - prescribe any alteration or amendment as a condition of association - with the other States of the Union. The General Government may - properly lend its aid to enable the people to express their will; - but any attempt to exercise power constitutionally reserved to the - State, beyond what may be demanded by the immediate exigencies of - war, will not tend to restore the Union, but rather to destroy our - whole system of government. - - 4. When citizens of a State rebel and take up arms against the - General Government they lose their rights as citizens of the United - States, and they necessarily forfeit those rights and franchises in - their respective States which depend on United States citizenship. - - 5. If a seceded State be still in the Union, entitled to recognition - as a State, and a majority of the people have voluntarily withdrawn - their allegiance, the loyal minority constitute the State and should - govern it. - - 6. Congress should not reject the governments presented because of - mere irregularity in the proceedings leading to their - reorganization. - - 7. If Congress has no right to make and impose a constitution upon - the people of any State; if its power extends no further than to - guaranty preëxisting republican forms of government; if the State - still exists, and the loyal men are entitled to exercise the - functions of its government, it follows that the only questions to - be examined here are, first, is the constitution the will of the - loyal men qualified to act? and, second, is it republican in form? - - 8. The constitutions of Louisiana and Arkansas are thought to be - republican in form, and it is admitted that the loyal men of those - States respectively acquiesce in them. Hence the duty of Congress to - recognize them, and the duty of each House to admit their - representatives.[407] - -On February 25 debate on Trumbull’s resolution was resumed. At this -point Mr. Sumner offered an amendment in substance as follows: - - That it is the duty of the United States at the earliest practicable - moment, consistent with the common defence and general welfare, to - reëstablish by act of Congress republican governments in those - States where loyal governments have been vacated by the existing - rebellion, and thus, to the full extent of their power, fulfil the - requirement of the Constitution, that “the United States shall - guaranty to every State in this Union a republican form of - government.” - - Sec. 2. _And be it further resolved_, That this important duty is - imposed by the Constitution in express terms on “the United States,” - and not on individuals or classes of individuals, or on any military - commander or executive officer, and cannot be intrusted to any such - persons, acting, it may be, for an oligarchical class, and in - disregard of large numbers of loyal people; but it must be performed - by the United States, represented by the President and both Houses - of Congress, acting for the whole people thereof. - - Sec. 3. _And be it further resolved_, That, in determining the - extent of this duty, and in the absence of any precise definition of - the term “republican form of government,” we cannot err, if, when - called to perform this guaranty under the Constitution, we adopt the - self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence as an - authoritative rule, and insist that in every reëstablished State the - consent of the governed shall be the only just foundation of - government, and all men shall be equal before the law. - -Not less important is the declaration in the fourth section that “in the -performance of this guaranty, there can be no power under the -Constitution to disfranchise loyal people, or to recognize any such -disfranchisement, especially when it may hand over the loyal majority to -the government of the disloyal minority; nor can there be any power -under the Constitution to discriminate in favor of the rebellion by -admitting to the electoral franchise rebels who have forfeited all -rights and by excluding loyal persons who have never forfeited any -right.” To allow the reëstablishment of any State without proper -safeguards for the rights of all the citizens, and especially without -making it impossible for rebels to trample upon the rights of those who -are now fighting the battles of the Union, would be, said the succeeding -section, for the United States to fail in duty under the Constitution. - -More directly in opposition to the resolution reported by the chairman -of the Judiciary Committee, however, was the seventh section, which -declared “That a government founded on military power, or having its -origin in military orders, cannot be a ‘republican form of government’ -according to the requirement of the Constitution; and that its -recognition will be contrary not only to the Constitution, but also to -that essential principle of our Government which, in the language of -Jefferson, establishes ‘the supremacy of the civil over the military -authority.’” - -The resolutions further asserted that a government founded on an -oligarchical class, even if erroneously recognized as a “republican form -of government,” could not sustain itself without national support; that -such an organization was not at that moment competent to discharge the -duties and execute the powers of a State, and that its recognition would -tend to enfeeble the Union, to postpone the day of reconciliation and to -endanger the national tranquillity. The ninth section renders clear one -ground of Sumner’s hostility to the recognition of Louisiana. It asserts -that - - Considerations of expediency are in harmony with the requirements of - the Constitution, and the dictates of justice and reason, especially - now, when colored soldiers have shown their military value; that as - their muskets are needed for the national defence against rebels in - the field, so are their ballots yet more needed against the subtle - enemies of the Union at home; and that without their support at the - ballot-box the cause of human rights and of the Union itself will be - in constant peril.[408] - -It was agreed on motion of Mr. Sumner to have his amendment printed. - -Senator Howard, of Michigan, entered at this point into the debate. Much -of what he said has already been related in the preceding narration of -events leading up to the reinauguration of a loyal government in -Louisiana. While admitting that the President’s plan had been undertaken -for patriotic ends, he could not, he said, recognize in the Executive, -without the subsidiary aid of an act of Congress, any right to assure a -community, composed of voters numbering one tenth of the electors who -participated in the Presidential contest of 1860, that it would be -recognized as a legitimate government and entitled to the constitutional -guaranty. This, he said, was a stretch of authority beyond any previous -attempt, and he thought it time that Congress, in whom, he believed, -rested solely the authority of readmitting and reconstructing the -rebellious States, “should lay hold of this subject, assert their power, -and provide by some statute of uniform application for the -reconstruction, as it is called, and readmission of the insurrectionary -States. That is their right and their duty; that is not the right, it is -not the duty of the President.” - -A State he defined negatively as not “the geographical superficies,” the -land, on which population resides, and positively as “a moral person, a -political community, possessing the faculty of political government.” -The land, he said, is the theatre on which the political community moves -and acts, but is endowed with no thought, no right, no duty. The -thinking beings residing upon it constitute the State.[409] - -“A State of the Union or a State in the Union is, therefore, a people -yielding obedience to the laws of the Union, that is, the acts of -Congress and the national treaties.... A people who have a State -government which is republican in form; a people who were one of the -original thirteen States which formed the United States, or a people who -have, since the adoption of the Constitution, been, in the language of -that Constitution, ‘admitted by the Congress into this Union’ as States -upon an equal footing with the original States; for this equality of -rights and powers as States is plainly implied by the language and the -manifest intention of the instrument; and no other people except such -original State or admitted State; none but a State which permits the -laws of the Union to have full scope and force within its limits; none -but a State which sends Senators and Representatives to Congress -friendly to the Government itself, willing to vote men and money to -support and uphold it, who believe that a person forcibly resisting its -authority is a traitor and deserving of death; none but a State which is -willing to bring to trial, to convict such a traitor, and to punish him -for his treason; none but a State whose population is capable of -furnishing both the grand jury to indict and the traverse jury to -convict such a traitor; none but a State whose population and whose -authorities are in favor not only of permitting the laws of the United -States relating to civil rights to be executed, but who are willing that -the punitive code of the nation, the code of vengeance against its -enemies, shall be carried out; none but such are States of the Union.... - -“To be in fact a State of the Union and in the Union, this will or -consent of the people must be in harmony with the Constitution, and its -movements subsidiary to it. It must regard the Constitution as its -highest political good; its injunctions as the highest human law, its -commands as the infallible and final measure of civil duty. In short, to -be in the Union is to be actively and willingly coöperating with other -States in the performance of all those acts and things without which the -Federal Government cannot act or move, cannot perform the functions -required of it by the Constitution; it is to elect Senators and -Representatives to the Congress of the United States; to permit the -courts of the United States to be held within their limits, and its -citizens to act as jurors and officers of the court; to permit the -judgments and sentences of the court to be executed against its -citizens; to permit the United States mail to be carried through the -State and its contents distributed according to law; to permit the -officers of the United States to collect the Federal revenue whether -derived from foreign or domestic products; to permit the United States -to manage and control their own property, whether consisting of forts, -dockyards, arsenals, mints, or public lands; to make such elections of -Senators and Representatives freely and as the means of maintaining -itself as a State in the Union; and to permit all these things willingly -and freely as rights belonging to the Federal Government with which -neither the State government nor the people of the State have any right -whatever to interfere. In short, to be a State in the Union is to use -all those powers of the State which have a relation to the Federal -Government in a manner friendly to that Government, friendly to its -existence and continuance, in a manner promotive of the objects of that -Government; and to permit without hindrance the exercise within the -State of all the powers of the Federal Government.” - -Though he declined to discuss the question whether a State by omitting -to send Representatives and Senators to Congress would on that account -cease to be a member of the Union, he gave it as his opinion that mere -failure to be represented in Congress would not be followed by such -consequences; but if a State not only refused to participate in Federal -legislation but went farther, and as a political community made war upon -the General Government, he declared that “it would be folly, madness, to -say that the State was not our enemy in every sense in which that term -can be employed to describe hostile relations between independent -communities.... No one will pretend that such a community is in the -Union in fact, for that would be to make an admission and in the same -breath to contradict it. _De facto_, such a community, and, if it be -bounded by State lines, such a State, is as completely out of the Union -as is Canada or Mexico, from the moment it assumes the attitude of -hostility until it is subdued and conquered by our arms, or until it -voluntarily lays down its arms, ejects its hostile government and -returns _in fact_ to its once friendly sentiments and friendly relations -to the Federal Government.” - -“Loyalty,” continued Senator Howard, “thus becomes the final test in -solving the question, what is a State in the Union? If a State by its -overt acts has shown a want of this friendship, it is no longer in the -Union _de facto_, and cannot be treated as if it were. The Supreme -Court, acting upon the soundest principles of public law, have decided -the waging of war by a State, although acting under an illegitimate and -revolutionary government, renders her territory enemy’s territory, and -the people there resident enemies of the United States, in the sense of -the laws of war. And their decision could not have been different.” - -The State, he argued further, was in fact, though wrongfully, out of the -Union because its actual government was disloyal and treasonable. Out of -it because unsubdued rebellion made it for the time being an independent -though unrecognized nation on the earth’s surface, throwing off its -allegiance to its paramount Government, and assuming by the sword to -assert its separate nationality. - -“But we are at war with the rebel States, and are told ... that the -Government, so far at least as the rebel States are concerned, is under -some peculiar constitutional restraint by which its hands are tied; that -we are prohibited from ‘subjugating’ those States; that all we can do, -under the Constitution, is to break up the military array of the rebels, -disperse their armed bands, take away their arms, and do that very -indefinite duty, _restore order_; that thereupon our task is ended and -the rebel States have a constitutional right to come back into the Union -and participate in the enactment of Federal laws and the conduct of the -Federal Government. And we are menaced both in Congress and out with -terrible retributions if we conquer or attempt to conquer, if we -subjugate or attempt to subjugate, the rebel States. It is admitted by -these our critics that in an international war ... we should have all -the rights and powers of other independent nations, and might rightfully -conquer our adversary, ... that we might make a complete conquest of his -people and his territory.... - -“Now, it is lawful to wage such a foreign war, for the purpose of -effectuating such a complete conquest, and of course lawful to attain -it; ... lawful to substitute the political authority of the United -States for that of a hostile foreign nation;” otherwise, he argued, the -war could not be a successful one; hence in a war with a member of the -Union the United States could substitute for the authority of such -hostile commonwealth its own authority. There was no difference between -the two cases. The former actual hostile government should be supplanted -by the Federal Government. No other government had a right to give the -law. Had the conquered rebel people that right? No; for that would be to -allow them at once to expel their conquerors by a popular decree, and to -deny the supremacy of the Federal Government which had subdued them. Had -the old State government, he asked, the once loyal government, the right -to govern the conquered people? No; there was no such government. It had -long since ceased to exist. “In fact, there is no government there, none -at all, which can for a moment be recognized or permitted by the United -States, as the party now holding the actual mastery of the country; and -like every other case where the possession of a country has arisen from -the use of superior force, the will of the conqueror is the law—that is, -the will of the United States expressed, in the absence of acts of -Congress, by the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, but by the acts of -Congress after Congress has spoken. - -“... No one will deny that we have a right to subdue by arms and to -reduce to quietude and submission a rebel State, that is, the people of -a State in insurrection. But how absurd to make this concession, and at -the same time to deny to us the constitutional power to occupy and hold -the territory and its people in our military grasp—an occupation just as -necessary to the end in view as the firing of cannon, the charging of -cavalry, or any other operation in the field. - -“... The true objects of the war ... are the suppression of the -rebellion, the reëstablishment of the original Federal authority within -the State, and the revival of the loyalty of the people of the State as -the sole foundation and condition of all its civil rights as a State of -the Union and of the right of its people to be treated as friends and -not as enemies. Although the United States have the full and complete -right which conquest gives, for the purpose of subjecting these domestic -enemies to the exercise of the powers granted by the Constitution to -Congress, and for the purpose of restoring to the body-politic its vital -blood, loyalty to the Government, yet those purposes, those distinct -ends, are without doubt limits beyond which we cannot go. We are -restrained by the manifest objects for which the national Government was -formed; but restrained by no particular clause of the Constitution. The -instrument contains no such clause, and the limitation and restraint are -of precisely the same nature as those which any other government is -under in subduing an insurrection of its own subjects or citizens; the -plain object of the war in both cases being the restoration of -legitimate authority and the revival of allegiance. And until this -revival of allegiance there must be the same need of military occupation -and repression in both cases.” - -After showing that the existence of the States is indispensable to that -of the Federal Government, he proceeded, “it is not permissible by mere -interpretation to clothe that Government with a power permanently to -abolish the State government by way of punishing or suppressing the -rebellion; or to convert the States into mere Territories of the United -States, that is, public domain, to be divided up afterward by lines -different from those of the States, and again admitted into the Union -like matured Territories, with such new geographical limits as Congress -may see fit to establish.” - -Article IV., Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution the Senator -regarded as an express prohibition to change the boundaries of any State -once in the Union without its consent; “its consent in its capacity as a -State, freely given by its own Legislature.” He believed that the -Amnesty Proclamation of President Lincoln indicated that its author held -a different opinion. - -He rejected the idea that the rebellious States could be converted into -Territories. This term, under our system, he added, “implies land never -lying in any State, land ceded to the United States either by the old -States, or purchased or conquered from foreign nations. The term never -has been used to describe a State or any part of a State; and it implies -not only the ownership of the soil and right of disposition, but full -and complete political jurisdiction in the Federal Government over the -people resident there....” - -The objects of the conquest being as stated above, such forcible -occupation was, he continued, in its very nature temporary and ought to -cease the moment those objects were attained. This could not be done -without establishing a government to preserve order, life and property—a -provisional government, for that is the true historic name to be applied -in all cases where an old government has been overthrown; a provisional -government instituted by the conqueror, and to be continued just so long -as Congress deemed it necessary to continue it for the attainment, and -while attaining, those high objects. The occupancy, that is, the -possession of all the reins of local government by the Federal -authorities would be but temporary, provisional, fiduciary. It should -necessarily last until the Federal Government had done its duty in the -reëstablishment of order and the revival of loyalty. Until then it was, -and should continue, the omnipotent sovereign of the State, holding -actually by right of conquest, though for a particular purpose, and -being itself necessarily the final judge to determine when its tutelary -mission had been accomplished. - -He avoided, he said, a discussion of the question whether a State can -commit suicide, that is, extinguish its own being by waging a rebellious -war against the Federal Government; instead of presenting any such -abstract question of political dialectics, the case, he declared, merely -presented the usual question which arose whenever and wherever there had -been a forcible revolution. What, he inquired, was the duty of the -paramount and lawful government in its treatment of insurgent -communities? And was not the Government doing its whole duty in -punishing the ringleaders in the revolt and restoring the old and -constitutional Government over those districts? - -The Government, Mr. Howard proceeded, must be the final judge of the -duration of this military occupation. It was bound by the plain terms of -the Constitution not only to suppress the insurrection, which was done -the moment it had obtained firm possession of the whole of the hostile -territory, but to guarantee to the conquered State a republican form of -government. To perform this high and sacred trust, time of course was -necessary; likewise a great variety of means and instrumentalities, “of -all which the Government of the United States must, because it has no -superior, no equal in the matter, be the sole and final judge. These -means may embrace acts of provisional legislation, creating private -rights and duties not previously in existence, but existing by law and -of a permanent nature, paramount to all subsequent State legislation -because arising under the supreme authority of the nation, as, for -instance, the giving freedom to slaves; or they may undoubtedly embrace -conditions to be performed by the subdued States on taking their places -again in the Union, such as would be an ordinance forever abolishing -slavery in the State.... - -“Yet while thus in our military power, awaiting our action, looking to -their restoration, nothing is clearer than that the citizens of the -rebel States, though owing obedience to all the laws of the United -States, possess no political rights under the Constitution except -protection. They are not free to act, because their freedom to act -would, if indulged, lead them again to draw the sword against the United -States.... They have no right to send members to this body or to the -House of Representatives, much less to participate in the election of -President and Vice-President. They are the ward-provinces of the United -States, progressing toward the maturity of revived loyalty, but not yet -entitled to exercise the elective franchise or to participate in the -enactment of laws. - -“If I am asked what I mean by the Government of the United States, and -whether I mean that the President as Commander-in-Chief has the -exclusive power to establish these provisional governments, I answer, I -do not. He has the right to regulate military occupation until Congress -has acted upon the subject; ... but the establishment of provisional -governments, the quieting of the rebellious province and the -reëstablishment of legitimate authority over it, pertains to the -sovereign power, that is, the law-giving power of the nation. With us -that power is lodged in Congress and not in the President; and in my -opinion it is the business of Congress, and Congress alone, to establish -and uphold these provisional governments.... We need not doubt that -whatever we see fit to enact will be approved and carried out by the -President. We cannot be more truly anxious than he to fix upon a stable, -firm policy for restoring peace and union; but we ought not to shut our -eyes to the necessities he will continually be under, to the almost -irresistible importunities he will encounter, to provide some sort of -civil government for the subdued States or districts; or to the -consequences of leaving such mighty questions for him to decide. It is -our plain duty to establish a uniform rule on the subject, so that all -may be treated alike and the same remedy be applied with a paternal but -firm and resolute hand to each delinquent State.” - -He opposed for two reasons the “scheme” of allowing one tenth or any -other minor part of the male citizens of a commonwealth to organize a -government and assume to act as a State: first, “because as against the -will of an actual majority the government of such a minority must -necessarily come to a speedy end and thus invite a renewal of the civil -war, in that locality at least; and second, because government by a -minority is of evil example and inconsistent with the genius of American -liberty.... As a Republican I would sooner hazard ten slaveholders’ -rebellions than risk liberty in a government by a minority.” In this -connection he assigned an additional motive for his attitude toward the -resolution. The will of the friendly element, he said, could prevail -only by military support, and such an organization, if intended as a -civil government, was not republican in the sense of the Constitution. -When such aid was withdrawn the majority, he asserted, would wreak -vengeance on the weakened minority. - -Concluding this part of his argument, he added: “The measure now before -you proposes to acknowledge eight thousand citizens of Louisiana as a -State, and to give them the rights and privileges exercised by a voting -population of more than fifty thousand in 1860. Eight thousand are thus -to give the law or assume to give it to forty-two thousand—to more than -five times their number. This they may do so long as their decrees are -sustained by the presence and consent of a competent military force; but -we all know, both parties there know, the world knows, and, sir, -posterity will know, that it is not the eight thousand who govern the -State, but the fear of the bayonet, and the fear is inspired solely by -the President of the United States, as Commander-in-Chief of the Army -and Navy! Disguise it, or attempt to disguise it, as we may, to this -complexion doth it come at last. Yes, sir, both the eight thousand and -the forty-two thousand voters are governed not by themselves, but by the -bayonet! And this is at present the only government in Louisiana. The -object of the present measure is to continue this hybrid, unnatural -government there. It allows the meager and almost contemptible -proportion of less than one sixth of the voting population to govern the -whole State, and to have the influence of the whole State in our -legislation here, while we know that if the military forces were -withdrawn that privileged one sixth part would be swept away like chaff -before the hurricane breath of the enraged majority. Sir, such a -government is the merest bubble, especially if unsustained by military -power. This is too obvious to need further comment.” - -“All this we might possibly endure,” continued Senator Howard, “were it -not that the measure before us clothes this mockery of a government, -this king of shreds and patches, this mistletoe State _régime_ that -falls to the earth the moment it ceases to cling around the flag-staff -of the national forces, with the high attribute of voting upon and -determining questions of legislation, questions of war or peace, -questions of prosecuting or ceasing to prosecute the present war, in -this Hall and in the Hall of the House of Representatives. This measure -introduces here Senators and Representatives whose immediate friends and -relatives at home have deliberately aided and assisted to put to death -myriads of Union soldiers from the North, and in swelling up that vast -debt of more than two thousand million dollars which now rests upon the -country. Think you that such Senators and Representatives, whose -constituents have already been stripped of their property by the rebel -government, and brought down to the depths of poverty; a community -without the habits of labor among the intelligent classes; naked, -hungry, despondent and sullen; think you that their Representatives -would at the present time be safe depositories of the power to tax their -constituents to pay this debt? Is it not, on the other hand, the part of -prudence to guard against the contingency of having that debt repudiated -by such legislators and the still more disgraceful contingency of being, -by their votes, aided by a Northern party, finally compelled to pay the -rebel debt of $4,000,000,000? And tell me, what right has Louisiana, the -majority of whose population is to-day, wherever they are, hostile to -this Government and anxious for its overthrow; what right has she, upon -any recognized principle of public law or justice, to be represented in -Congress?” - -The treatment accorded Louisiana would, he feared, be a precedent for -the ten remaining States. There would be the expense of holding each for -a time in military occupation to bolster up their State governments. He -preferred for Louisiana and the other insurgent States a provisional -establishment for regulating domestic affairs, but without -representation in Congress until the mass of their people plainly -perceived their error in attempting to overthrow the General Government. - -Congress should, he thought, take the subject of readmission into their -own hands. It was for them and not for the President to execute the -important guaranty to each State of a republican form of government, and -that duty became more and more urgent as the Federal armies swept on -from victory to victory. In making good that guaranty the great -indispensable necessity, he declared, was loyalty.[410] - -Mr. Howard was followed immediately by Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, who -to the great surprise of his fellow-Democrats argued in favor of the -resolution. His remarks were introduced by a concise statement of the -chief political events occurring in Louisiana between the capture of New -Orleans and the ratification, in September, 1864, of the new -constitution. Concluding this part of his speech he said: - -“These, sir, are the facts. The Committee on the Judiciary—and in the -conclusion to which they came I concurred—were of opinion that under the -circumstances in which the State was at the period when these -proceedings were had, she could not be recognized as a State of the -United States under that constitution adopted in 1864, except by an act -of Congress. The committee were of opinion that it was not in the power -of the Executive under the circumstances to bring the State back under -that constitution. They were of opinion, however, that it was competent -for Congress to do so, and the only question before the Committee was, -whether, under the circumstances under which the State was at the time, -it was not the duty of Congress to bring the State back so as to have -her represented in the Union.” - -His objection to the conclusion of the committee was that the -proceedings which led to the adoption of the constitution were -instituted at the instance and under the power of the Federal military -authorities. The precedent, he admitted, was really a bad one, and the -proposition upon which the committee were called to decide was whether, -if they were satisfied that the number of votes said to have been cast -were in fact cast, and the persons voting were loyal citizens, they -should be denied the privilege of being represented in the councils of -the nation and subjected to a continuance of military power. Mr. Johnson -added: “My impression is that, no matter how the proceedings were -instituted, whether it was by the military authority, or by the coming -together of the people of the State, if in point of fact the people of -the State did act voluntarily and were competent to act under the -original constitution, and were authorized to act by being loyal at the -time they did act, it is the duty of the government of the United States -to receive them back. - -“Another objection was that, however true it might be that it would be -in the power of all the voters of the State to adopt a constitution for -themselves, or to claim the right of coming back to the Union under the -constitution existing at the time of the rebellion, it was not true that -it was in the power of fourteen [eleven] thousand, four hundred and -fourteen voters, when the entire voting population of the State was -fifty-one thousand, to take that course. As it seemed to me then, and -seems now, there is no evidence to show that a single citizen of -Louisiana was excluded from the right of voting.” - -It was not so certain, he argued further, that the eleven thousand -voters who participated were not a large majority of the actual electors -in Louisiana, for the war engaged the greater part of the voting -population, and nine tenths of those who entered the Confederate service -had forfeited their lives upon the battlefield; of those above or below -the military age many had gone elsewhere, or if they remained in the -State it was as disloyal citizens. - -It was not pretended, he said, in discussing the relation of the loyal -minority to the General Government, that by the act of secession they -ceased to be citizens of the United States. Their fidelity to the Union -entitled them to Federal protection. If loyal, they had forfeited no -rights belonging to them before the commencement of the rebellion. No -Federal law had been violated, no constitutional obligation evaded by -them. They could not ask admission into the Union, because to speak such -a desire was to subject themselves to punishment; when the protection of -the United States was afforded them and they could once more declare -their sentiments without hazard they met at their several election -polls, organized their government under existing law, and then, wishing -to change it, met in convention and adopted the constitution which had -been submitted to the Senate. “Why,” inquired Mr. Johnson, “should we -not receive it?” The right of eleven thousand citizens to change their -constitution was not denied, but their action was questioned because -there were others, then in arms against the Government of the United -States, who did not join them in asserting it. In examining the question -who were to exercise the authority of the State, he argued: “Now, if it -be true that the secession ordinance had no operation to carry the State -out, and that I understand even the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. -Sumner] admitted last night; if it be true that the State is in the -Union notwithstanding the ordinance, then the only question to be -considered is, who are the people of Louisiana that are to exercise the -sovereign authority belonging to the State of Louisiana? Are they the -loyal or the disloyal? There can be but one answer to that inquiry. It -must only be the loyal.” - -Senator Howard admitted, continued Mr. Johnson, that it is not in the -power of the United States to change the territorial limits of the -States that had gone out, because the Constitution prohibits it. If he -had thought for a moment he would have seen that the Constitution -equally prohibits any interference on the part of the General Government -with the exercise of the right of suffrage in a State. He then combated -at some length the intimation of Senators Howard and Sumner that any -power without a State had a right to prescribe qualifications for the -exercise of the suffrage. - -Mr. Powell, too, concurred in this view and asked by what authority -General Banks and the President undertook to prescribe the -qualifications of voters in Louisiana. The Maryland Senator replied that -this question had been anticipated. The eleven thousand four hundred and -fourteen voters, according to the proof before the Senate, were all -loyal men and entitled to vote by the original constitution of -Louisiana, no matter how they were brought together. If, coming -together, they did an act which they would have been authorized to do if -they had come together voluntarily they ought to be received. - -Powell then inquired, what right had the Senate to presume that there -may not have been twelve thousand loyal voters in Louisiana who were -deprived of the right of suffrage because of this order of General -Banks? As the Kentucky Senator understood it, no man could vote “unless -he would go forward and take the oath prescribed by the President and -swear to support and sustain all proclamations in regard to African -slavery already issued and all that might afterward be issued.” Mr. -Johnson acknowledged this difficulty and admitted that he had always -felt it; but they had the same difficulty, he asserted, in his own -State, and a much greater one; he would be sorry to think Maryland was -not in the Union. “Maryland is in the Union,” said Senator Powell. “The -constitution,” observed Johnson in reply, “which now makes her a State -in the Union was adopted the other day. I mean the one which governs -her. She has manumitted her slaves by force of that constitution. No man -in Maryland seriously contests the obligation of that constitution in -that particular or in any other. But it was adopted, in fact, by the -exclusion of a good many men who were entitled to vote.” - -Mr. Johnson at this point became engaged in an argument, not wholly -relevant, with Sumner in which he gained some advantage over the -Massachusetts Senator. As a specimen of the latter’s parliamentary -tactics at this time it may not be irrelevant to reproduce a passage -from the _Congressional Globe_. - - =Mr. Sumner.= Allow me to ask the Senator [Johnson] whether, in his - opinion, the Ordinance governing the Northwest Territory, - prohibiting slavery everywhere throughout that Territory, and which - was declared to be a perpetual compact, could be set aside by any - one of the States in the Territory now. - - =Mr. Johnson.= I certainly think they can, except so far as rights - are vested. - - =Mr. Sumner.= The Senator, then, thinks Ohio can enslave a - fellow-man? - - =Mr. Johnson.= Just as much as Massachusetts can. - - =Mr. Sumner.= Massachusetts cannot. - - =Mr. Johnson.= Why not? - - =Mr. Sumner.= Massachusetts cannot do an act of injustice. - - =Mr. Johnson.= Oh, indeed! I did not know that. [Laughter.][411] - -Notwithstanding this claim for his native State Sumner admitted a moment -later that Massachusetts had united in the Convention of 1787 with South -Carolina to deny to Congress authority to prohibit the slave trade for -twenty years, and he confessed that such action was unjust. His -inconsistency was still further exposed by Senator Henderson, who called -attention to the fact that the educational qualification imposed by the -Massachusetts constitution would exclude from the franchise almost every -negro in Louisiana if the provisions were applicable in the latter -State.[412] - -After this colloquy, not uninteresting to the student of constitutional -history, the Maryland Senator resumed his remarks: - -“One word more, sir, and I have done. If Congress passes this -resolution, and the State is admitted, no court will hereafter be able -to decide that she is not a State in the Union, and no court therefore -can call in question the validity or effect of any provision to be found -in her constitution. One of the provisions of this constitution is that -all the slaves of Louisiana are emancipated. Pass this resolution, admit -the State, and that provision is effectual at once.”[413] - -Mr. Sumner, having in mind the fundamental condition imposed by Congress -upon the admission of Missouri, offered the following amendment of the -resolution from the Committee on the Judiciary: - - _Provided_, That this shall not take effect except upon the - fundamental condition that within the State there shall be no denial - of the electoral franchise, or of any other rights on account of - color or race, but all persons shall be equal before the law. And - the Legislature of the State, by a solemn public act, shall declare - the assent of the State to this fundamental condition, and shall - transmit to the President of the United States an authentic copy of - such assent whenever the same shall be adopted, upon the receipt - whereof he shall, by proclamation, announce the fact; whereupon, - without any further proceedings on the part of Congress, this joint - resolution shall take effect.[414] - -Though Senator Clark favored the principle of Sumner’s amendment, he -opposed it, as it stood, because it affected a resolution which proposed -“to recognize the government in the State of Louisiana,” which in his -judgment was still a State in the Union, “having its constitution -overthrown, but desiring and attempting to establish a new” one; and he -added, “I hold that we have no power to amend that constitution; and -that is the reason why I shall be obliged to vote against it here.” - -He spoke for the adoption of Trumbull’s resolution and, in doing so, -traveled some of the ground gone over by Henderson. The government of -Louisiana, Mr. Clark believed, belonged to the Union people. He was not -aware that any definite number of persons was required to constitute a -State, nor did he understand how the majority by going into rebellion -could take away the rights of the loyal minority. - -The guaranty of a republican form of government was made, he asserted, -to meet precisely such a case as had arisen in Louisiana. In this view -it became the duty of Congress to protect the government established by -the minority.[415] - -Mr. Pomeroy, speaking to the principle of Sumner’s amendment, declared -that he would vote against all measures that looked like Congressional -interference with the right to vote in the States. Saulsbury interrupted -him to inquire what he would have done had the President, or his -Secretary of War, sent armed soldiers to the polls and imposed a test -upon voters as was done in Delaware, where Democrats were chased into -swamps and compelled in the night time to lie out in the snow. Pomeroy’s -only reply to this was to relate his own experience under Democratic -supremacy in the early days of Kansas. He resumed his remarks on -Louisiana, but these had been anticipated by the speakers who preceded -him. In conclusion he asserted that there were two reasons for -recognizing Arkansas where there was but one in favor of Louisiana.[416] - -The Delaware Senator did not fail to call attention to Pomeroy’s -evasion, and said he was glad to observe a change in the spirit of some -of his Republican friends. “I think,” he said, “they begin to scent the -danger in the distance; that they begin to see that if a Government of -law is to be destroyed, and power is to be concentrated in Executive -hands, or in the hands of Executive agents, there is an end of liberty -in this country. I hail the dawn, therefore, of a better day.”[417] - -Mr. Henderson again entered into the discussion, and in the course of -his remarks drew from Senator Sumner this remarkable statement -concerning Louisiana: “It is in and it is not. [Laughter.] The territory -is in; but as yet there is no State government that is in.” In this -discussion Sumner asserted also that when the bill of his friend Senator -Wade was before Congress no one questioned its constitutionality though -it proposed to interfere in the suffrage and to impose a condition upon -States at the time of their reconstruction. Pomeroy dissented from the -doctrine that Congress could reconstruct the insurgent States, and -maintained that the only question then was whether they would recognize -what the people of Louisiana had done. - -Reverdy Johnson pointed out to Sumner the great increase of -representation in Congress which the South would acquire by an extension -of the suffrage to negroes. The three fifths provision, he said, would -be done away with, and he made the further observation that for years to -come the entire colored vote of that section would be in the hands of a -few white men. He urged recognition of both Louisiana and Arkansas, so -that the constitutional amendment would become binding, for unless -ratified by three fourths of all the States it would be open to doubt. - -The session was drawing rapidly toward its close; it was late in the -evening of February 25, and the resolution under discussion was too -important to be passed without due consideration. These circumstances -offered Mr. Wade, who vehemently opposed the measure, a decent pretext -for demanding the “yeas” and “nays” on his motion to postpone the -subject till the first Monday of December following, 1865. - -Before a vote was reached on this motion, however, Powell spoke again at -considerable length. In addition to his former arguments, many of which -were repeated, he said that “all the loyal Union men in the State of -Louisiana who refused, like supple menials and slaves, to crouch beneath -the iron military power of General Banks, and take that oath were -excluded from voting,” and he added, “I believe to-day there are more -men of that description in Louisiana than voted to ratify this -constitution.” - -When asked by Mr. Henderson whether he had heard of any objection to it -on the part of the loyal men of Louisiana, Powell answered that Thomas -J. Durant and thirty-one others, distinguished, leading, loyal men of -that State, had made earnest and powerful protest against it, and -remonstrated against the admission to Congress of Senators and -Representatives from Louisiana. They were also opposed to counting her -electoral vote. Mr. Durant, he believed, was the first district-attorney -appointed in Louisiana by the present Executive. Henderson insinuated by -an inquiry that Durant was himself a candidate for office at that -election and took the oath prescribed. Powell not being informed on -these points, the matter was left in doubt. - -The Kentucky Senator took this opportunity to characterize the manner of -General Banks in his statement before the Judiciary Committee as that of -a “swift witness, to make a case that he thought would cause Louisiana -to be admitted.” He also called upon some advocate of the resolution to -explain a support of the present measure after voting a few days before -for the resolution declaring that the electoral vote of Louisiana should -not be counted. If Louisiana was then a legitimate government, why, he -asked, was she not entitled to cast her electoral vote? He did not then -believe it a legitimate government and so opposed the counting of her -electoral vote; but the Senator from Maryland [Mr. Johnson] and the -Senator from Missouri [Mr. Henderson], who then voted with him, now -supported the resolution.[418] - -Wade’s motion to postpone further consideration of the joint resolution -till the first Monday of December was defeated by a vote of 17 to -12.[419] - -In the course of the discussions to postpone Sumner said that he would -regard its passage as a national calamity. It would be the political -Bull Run of that Administration, sacrificing, as it would, a great cause -and the great destinies of this Republic. When Trumbull taxed him with -intent to postpone discussion by dilatory motions the Massachusetts -Senator admitted his opposition and declared that to defeat the measure -he would employ any weapon in the arsenal of parliamentary warfare. - -The friends of the Administration endeavored to press their adversaries -to take final action on the resolution. The earnestness of the two -factions provoked rather sharp censure of Sumner and the few Republicans -who acted with him and were attempting by dilatory motions to fatigue -the Senate into a postponement. Doolittle was especially severe on them, -and particularly on Sumner, who replied with much asperity. He was -supported by Howard and Chandler, while Trumbull, Foster and Doolittle -undertook a defence of the resolution and its advocates. This wrangling -appears to have delighted the Democratic members. Mr. Hendricks, indeed, -made no attempt to conceal his satisfaction. - -“The discordant elements of the Republican party are exhibiting -themselves here,” said the Indiana Senator, “and I venture the prophecy -that a like exhibition will be witnessed over the country within a very -few years. But four years ago, at the Chicago Convention, when Mr. -Lincoln was nominated for the Presidency a solemn pledge was made to the -people of this country that that party, when it came into power, would -not undertake to interfere with the institutions of the States. As soon -as the disturbed condition of the country gave the pretext for it, the -undertaking was commenced; and now, when, in the judgment of some, it -has been accomplished, there comes up the grave question, what is to be -done, and what is to be the political condition of the four million -negroes when they are set free? And upon that question the real strife -of to-night has been witnessed. That is the subject and it need not be -disguised. It is growing out of the discordant elements of the party -that now governs the country.”[420] - -Trumbull, in reply to an inquiry of Senator Wade, said that he had voted -against receiving the electoral vote of Louisiana because it had not -been recognized. Now he proposed to put it in a condition where it could -cast electoral votes, and do all other acts belonging to a State. - -To this Wade replied that “If the President of the United States, -operating through his major-generals, can initiate a State government, -and can bring it here and force us, compel us, to receive as associates -on this floor these mere mockeries, these men of straw who represent -nobody, your Republic is at an end. - -“Sir, I have heard a great deal about this pretended election in -Louisiana that did not come from Major-General Banks, and I pronounce -the proceeding a mockery. It is not pretended that there could be -drummed up from the riffraff of New Orleans and sent into the vicinity -under the mandate of a Major-General more than about six thousand votes, -where over fifty thousand were formerly polled. - - * * * * * - -“Talk not to me of your ten per cent. principle. A more absurd, -monarchical, and anti-American principle was never announced on God’s -earth——“[421] - -At this point Senator Sherman, of Ohio, interposed to obtain -consideration for a revenue measure which he had in charge, whereupon -his colleague changed somewhat the declamation against the resolution to -a denunciation of its advocates, especially Trumbull, upon whom he -retorted the charge of retarding legitimate business. Howard resented -the charge of radical factiousness and denounced Trumbull with -considerable warmth. Sherman suggested that enough had been said on both -sides, and in the lighter skirmishing of the breathing-spell which -followed, Mr. Sprague, of Rhode Island, hitherto a silent spectator of -these exciting scenes, declared that he held in his possession a paper -indicating the names of the members of the Louisiana Legislature, and it -showed that twenty-five, or twenty-seven or thirty of those gentlemen -who constituted that assembly were officeholders of the Federal -Government, or the government of the State, which, he said, was the same -thing.[422] - -While Sherman’s measure and Trumbull’s resolution were competing for -priority of consideration Sumner remarked that during the preceding -summer, 1864, he had met a distinguished gentleman just returned from -Louisiana; he had been present at some of the sittings of the -convention, having been in New Orleans in discharge of important public -duties. This gentleman, added Sumner, said compendiously that the -convention was “nothing but a stupendous hoax.” - -When Reverdy Johnson inquired the name of Sumner’s informant, Senator -Grimes replied that he could furnish a large number of names of persons -present in New Orleans when the convention was held, and added: “If the -Senate will give a committee I will undertake to prove and I will prove -that the voters whose votes were polled in the outlying parishes at -Thibodeaux and Placquemines, and other places, were carried in army -transports to those places where they polled the votes, being discharged -soldiers and persons belonging in New Orleans, and were brought back to -New Orleans, and were not residents of the places where they purported -to vote.”[423] - -Sumner, immediately after the uncontroverted statement of Mr. Grimes, -added, with more energy than elegance: “The pretended State government -in Louisiana is utterly indefensible whether you look at its origin or -its character. To describe it, I must use plain language. It is a mere -seven-months’ abortion, begotten by the bayonet in criminal conjunction -with the spirit of caste, and born before its time, rickety, unformed, -unfinished—whose continued existence will be a burden, a reproach, and a -wrong. That is the whole case; and yet the Senator from Illinois now -presses it upon the Senate at this moment to the exclusion of the -important public business of the country.”[424] - -The urgency of the army and navy appropriation bills prevented for the -time further consideration of the Louisiana question. The subject, -however, was again brought before the Senate on March 2, 1865, by Mr. -Doolittle, who had received and had been requested to file with the -secretary of the Senate a certificate, under seal of the State of -Louisiana, of the election of Michael Hahn as a Senator of the United -States from the State of Louisiana for six years from March 4, 1865. Mr. -Davis, of Kentucky, opposed its reception. Doolittle’s motion to have it -laid on the table and filed was, however, agreed to. - -Only two days of the session remained; in the temper of the Senate it -was impossible that the resolution could pass at that time, and the -House had not yet taken it up for discussion. In these circumstances the -measure was abandoned, though very reluctantly, by its champions. - ------ - -Footnote 399: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1395. - -Footnote 400: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 971–974. - -Footnote 401: - - Ibid., p. 903. - -Footnote 402: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1011. - -Footnote 403: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 404: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 405: - - Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1061–1064. - -Footnote 406: - - While this chapter was in press an interesting letter from Senator - Henderson informed the author that the Hon. Samuel Treat, of St. - Louis, formerly Judge of the United States Court for the Eastern - District of Missouri, is the distinguished jurist referred to in the - text. - -Footnote 407: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1065–1070. - -Footnote 408: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1091. - -Footnote 409: - - In support of this view the Senator cited Penhallow’s Case, 3 Dallas, - p. 94. - -Footnote 410: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1091–1095. - -Footnote 411: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1097. - -Footnote 412: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 413: - - Ibid., pp. 1095–1098. - -Footnote 414: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1099. - -Footnote 415: - - Ibid., pp. 1101–1102. - -Footnote 416: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1101–1102. - -Footnote 417: - - Ibid., p. 1102. - -Footnote 418: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1106–1107. - -Footnote 419: - - Ibid., p. 1107. - -Footnote 420: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1111. - -Footnote 421: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1128. - -Footnote 422: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1129. - -Footnote 423: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 424: - - Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1129. - - - - - XI - INCIDENTS OF RECONSTRUCTION - - -The Emancipation Proclamation did not affect, as is well known, the -status of slaves in the loyal border States or in the excepted parts of -Virginia and Louisiana. The State of Tennessee, too, as we have seen, -was not named in the edict of freedom; that was published by the -President simply as a measure of military necessity, and was not -regarded by him or by others as operative to prevent, when war had -ceased, a revival of servitude in the insurgent States, for negroes -could easily be imported from those loyal commonwealths still tolerating -that institution. It was uncertain, too, how the proclamation would -affect the status of slaves in those districts not yet overrun by the -Union armies. In the border States, in Tennessee and in the excepted -parts of Louisiana and Virginia there were probably 2,000,000 men in -bondage. In order, then, to abolish universally as well as permanently -to prohibit involuntary servitude an amendment of the Constitution was -proposed in the familiar language of the sixth section of the ordinance -of 1787. Though it passed the Senate, April 8, 1864, it failed at that -time to receive in the House the requisite two thirds vote. It has been -seen how upon the recommendation of Mr. Lincoln it was reconsidered and -passed by the Representatives at a succeeding session, January 31, 1865, -and submitted to the States for their action. It was adopted by his own -State, Illinois, on the following day. By the close of February sixteen -others had followed its example, and before the President’s death twenty -in all had ratified the Amendment. To Mr. Lincoln, who had long held -anti-slavery opinions, this expression of public sentiment was extremely -grateful; indeed, less than two months before his assassination he -declared his satisfaction at the popular verdict, and his confidence -that the States would consummate what Congress had so nobly begun. The -Thirteenth Amendment, however, was not announced as part of the organic -law until after the Presidential plan of reconstruction had been ignored -by the Thirty-ninth Congress. This subject, therefore, need not be -further discussed in these pages. - -The extraordinary amount of work actually completed by the national -Legislature can be comprehended only by considering the degree of -perfection to which the committee system has been carried under -congressional government. Measures that conduct the reader over vast -stretches of the records of Congress occupy but a day or two in the -calendar. The discussions described in the two preceding chapters did -not, as might be supposed, engage the entire attention of Federal -legislators. It was desirable, if, indeed, it was not essential, that -the sentiments of the lawmaking body of the nation be authoritatively -declared on the question of admitting members to Congress from those -States reconstituted under the Executive plan; definitive action in the -matter of the electoral votes which they presented was also awaited with -not a little interest. Scarcely inferior in importance and more -instructive than these measures was the passage of an act, approved -March 3, 1865, which created in the War Department a “Bureau of -Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands.” As the system of relief then -inaugurated was destined to become an important agency in the work of -reconstruction a brief account of its origin and institution may not be -deemed superfluous. - -A former chapter has related how great numbers of “contrabands,” by -assembling early in the war at Fortress Monroe and Newport News, taxed -the ingenuity of even General Butler to provide for their maintenance; -it also noticed an attempt under Mr. E. L. Pierce to improve the -condition of abandoned slaves in South Carolina, and the friendly -interest of Secretary Chase in that experiment. But the hundreds of -fugitives within Federal lines in May, 1861, had grown to be millions by -the beginning of 1865. Of this army of homeless freedmen the policy of -enlisting colored troops provided directly for nearly 200,000 -able-bodied males. The women, the children and the large class -unsuitable for military service left a multitude still unprovided for. -Some relief, it is true, was afforded by the Treasury Department, which -undertook to establish on abandoned and confiscated lands colonies of -self-supporting negroes, but the ignorance and rapacity of many persons -entrusted with the supervision of this work led to its general failure. -Here and there, indeed, more satisfactory results were obtained, though -these isolated successes seldom reached the point of actual -encouragement. The South Carolina experiment may, therefore, be properly -regarded as the germ of the Freedmen’s Bureau. - -The progress of these communities had been watched anxiously by the -abolition and the kindred associations which sprang up to continue the -work that anti-slavery men had begun. On this subject a committee -representing the Freedmen’s Aid Societies of Boston, New York, -Philadelphia and Cincinnati addressed, December 1, 1863, an able -memorial to the President. Without expressing a favorable opinion of the -plan suggested by the petitioners, Mr. Lincoln referred the question, as -one of great magnitude and importance, to the consideration of Congress. -The Freedmen’s Aid Societies, however, had been anticipated by -Representative Eliot, of Massachusetts, who had offered, January 12, -1863, a bill to establish a Bureau of Emancipation, which was referred -to a select committee; but other business, regarded as more urgent, -prevented them from reporting at that time a measure which had been -prepared. At the succeeding session the proposition was offered again. -After numerous efforts to secure favorable action, efforts extending -over a period of two years, Congress took the subject into -consideration. The House proposed one, the Senate a different measure; a -committee of conference suggested something unlike either, though -embodying important features of both. This, like every proposition -affecting the negro, encountered considerable opposition. The creation -of such a bureau, said its adversaries, conceded the very point that -pro-slavery men had always maintained; namely, that the negro was -incapable of taking care of himself. The extent of its powers, its -duration and the cost of its maintenance were successively made grounds -of opposition by those hostile to its establishment. Nor did its enemies -fail to point out the great temptation to abuse which was offered by the -system. - -The act established in the War Department, to continue during the -rebellion and for one year thereafter, a bureau to which should be -committed the management of all confiscated or abandoned lands, and the -control of all subjects relating to refugees and freedmen from any -district within the territory embraced in the operations of the army, -under such regulations as might be adopted by the head of the bureau and -approved by the President. - -The conduct of the bureau was entrusted to a commissioner appointed by -the President with the concurrence of the Senate. In the exercise of his -functions he was to be assisted by such clerks as the Secretary of War -might assign him; their number, of course, was limited by law. For his -compensation the head of the new bureau was to receive a sum fixed at -$3,000 per annum. To aid in executing the provisions of the act the -President was authorized to select, by and with the advice and consent -of the Senate, one assistant commissioner for each of the States -declared to be in insurrection, not, however, to exceed ten in number, -each to receive an annual salary of $2,500. - -The Secretary of War, besides assigning clerks of the several grades -mentioned in the law, was authorized to issue, under regulations which -he might himself prescribe, such provisions, clothing and fuel as might -be deemed needful for the immediate and temporary shelter and supply of -destitute and suffering refugees and freedmen as well as their wives and -children. Any military officer could be detailed to duty under the act, -but without increase of pay or allowances. - -It was further provided that the commissioner, “under the direction of -the President, shall have authority to set apart, for the use of loyal -refugees and freedmen, such tracts of land within the insurrectionary -States as shall have been abandoned, or to which the United States shall -have acquired title by confiscation or sale, or otherwise, and to every -male citizen, whether refugee or freedman, as aforesaid, there shall be -assigned not more than forty acres of such land, and the person to whom -it was so assigned shall be protected in the use and enjoyment of the -land for the term of three years at an annual rent not exceeding six per -centum upon the value of said land, as it was appraised by the State -authorities in the year 1860, for the purpose of taxation, and in case -no such appraisal can be found, then the rental shall be based upon the -estimated value of the land in said year, to be ascertained in such -manner as the commissioner may by regulation prescribe. At the end of -said term, or at any time during said term, the occupants of any parcels -so assigned may purchase the land, and receive such title thereto as the -United States can convey, upon paying therefor the value of the land, as -ascertained and fixed for the purpose of determining the annual rent -aforesaid.”[425] - -It was made the duty of the assistant commissioners to submit a -quarterly report of their proceedings to the commissioner, who in turn -was required to report annually to the President before the commencement -of each regular session of Congress. Special reports might from time to -time be requested of either the head of the bureau or his subordinates. - -The bureau thus established was organized principally by officers of the -regular army under direction of General Oliver O. Howard, who had been -selected by President Johnson as commissioner. It soon grew to vast -proportions. At first it was economically managed and beneficent in its -influence; subsequently, however, it degenerated into an abuse. -Interesting and instructive as would be an inquiry into its operations, -the history of this politico-philanthropic experiment does not fall -within the limits of this work. - -Since the adjournment, February 27, 1861, of the Peace Convention, which -had been in session at Washington endeavoring to discover, if possible, -a means of avoiding the irrepressible conflict, there was a large class -who believed that if only they had been directing the policy of -Government the outbreak could have been averted; even when war was -flagrant and passions were highest this class, though diminished greatly -in numbers, did not altogether despair of effecting a settlement between -the sections. Besides these well-meaning patriots there were not a few -who were ambitious of notoriety or possessed of an undue opinion of -their own importance. Persons of both classes attempted from time to -time to bring about an armistice which would facilitate negotiations -between the two governments. The efforts of these men have no further -bearing on the subject of reconstruction than as they serve to show Mr. -Lincoln’s views in successive stages of the conflict. - -Prominent among these attempts was the Jacquess-Gilmore mission, which -has been described in an interesting volume of Rebellion reminiscences -by one of the participants.[426] Horace Greeley’s career as a diplomat -is also a familiar story, which at once illustrates the guilelessness of -the editor and the sagacity of the President. Mr. Greeley’s failure at -Niagara Falls, however, did not discourage a similar undertaking by Hon. -Jeremiah S. Black, who, with no greater success, had an interview in -Canada with his former friend Jacob Thompson.[427] - -More important, because of its consequences, than the work of any of -these volunteer commissioners was the visit of Francis P. Blair, Sr., to -Richmond. This distinguished politician and editor had in the days of -Nullification assisted in shaping the policy of the Government. The -bosom friend and confidential adviser of Andrew Jackson, Mr. Blair -thoroughly understood Southern feeling, and from long residence in -Washington was intimately acquainted with Southern leaders. His -political victories in the past encouraged, no doubt, the hope of some -notable achievement to crown his maturer years. For some time he had -been meditating a plan of reunion which would not only end the strife -but contribute to heal the wounds of war. Though anxious to communicate -his project to the President, he received no encouragement to do so. By -requesting Blair to call upon him after the fall of Savannah Mr. Lincoln -evaded a discussion of the subject. That contingency, however, was not -remote, and late in December the veteran political leader received from -the President a card bearing these words: - - Allow the bearer, F. P. Blair, Sr., to pass our lines, go South, and - return. - - =A. Lincoln.= - - _December 28, 1864._ - -With this credential Mr. Blair went at once to the camp of General -Grant, whence under flags of truce he sent two communications to -Jefferson Davis requesting, among other things, permission for an -interview. This, after some delay, was granted, and on the 12th of -January, 1865, he found himself in Richmond face to face with the -Confederate President. What transpired is accurately known from accounts -of the meeting by both Blair and Davis. The former admitted frankly that -Mr. Lincoln afforded him no opportunity to explain the object of his -mission, and, indeed, appeared anxious to avoid an interview on that -subject. When he had been assured that the Confederate authorities were -under no engagements to European powers that would prevent their -entering into arrangements with the Government of the United States Mr. -Blair unfolded his plan by reading to Mr. Davis a carefully prepared -paper embodying the following suggestions: - -Slavery, he said, was doomed, for even the South itself had proposed to -employ the slave in winning its independence. That institution, -therefore, no longer remained as an obstacle to peace. Louis Napoleon, -he continued, had declared publicly that his object was to make the -Latin race supreme in the southern part of North America. This, indeed, -had been an idea of the Emperor’s uncle, who desired at one time to make -conquests of territory in the States bordering the Gulf, and the -foothold already effected in Mexico was one step in the accomplishment -of this grand design. After developing these points Mr. Blair added, -“Jefferson Davis is the fortunate man who now holds the commanding -position to encounter this formidable scheme of conquest, and whose fiat -can at the same time deliver his country from the bloody agony now -covering it in mourning. He can drive Maximilian from his American -throne, and baffle the designs of Napoleon to subject our Southern -people to the ‘Latin race.’” - -How this was to be accomplished Mr. Blair’s paper outlined. President -Lincoln’s amnesty proclamation looked to an armistice, which could be -enlarged to embrace all engaged in the war; then by secret preliminaries -to a cessation of hostilities Mr. Davis could transfer to Texas such a -portion of the Confederate army as was deemed adequate to his purpose. -With a Southern force on the Rio Grande and Juarez conciliated it could -enter Mexico and expel her invaders. If these combined forces were -insufficient, multitudes from the Federal army, officers and men, would -be found ready to engage in the enterprise. Both Republicans and -Democrats of the North had declared their adherence to the Monroe -Doctrine. - -After thus indicating for Mr. Davis a means of escape from his dilemma -the adroit politician next appealed powerfully to his desire of fame. -“He who expels the Bonaparte-Hapsburg dynasty from our Southern flank,” -proceeded Mr. Blair, “which General Jackson in one of his letters warned -me was the vulnerable point through which foreign invasion would come, -will ally his name with those of Washington and Jackson as a defender of -the liberty of the country. If in delivering Mexico he should model its -States in form and principle to adapt them to our Union and add a new -Southern constellation to its benignant sky while rounding off our -possessions on the continent at the Isthmus, and opening the way to -blending the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific, thus embracing our -Republic in the arms of the ocean, he would complete the work of -Jefferson, who first set one foot of our colossal Government on the -Pacific by a stride from the Gulf of Mexico.”[428] - -Blair remarked in conclusion, “There is my problem, Mr. Davis; do you -think it possible to be solved?” After a little consideration came the -reply, “I think so.” Touching the question of bringing the sections -together again Mr. Davis observed that though a spirit of vindictiveness -had been engendered by the war, time and events would do something -toward its removal. The circumstance of Northern and Southern armies -united in a common cause would, he believed, assist greatly in restoring -the old feeling. He also acknowledged to his visitor that European -powers were pleased to see the sections exhausting their resources in -mutual war. - -Thus was the Confederate leader persuaded to entertain the bold project -of conquering Mexico under pretence of relieving the Monroe Doctrine -from its peril. The explanation of this easy conversion, however, lies -mainly in the fact that Mr. Davis, however he might endeavor to conceal -his convictions, was convinced that the resources of the South were -scarcely equal to another campaign. Like other leaders of the -Confederacy he was anxious to seize any means of escape from an -embarrassing situation. He proposed to Mr. Blair, therefore, the -appointment of commissioners, and mentioned Judge Campbell, formerly of -the United States Supreme Court, as one qualified by his talents and -integrity to undertake such a mission. - -During his short sojourn in Richmond Mr. Blair learned from other -prominent secessionists the hopelessness of the rebellion, and this, -perhaps, was the only tangible result of his celebrated intrigue. To -initiate the project Mr. Davis handed him a letter to be shown President -Lincoln. That interesting communication was as follows: - - =Richmond, Virginia=, _12 Jany., ’65_. - - =F. P. Blair=, Esq.: - - =Sir=: I have deemed it proper, and probably desirable to you, to - give you, in this form, the substance of remarks made by me, to be - repeated by you to President Lincoln, etc., etc. I have no - disposition to find obstacles in forms, and am willing now, as - heretofore, to enter into negotiations for the restoration of peace; - and am ready to send a commission whenever I have reason to suppose - it will be received, or to receive a commission, if the United - States Government shall choose to send one. That, notwithstanding - the rejection of our former offers, I would, if you could promise - that a commissioner, minister, or other agent, would be received, - appoint one immediately, and renew the effort to enter into - conference, with a view to secure peace to the two countries. - - Yours, etc., - =Jefferson Davis=.[429] - -Mr. Lincoln’s only response to the communication thus brought to his -attention was to open a little wider the door for negotiation by sending -to Mr. Blair the following letter: - - =Washington=, _January 18, 1865_. - - =F. P. Blair=, Esq.: - - =Sir=: You having shown me Mr. Davis’s letter to you of the 12th - instant, you may say to him that I have constantly been, am now, and - shall continue ready to receive any agent whom he, or any other - influential person now resisting the National authority, may - informally send to me, with the view of securing peace to the people - of our one common country. - - Yours, etc., - =A. Lincoln=. - -With this note Mr. Blair returned to Richmond framing as best he could -excuses why President Lincoln rejected the overtures of Jefferson Davis -for a joint invasion of Mexico. With the nature of these explanations -this essay is not concerned. To cover his retreat from an unsuccessful -intrigue the disappointed commissioner then suggested that, perhaps, -Grant and Lee could enter into negotiations for peace with more -assurance of success than politicians could hope to do. Though Mr. Davis -offered no objection to this proposal, Blair was forced soon after to -report that military negotiations were out of the question. - -The Confederate leader was then compelled to choose between obstinate -perseverance in his policy of a war for Southern independence or to -accept frankly Mr. Lincoln’s offer of reunion. Blair’s first visit to -Richmond did not escape observation, and, when his second conference was -known, interest in the purpose of his mission became intense. Without -some effort at negotiation Mr. Davis could not afterward satisfy the -peace party in the South without subjecting himself to the injurious -imputation of preferring war. In these circumstances, and after -consultation with his cabinet, he authorized Alexander H. Stephens, John -A. Campbell and R. M. T. Hunter to proceed to Washington as a commission -for the purpose of informally conferring with Mr. Lincoln “upon the -issues involved in the existing war, and for the purpose of securing -peace to the two countries.” They were burdened with no instructions, -and only one condition was insisted upon, that is, an acknowledgment of -Southern independence. - -Toward the end of January they presented themselves at the Federal -military lines near Richmond, and, after an exchange of telegrams with -the authorities in Washington, were permitted to pass on to Fortress -Monroe. It was the original intention of President Lincoln to intrust -the work of the conference wholly to Secretary Seward, and for this -purpose he gave him the following written instructions: - - =Executive Mansion, - Washington=, _January 31, 1865_. - - Hon. =William H. Seward=, _Secretary of State_: - - You will proceed to Fortress Monroe, Virginia, there to meet and - informally confer with Messrs. Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell, on - the basis of my letter to F. P. Blair, Esq., of January 18, 1865, a - copy of which you have. You will make known to them that three - things are indispensable, to wit: _First_. The restoration of the - national authority throughout all the States. _Second._ No receding - by the executive of the United States on the slavery question from - the position assumed thereon in the late annual message to Congress, - and in preceding documents. _Third._ No cessation of hostilities - short of an end of the war and the disbanding of all forces hostile - to the Government. You will inform them that all propositions of - theirs, not inconsistent with the above, will be considered and - passed upon in a spirit of sincere liberality. You will hear all - they may choose to say and report it to me. You will not assume to - definitely consummate anything. - - Yours, etc., - =Abraham Lincoln=.[430] - -The different if not conflicting statements as to the object of their -mission nearly led to a return of the Confederate representatives -without any interview whatever. General Grant, fearing the unfavorable -influence on the Union cause of such a result, sent to Secretary Stanton -a confidential dispatch in which he referred to the evident sincerity of -Stephens and Hunter. He also expressed his regret that they were about -to return without an expression on the subject of their mission from any -person in authority. President Lincoln, who was about to recall Mr. -Seward by telegraph, decided, on reading Grant’s message, to join his -Secretary at Fortress Monroe, for which place he set out at once. - -The famous conference, which took place February 3, 1865, on board a -steamer at Hampton Roads, has been treated in detail by nearly every -historian of the Rebellion, and, therefore, need only be briefly noticed -in these pages. An informal discussion of four hours occurred on the -_River Queen_. By a previous agreement no writings or memoranda were -made; hence our principal knowledge of what transpired at that -celebrated interview is derived from accounts subsequently written out -from memory by the Confederate commissioners, and from Secretary -Seward’s letter to Charles Francis Adams, United States Minister to -England. - -Mr. Stephens, who began the discussion, asked whether there was no way -of restoring former relations; to this Mr. Lincoln replied, “There was -but one way that he knew of, and that was, for those who were resisting -the laws of the Union to cease that resistance.” Stephens observed that -they had been led to believe that both sections might for a time cease -their present strife and unite on some continental question until -passion had somewhat subsided and accommodation become possible. - -To this suggestion Mr. Lincoln replied promptly: “I suppose you refer to -something that Mr. Blair has said. Now it is proper to state at the -beginning that whatever he said was of his own accord, and without the -least authority from me.” The President then stated that before the -visit to Richmond he had flatly refused to hear Mr. Blair’s -propositions; he was willing, however, to hear proposals for peace on -the conditions expressed in his reply to the letter of Mr. Davis. The -restoration of the Union was a _sine qua non_ with him, therefore his -instructions that no conference be held except on that basis. - -Though the Confederate statesmen had resolved not to enter into any -agreement that would require their forces to unite in an invasion of -Mexico, Mr. Stephens continued to press the subject, and this after Mr. -Lincoln had refused even to discuss the question. The President then -brought the conversation back to the original object of the meeting, and -declared that he could not entertain a proposition looking to an -armistice until the paramount question of reunion was first determined. - -The terms of reunion were then discussed. On this subject Mr. Lincoln is -reported by the commissioners to have said that the shortest way to -effect this was to disband the insurgent armies and permit “the National -authorities to resume their functions.” As to the admission of members -to Congress from the seceding States the President believed they ought -to be received, and also that they would be; however, he could enter -into no stipulations on that subject. By the cessation of resistance, he -is alleged to have declared, the States would be immediately restored to -their practical relations to the Union. This sentiment was probably -ascribed to him for party purposes. - -As the enforcement of the confiscation and other penal laws was left -entirely with him he assured them that the Executive power would be -exercised with the utmost liberality. The courts could determine all -questions involving rights of property, and Congress, after passion had -been somewhat composed, would, no doubt, be liberal in making -restitution of forfeited property, or would indemnify those who had -suffered. - -The President refused to promise any modification whatever of the terms -of his Emancipation Proclamation. He regarded it as a judicial question. -How the courts would decide it he did not know. His own opinion was that -as the proclamation was only a war measure, as soon as the war ceased it -would be inoperative for the future. It would be held to apply only to -such slaves as had come under its operation while it was in active -exercise. The courts, however, might hold that it effectually -emancipated all the slaves in the States to which it applied at the -time. He is reported further to have said that he interfered with -slavery to maintain the Union, and then only with hesitation and under -pressure of a public necessity. He had always favored emancipation, but -not immediate emancipation. - -On the same occasion he is said to have stated as his belief that the -people of the North were not less responsible for slavery than those of -the South; if the war should then cease, with the voluntary abolition of -slavery by the States, he would favor, individually, payment by the -Government of a fair indemnity for the loss to owners. That feeling, he -believed, had an extensive existence in the loyal States. He knew some -who were in favor of an appropriation as high as $400,000,000 for that -purpose. However, he could enter into no stipulation. He merely -expressed his own views and what he believed to be the views of others -upon the subject. - -Relative to the division of Virginia Mr. Lincoln said he could give only -“an individual opinion, which was, that Western Virginia would continue -to be recognized as a separate State in the Union.” - -Seward brought to the notice of the commissioners one topic which to -them was new, that is, the passage by Congress three days earlier of the -proposed amendment to the Federal Constitution. He is reported to have -said that it was passed in deference to the war spirit, and that if the -South would agree to immediate restoration its ratification might be -defeated. This, however, is doubtful, for the Cabinet as well as the -President approved the action of Congress in submitting the Thirteenth -Amendment to the consideration of the States; besides, it is not in -harmony with Mr. Seward’s anti-slavery record. - -In urging on Mr. Stephens separate State action to effect a cessation of -hostilities, the President said: “If I resided in Georgia, with my -present sentiments, I’ll tell you what I would do if I were in your -place. I would go home and get the Governor of the State to call the -Legislature together, and get them to recall all the State troops from -the war; elect Senators and Members to Congress, and ratify this -constitutional amendment prospectively, so as to take effect—say in five -years. Such a ratification would be valid, in my opinion. I have looked -into the subject, and think such a prospective ratification would be -valid. Whatever may have been the views of your people before the war, -they must be convinced now that slavery is doomed. It cannot last long -in any event, and the best course, it seems to me, for your public men -to pursue would be to adopt such a policy as will avoid, as far as -possible, the evils of immediate emancipation. This would be my course, -if I were in your place.”[431] - -The advice was wasted. When the party was on the point of separating, -Mr. Stephens again asked the President to reconsider the plan of an -armistice on the basis of a Mexican expedition. “Well, Stephens,” -replied Mr. Lincoln, “I will reconsider it; but I do not think my mind -will change.” Thus ended the famous Hampton Roads conference. - -On their return to Richmond the commissioners made a formal report to -Mr. Davis of the failure of negotiations; this he transmitted to the -Confederate Congress with an artful letter designed to strengthen the -war party in the South, and to silence effectually the adversaries of -his administration. To improve this advantage a day was appointed for -the purpose of getting a popular expression on the result of the -conference. Business was generally suspended, and the people crowded -every building in the city suitable for holding large assemblies. -Churches, theatres and halls of legislation were engaged for the -occasion. Twenty orators, among the ablest in the South, told their -hearers of the Northern “ultimatum,” not omitting to describe eloquently -all the consequences of subjugation. The old war spirit appeared to have -been kindled once more; “But,” says Mr. Pollard, “it was only the sickly -glare of an expiring flame; there was no steadiness in the excitement; -there was no virtue in huzzas; the inspiration ended with the voices and -ceremonies that invoked it; and it was found that the spirit of the -people of the Confederacy was too weak, too much broken to act with -effect, or assume the position of erect and desperate defiance.”[432] In -March General Lee revealed the weakness of his army at Fort Steadman; -Grant’s movements around Petersburg followed in April; the rest is a -familiar story. - -From this brief discussion of topics only allied to the Presidential -method of reunion it is time to resume our examination of the main -theme. - -It is almost a trite observation to remark that President Lincoln’s -opinions on public questions were formed only after mature deliberation, -and that to the conclusions thus reached he adhered with inflexible -tenacity. Notwithstanding the sentiments of Congress on the question of -reconstruction he evinced a decided preference for his own. This is -proved by a number of letters and speeches from which two may be -selected both because of the time of their appearance and the station of -the persons to whom they were addressed. To General Hurlbut, who had -temporarily succeeded Banks in command at New Orleans, the President -wrote, November 14, 1864, the following admonitory letter: - - Few things, since I have been here, have impressed me more painfully - than what, for four or five months past, has appeared a bitter - military opposition to the new State government of Louisiana. I - still indulged some hope that I was mistaken in the fact; but copies - of a correspondence on the subject between General Canby and - yourself, and shown me to-day, dispel that hope. A very fair - proportion of the people of Louisiana have inaugurated a new State - government, making an excellent new constitution—better for the poor - black man than we have in Illinois. This was done under military - protection, directed by me, in the belief, still sincerely - entertained, that with such a nucleus around which to build we could - get the State into position again sooner than otherwise. In this - belief a general promise of protection and support, applicable alike - to Louisiana and other States, was given in the last annual message. - During the formation of the new government and constitution they - were supported by nearly every loyal person, and opposed by every - secessionist. And this support and this opposition, from the - respective standpoints of the parties, was perfectly consistent and - logical. Every Unionist ought to wish the new government to succeed; - and every disunionist must desire it to fail. Its failure would - gladden the heart of Slidell in Europe, and of every enemy of the - old flag in the world. Every advocate of slavery naturally desires - to see blasted and crushed the liberty promised the black man by the - new constitution. But why General Canby and General Hurlbut should - join on the same side is to me incomprehensible. - - Of course, in the condition of things at New Orleans, the military - must not be thwarted by the civil authority; but when the - constitutional Convention, for what it deems a breach of privilege, - arrests an editor in no way connected with the military, the - military necessity for insulting the Convention and forcibly - discharging the editor is difficult to perceive. Neither is the - military necessity for protecting the people against paying large - salaries fixed by a legislature of their own choosing very apparent. - Equally difficult to perceive is the military necessity for forcibly - interposing to prevent a bank from loaning its own money to the - State. These things, if they have occurred, are, at the best, no - better than gratuitous hostility. I wish I could hope that they may - be shown to not have occurred. To make assurance against - misunderstanding, I repeat that in the existing condition of things - in Louisiana, the military must not be thwarted by the civil - authority; and I add that on points of difference the commanding - general must be judge and master. But I also add that in the - exercise of this judgment and control, a purpose, obvious and - scarcely unavowed, to transcend all military necessity, in order to - crush out the civil government, will not be overlooked.[433] - -A similar communication, though less peremptory in tone, he felt -constrained to send to General E. R. S. Canby, who had been assigned to -command in the military division of West Mississippi. Under date of -December 12, 1864, he wrote that officer: - - I think it is probable that you are laboring under some - misapprehension as to the purpose, or rather the motive, of the - Government on two points—cotton and the new Louisiana State - government. - - It is conceded that military operations are the first in importance; - and as to what is indispensable to these operations, the department - commander must be judge and master. - - But the other matters mentioned I suppose to be of public importance - also; and what I have attempted in regard to them is not merely a - concession to private interest and pecuniary greed. - - * * * * * - - As to the new State government of Louisiana. Most certainly there is - no worthy object in getting up a piece of machinery merely to pay - salaries and give political consideration to certain men. But it is - a worthy object to again get Louisiana into proper practical - relations with the nation, and we can never finish this if we never - begin it. Much good work is already done, and surely nothing can be - gained by throwing it away. - - I do not wish either cotton or the new State government to take - precedence of the military while the necessity for the military - remains; but there is a strong public reason for treating each with - so much favor as may not be substantially detrimental to the - military.[434] - -That Mr. Lincoln never modified these opinions is conclusively proved by -the last public utterance of his life. In addressing the citizens of -Washington, who were holding a demonstration in consequence of Lee’s -surrender, the President on the evening of April 11 said: - - By these recent successes the reinauguration of the national - authority—reconstruction—which has had a large share of thought from - the first, is pressed much more closely upon our attention. It is - fraught with great difficulty. Unlike a case of war between - independent nations, there is no authorized organ for us to treat - with—no one man has authority to give up the rebellion for any other - man. We simply must begin with and mold from disorganized and - discordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrassment that - we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, - and measure of reconstruction. As a general rule, I abstain from - reading the reports of attacks upon myself, wishing not to be - provoked by that to which I cannot properly offer an answer. In - spite of this precaution, however, it comes to my knowledge that I - am much censured for some supposed agency in setting up and seeking - to sustain the new State government of Louisiana. - - In this I have done just so much as, and no more than, the public - knows. In the annual message of December, 1863, and in the - accompanying proclamation, I presented a plan of reconstruction, as - the phrase goes, which I promised, if adopted by any State, should - be acceptable to and sustained by the executive Government of the - nation. I distinctly stated that this was not the only plan which - might possibly be acceptable, and I also distinctly protested that - the executive claimed no right to say when or whether members should - be admitted to seats in Congress from such States. This plan was in - advance submitted to the then Cabinet, and distinctly approved by - every member of it. One of them suggested that I should then and in - that connection apply the Emancipation Proclamation to the - theretofore excepted parts of Virginia and Louisiana; that I should - drop the suggestion about apprenticeship for freed people, and that - I should omit the protest against my own power in regard to the - admission of members of Congress. But even he approved every part - and parcel of the plan which has since been employed or touched by - the action of Louisiana. - - The new constitution of Louisiana, declaring emancipation for the - whole State, practically applies the proclamation to the part - previously excepted. It does not adopt apprenticeship for freed - people, and it is silent, as it could not well be otherwise, about - the admission of members to Congress. So that, as it applies to - Louisiana, every member of the Cabinet fully approved the plan. The - message went to Congress, and I received many commendations of the - plan, written and verbal, and not a single objection to it from any - professed emancipationist came to my knowledge until after the news - reached Washington that the people of Louisiana had begun to move in - accordance with it. From about July 1862, I had corresponded with - different persons supposed to be interested [in] seeking a - reconstruction of a State government for Louisiana. When the message - of 1863, with the plan before mentioned, reached New Orleans, - General Banks wrote me that he was confident that the people, with - his military coöperation, would reconstruct substantially on that - plan. I wrote to him and some of them to try it. They tried it, and - the result is known. Such has been my only agency in getting up the - Louisiana government. - - As to sustaining it, my promise is out, as before stated. But as bad - promises are better broken than kept, I shall treat this as a bad - promise, and break it whenever I shall be convinced that keeping it - is adverse to the public interest; but I have not yet been so - convinced. I have been shown a letter on this subject, supposed to - be an able one, in which the writer expresses regret that my mind - has not seemed to be definitely fixed on the question whether the - seceded States, so called, are in the Union or out of it. It would - perhaps add astonishment to his regret were he to learn that since I - have found professed Union men endeavoring to make that question, I - have purposely forborne any public expression upon it. As appears to - me, that question has not been, nor yet is, a practically material - one, and that any discussion of it, while it thus remains - practically immaterial, could have no effect other than the - mischievous one of dividing our friends. As yet, whatever it may - hereafter become, that question is bad as the basis of a - controversy, and good for nothing at all—a merely pernicious - abstraction. - - We all agree that the seceded States, so called, are out of their - proper practical relation with the Union, and that the sole object - of the Government, civil and military, in regard to those States is - to again get them into that proper practical relation. I believe - that it is not only possible, but in fact easier, to do this without - deciding or even considering whether these States have ever been out - of the Union, than with it. Finding themselves safely at home, it - would be utterly immaterial whether they had ever been abroad. Let - us all join in doing the acts necessary to restoring the proper - practical relations between these States and the Union, and each - forever after innocently indulge his own opinion whether in doing - the acts he brought the States from without into the Union, or only - gave them proper assistance, they never having been out of it. The - amount of constituency, so to speak, on which the new Louisiana - government rests, would be more satisfactory to all if it contained - 50,000, or 30,000, or even 20,000, instead of only about 12,000, as - it does. It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective - franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer - that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who - serve our cause as soldiers. - - Still, the question is not whether the Louisiana government, as it - stands, is quite all that is desirable. The question is, will it be - wiser to take it as it is and help to improve it, or to reject and - disperse it? Can Louisiana be brought into proper practical relation - with the Union sooner by sustaining or by discarding her new State - government? Some twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave - State of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be - the rightful political power of the State, held elections, organized - a State government, adopted a free State constitution, giving the - benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and empowering - the legislature to confer the elective franchise upon the colored - man. Their legislature has already voted to ratify the - constitutional amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing - slavery throughout the nation. These twelve thousand persons are - thus fully committed to the Union and to perpetual freedom in the - State—committed to the very things, and nearly all the things, the - nation wants—and they ask the nation’s recognition and its - assistance to make good their committal. - - Now, if we reject and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize - and disperse them. We, in effect, say to the white man: You are - worthless or worse; we will neither help you, nor be helped by you. - To the blacks we say: This cup of liberty which these, your old - masters, hold to your lips we will dash from you, and leave you to - the chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in some - vague and undefined when, where, and how. If this course, - discouraging and paralyzing both white and black, has any tendency - to bring Louisiana into proper practical relations with the Union, I - have so far been unable to perceive it. If, on the contrary, we - recognize and sustain the new government of Louisiana, the converse - of all this is made true. We encourage the hearts and nerve the arms - of the twelve thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, - and proselyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, - and ripen it to a complete success. The colored man, too, in seeing - all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and energy, and - daring, to the same end. Grant that he desires the elective - franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already - advanced steps toward it than by running backward over them? Concede - that the new government of Louisiana is only to what it should be as - the egg is to the fowl, we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching - the egg than by smashing it. - - Again, if we reject Louisiana we also reject one vote in favor of - the proposed amendment to the national Constitution. To meet this - proposition it has been argued that no more than three fourths of - those States which have not attempted secession are necessary to - validly ratify the amendment. I do not commit myself against this - further than to say that such a ratification would be questionable, - and sure to be persistently questioned, while a ratification by - three fourths of all the States would be unquestioned and - unquestionable. I repeat the question: Can Louisiana be brought into - proper practical relation with the Union sooner by sustaining or by - discarding her new State government? What has been said of Louisiana - will apply generally to other States. And yet so great peculiarities - pertain to each State, and such important and sudden changes occur - in the same State, and withal so new and unprecedented is the whole - case that no exclusive and inflexible plan can safely be prescribed - as to details and collaterals. Such exclusive and inflexible plan - would surely become a new entanglement. Important principles may and - must be inflexible. In the present situation, as the phrase goes, it - may be my duty to make some new announcement to the people of the - South. I am considering, and shall not fail to act when satisfied - that action will be proper. - -The promised announcement was never made; for within three days the -great career of Abraham Lincoln was brought to a close. The inherent -difficulties of reconstruction, as well as the mischievous consequences -of faction among Union men, he perceived and acknowledged at the outset. -Precisely how he would have removed the one and, without breaking with -his party, have avoided the other we can never know. His uniform success -in dealing with other embarrassing questions appears to justify the -opinion that he would not have failed altogether in solving the greater -problem presented by the return of peace. This subject will be further -discussed in the succeeding chapter. - ------ - -Footnote 425: - - Globe, 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 141 (appendix). - -Footnote 426: - - Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln, by James R. Gilmore. - -Footnote 427: - - Gorham’s Life and Public Services of Edwin M. Stanton, Vol. II. pp. - 148–153. - -Footnote 428: - - N. and H., Vol. X. pp. 101–102. - -Footnote 429: - - N. and H., Vol. X. p. 107. - -Footnote 430: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 644–645. - -Footnote 431: - - An interesting account of this entire subject will be found in Nicolay - and Hay’s Lincoln, Vol. X. ch. VI.; see also Raymond’s Life of - Lincoln, pp. 647–662. - -Footnote 432: - - The Lost Cause, pp. 684–685. - -Footnote 433: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 597–598. - -Footnote 434: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 616–617. - - - - - XII - CULMINATION OF THE PRESIDENTIAL PLAN - - -Able and candid exponents of public opinion in the South, even those who -were a part of the “Lost Cause,” are almost unanimous in regarding the -assassination of President Lincoln as one of the greatest calamities -that befell their section of the Union.[435] Indeed, the writer has -heard a distinguished editor ascribe to Jefferson Davis himself the -opinion that next to the failure of the Confederacy the untimely death -of Mr. Lincoln was the severest blow inflicted on Southern -interests.[436] Many of the evils experienced by their States during the -early years of Congressional reconstruction would have been avoided, -they believe, under a continuance of the wise and considerate policy of -the martyr President. While it is true that the confidence which he -enjoyed among the masses in the loyal States, his unquestionable -integrity and his splendid intellectual powers would have made him a -formidable adversary even in a controversy with Congress, yet we have no -assurance that these undoubted elements of strength would have enabled -him, in the confused times following the Rebellion, to do more than -postpone a contest with the Legislative branch in which a desire to -discipline the South was even then winning adherents. The passions of -the hour would have discovered a weakness in his clemency to the -vanquished, while his very breadth of soul and sense would have been -regarded by radical members of his party as only an evidence of his -desire to facilitate the restoration to power of red-handed rebels. But -it is idle to speculate on what might have been the result of his -endeavors to heal the wounds of war, for, by the assassin’s bullet, the -execution of his policy passed into other hands. - -While the terrible tragedy of April 14 was still unknown to a great -majority of American citizens, Andrew Johnson was quietly installed in -the office of President. As every detail of the simple ceremony in the -Kirkwood Hotel is familiar to this generation of readers, that event -requires only a passing allusion. In the presence of the constitutional -advisers of his predecessor, except Secretary Seward, who had been -dangerously wounded by one of Booth’s accomplices, the oath of office -was administered by Chief Justice Chase, who, with the Attorney-General, -had examined the precedents and the law. Besides these officials a few -members of Congress, who still lingered at the capital, were in -attendance as witnesses. - -Something of Andrew Johnson’s political career has been related in the -chapter on Tennessee. As military governor of that State his high -courage, his acknowledged patriotism, his honesty of purpose and -principle were evident to all. Traits of character suspected, but not -then fully disclosed, were developed by more complex conditions. The -problem that confronted him may be briefly stated. - -When Mr. Johnson succeeded to the Presidential office Confederate armies -somewhat broken, indeed, but still capable of mischief were retarding -the victorious march of Sherman’s legions. Measures for disbanding the -former became necessary when Southern leaders, recognizing the -hopelessness of further resistance, made overtures looking to an -armistice which took place and to the surrender that subsequently -followed. It became necessary to discontinue at once the enlistment of -men in the loyal States, and, to economize expense, to muster out of -service as expeditiously as possible the grand army of Union volunteers. -The energy and promptness with which this task was accomplished were not -the least of Secretary Stanton’s services to the nation. The perfection -to which years of experience had brought the machinery of the War -Department enabled the bulk of the Union armies to return without delay -to their homes, where, discarding the character of soldiers, they melted -insensibly into the civil population and speedily resumed the pursuits -of peace. Relations with France were somewhat strained, and, owing to a -succession of unfriendly acts, a war with Great Britain was not -improbable. The public finances, too, required attention. To provide a -revenue adequate to the extraordinary demands of the time was beginning -to tax the resources of Government. A satisfactory settlement of even -the least of these might well have appeared a serious question. The -cessation of hostilities, however, presented a problem far transcending -the greatest of them in importance. - -Many of the late Confederate States were threatened with anarchy, for in -those commonwealths the recent authority had been extinguished and no -organizations existed which the Administration could recognize as State -governments. The political reconstruction of four of them, it is true, -had been commenced under encouragement and direction of the national -Executive, but even in those much remained to be done. Before examining -the condition of the insurgent States as a whole it may be well, -therefore, to summarize the most important events that occurred in -Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana and Virginia between the institution of -loyal governments in those commonwealths and the meeting of the -Thirty-ninth Congress in December, 1865. - -The General Assembly of Arkansas, though lacking its full membership, -convened in March, 1865, and unanimously adopted on April 14 succeeding -the proposed amendment to the Federal Constitution. The action of -Congress, however, in submitting that proposition to the States had been -anticipated by the Union men of that commonwealth, for their organic law -had already abolished involuntary servitude; by the same instrument they -had repudiated all debts created in the conduct of the war, thereby -complying with three of the principal conditions required for restoring -their State to the Union. - -During the same session an act passed the Legislature disfranchising all -citizens who had aided the Confederate cause after the organization, -April 18, 1864, of a loyal government. By the adversaries of this -measure it was claimed that the lawmaking body exceeded its powers, -because the act in effect prescribed qualifications for the suffrage -different from those required by the State constitution, and, so far as -it attempted to deprive citizens of their privileges without judicial -conviction of crime, was contrary to the law of the land. This statute -awakened the indifferent, and, as the time approached for holding -Congressional elections, excited considerable discussion. - -In the mean time the new government silently extended its authority over -those parts of the State occupied by Southern soldiers until the -cessation of hostilities. Governor Flanigan on retiring suggested that -Confederate county officers be continued under his successor. This -proposal, however, was promptly rejected and the secession establishment -in all its parts completely ignored. Governor Murphy then published a -proclamation urging the people in those regions hitherto dominated by -the enemy, which comprised nearly half the counties in the State, to -assemble and renew their local organizations. His address was favorably -received, and his administration soon acquiesced in throughout the -commonwealth. Outrages ceased with the disappearance of Confederate -soldiers, and by the beginning of July judicial tribunals had been -revived in nearly every county. Some of the courts had been in session, -and most of them were prepared to meet regularly for the transaction of -business. Taxes were collected as quietly as before the war, and civil -process could be executed in every part of the State. Hundreds had -returned from the South to their former homes and resumed the pursuits -of peace. Discontent, so far as any existed in the State, was confined -to some ex-Confederate officers and to a few non-combatants who had -sympathized with the rebellion. Both classes advised disregard of the -disfranchising law, but as a rule the returned soldiers on both sides -were quiet and orderly. All accounts concur in representing the -pacification of Arkansas as complete toward the end of summer, and by -October 13, 1865, the Secretary of State was able to report officially -that the new government was in successful operation, the civil -organization of every county having been effected. Governor Murphy in -approving a circular published near the close of the same month by -Brigadier General Sprague, an assistant commissioner of the Freedmen’s -Bureau, enjoined both civil officers and citizens to give all possible -encouragement to the officers and appointees of the bureau.[437] - -The President on receiving intelligence of this satisfactory condition -of affairs sent to Governor Murphy the following dispatch: - - There will be no interference with your present organization of - State government. I have learned from E. W. Gantt, Esq., and other - sources, that all is working well, and you will proceed and resume - the former relations with the Federal Government, and all the aid in - the power of the Government will be given in restoring the State to - its former relations.[438] - -As the time approached for an election of national Representatives, the -Governor issued another address in which he advised the choice of -persons who could take the oath required by Congress. Three members were -elected, namely: William Ryers, G. H. Kyle and James M. Johnson, who -subsequently appeared at Washington and presented their -credentials.[439] - -The foregoing account of the situation in Arkansas is confirmed by the -testimony of General Reynolds, military commander of the department, who -had sent officers into all the counties. These reported civil government -as everywhere reëstablished. The State, they asserted, had never enjoyed -greater tranquillity. There was not a shadow of conflict between the -civil and the military authority, for the latter in sustaining the -former was careful not to encroach on any of its functions. In short, -the restoration of civil law in that State was universally admitted. - -In two thirds of the counties, however, great destitution prevailed. -Early in the summer the General Government felt compelled to distribute -among indigent freedmen and refugees vast quantities of food, and -Northern generosity alone, the Governor declared, could prevent great -distress during the ensuing winter. Nor was his expectation -disappointed. It is a splendid tribute to the character of Americans -that one of the most destructive conflicts in history, with all the -animosities which protracted civil wars engender, did not perceptibly -impair in them the feelings of humanity. - -The organization of a Union government in Tennessee has elsewhere been -described. The Assembly chosen under its authority met at Nashville on -the 2d of April, 1865, and three days later ratified the Thirteenth -Amendment. On the 21st the President was requested to proclaim the -insurrection at an end in that commonwealth, though a few weeks later he -was called upon for troops to guarantee a republican form of government -and to protect the State against invasion and domestic violence. Besides -appointing executive officers the Legislature elected to the United -States Senate David T. Patterson and Joseph S. Fowler. - -The most important measure of the session, however, was the enactment on -June 5 of a severe law affecting the elective franchise. By it the right -to vote was restricted, as formerly, to white males who had attained -their twenty-first year. To the classes excepted by the Proclamation of -December 8, 1863, were added all those who had left seats in the General -Assembly, all who were absentees from the United States for the purpose -of aiding the rebellion and all who had fled within the Confederate -lines with the same intention. These were disfranchised for the period -of fifteen years from the passage of the act.[440] - -During this session there was presented by the freedmen of the State a -petition for the elective franchise. The “colored citizens of -Tennessee,” as they styled themselves, received no response to their -prayer beyond the approval of an order for printing 500 copies of their -memorial. The motion for this trifling concession was carried by a vote -of 41 to 10. - -On June 12 the Legislature adjourned until the first Monday in October. -On the same day Governor Brownlow ordered an election to be held on -August 2 for Representatives to Congress in each of the eight districts -into which the State had just been divided. Vacancies in the General -Assembly were directed to be filled at the same time. - -The disfranchising act, with the oath required thereunder, had the -effect of excluding a large number, probably three fourths, of the -citizens from voting. Its adversaries declared the law unconstitutional, -and it encountered much opposition, especially in Middle and West -Tennessee. Its constitutionality, however, was sustained by one of the -State courts in a decision rendered June 29, and the Governor, in a -proclamation of July 10 succeeding, argued in favor of the statute. -Those who should unite to defeat its execution would be “declared in -rebellion against the State of Tennessee, and dealt with as rebels.” It -was further signified that votes cast in violation of the law would not -be taken into account by the Secretary of State. - -Nor were these idle threats, for the civil officers were instructed “to -arrest and bring to justice all persons who, under pretence of being -candidates for Congress or other office, are traveling over the State -denouncing and nullifying the Constitution and laws of the land, and -spreading sedition and a spirit of rebellion.”[441] - -It was relative to these measures that President Johnson on July 20, -1865, sent the following despatch to Governor Brownlow: - - I hope and have no doubt you will see that the recent amendments to - the constitution of the State as adopted by the people, and all the - laws passed by the last Legislature in pursuance thereof, are fairly - executed, and that all illegal votes in the approaching election be - excluded from the polls, and the election for members of Congress be - legally and fairly conducted. When and wherever it becomes necessary - to employ force for the execution of the laws and the protection of - the ballot-box from violence and fraud, you are authorized to call - upon Maj.-Gen. Thomas for sufficient military force to sustain the - civil authorities of the State. I have received your recent address - to the people, and think it well timed, and hope it will do much - good in reconciling the opposition to the amendment to the - constitution and the laws passed by the last Legislature. The law - must be executed and the civil authority sustained. In your efforts - to do this, if necessary, Gen. Thomas will afford a sufficient - military force. You are at liberty to make what use you think proper - of this despatch.[442] - -Though no violence marked the election, considerable irregularities, -notwithstanding the Governor’s precautions, appear to have crept into -modes of registration, and he felt compelled in consequence to reject -the ballots of twenty-nine counties. In this contest 61,783 citizens -participated, but when those illegally enrolled were disregarded the -number was reduced to 39,509. The defective vote, which applied to all -the candidates, was thrown out in every county, though it changed the -result in only one district. Of the eight Representatives chosen all -were Union men; four, however, were conservatives, opposed both to test -oaths and measures of disfranchisement.[443] Governor Brownlow because -of his action was severely censured, but was supported by a majority of -the General Assembly. - -In October, when the Legislature reassembled, a bill to render persons -of African and of Indian descent competent witnesses in the State courts -passed the Senate by the close vote of 10 to 9, but failed altogether to -receive the approval of the House. The Representatives of his State -declined at that time, by a vote of 35 to 25, to pass a simple -resolution endorsing the Administration of President Johnson, but almost -unanimously adopted in place of that proposition the following: - - _Resolved_, That we endorse the administration of his Excellency the - President of the United States, and especially his declaration that - treason shall be made odious, and traitors punished.[444] - -A colored convention representing the freedmen of the State was held at -the capital during the week succeeding the election. If the Legislature -did not grant before December 1, 1865, their petition for the elective -franchise, this body resolved to protest against the admission of the -Tennessee delegation to Congress. On the question of negro suffrage the -Governor in his October message said: - - I think it would be bad policy, as well as wrong in principle, to - open the ballot-box to the uninformed and exceedingly stupid slaves - of the Southern cotton, rice, and sugar fields. If allowed to vote, - the great majority of them would be influenced by leading - secessionists to vote against the Government, as they would be - largely under the influence o£ this class of men for years to come, - having to reside on and cultivate their lands. When the people of - Tennessee become satisfied that the negro is worthy of suffrage, - they will extend it, and not before; and I repeat that this question - must be regulated by the State authorities and by the loyal voters - of the State, not by the General Government.[445] - -Apprehending trouble from the antagonism of races Mr. Brownlow advocated -the old idea of colonization for the black man. He believed, however, -that negroes should be admitted to testify in the courts and argued in -favor of conferring such a privilege. Repugnance to their testimony, he -declared, was due principally to education and habit. - -If the following account from _The Knoxville Whig_ of September 27 is -trustworthy the freedmen of Tennessee had but a slender claim to the -right to vote. That journal said: - - Thousands of free colored persons are congregating in and around the - large towns in Tennessee, and thousands are coming in from other - States, one third of whom cannot get employment. Indeed, less than - one third of them want employment, or feel willing to stoop to work. - They entertain the erroneous idea that the Government is bound to - supply all their wants, and even to furnish them with houses, if, in - order to do that, the white occupants must be turned out. There is a - large demand for labor in every section of the State, but the - colored people, with here and there a noble exception, scorn the - idea of work. They fiddle and dance at night, and lie around the - stores and street corners in the day time.[446] - -The Governor’s message, sent in at this session, was hopeful in tone. He -favored some amendment but not a repeal of the franchise law. He advised -also a “full pardon to the masses—the young and the deluded, who -followed blindly the standard of revolt, provided they act as becomes -their circumstances.” The unrepentant, however, should suffer the period -of disfranchisement; while the active leaders, he believed, were -entitled “neither to mercy nor forbearance.” To some negroes he would -give the right of suffrage, but, believing it unsafe, he was opposed to -conferring it on them all. - -Tennessee, over which advancing and retreating armies had repeatedly -passed, suffered even more severely than Arkansas, for besides having -been the principal theatre of operations for the contending hosts in the -West, her territory had also been in the early rule of Governor Johnson -the scene of local strife. Old family feuds that for various reasons had -been allowed to slumber were in many instances revived, and the most -lawless outrages perpetrated in the face of day. These disorders, -however, had practically ceased toward the conclusion of his -governorship, and peace reigned once more within the borders of that -community. The existence there of a considerable demand for labor -assisted greatly in diminishing the burden of the authorities. - -The closing months of the war found the loyal government of Louisiana -endeavoring with the influence of the Union army to extend its -jurisdiction over all the territory that had been brought under Federal -control. Notwithstanding its contracted area this commonwealth for -certain purposes was treated as a restored member of the Union. Like the -Northern States it was affected by the draft which, on February 15, took -place in some districts included in the Department of the Gulf. But the -great struggle that for four years had employed the attention and tested -the resources of the Government soon reached its close, thus rendering -unnecessary any field service from the recruits then obtained. - -Though the attitude of Congress toward the Banks government has been -described in the preceding pages, that was not believed the proper place -to examine the nature of the election which was held on September 5, or -the _personnel_ of the Legislature chosen on that occasion. In -connection with the appointment by that assembly of Messrs. Smith and -Cutler as United States Senators the subject was noticed incidentally. -The action of Congress on the question of admitting members from -Louisiana was, however, fully entered into in that relation. - -Some additional information affecting the validity of that election is -afforded by a proclamation published May 13, 1865, by the acting -Governor, J. Madison Wells.[447] This document asserts that the Register -of Voters for the city of New Orleans declared officially that there had -been enrolled 5,000 persons who did not possess the legal qualifications -for electors. To ascertain the political people, therefore, a new -registration was thought desirable. Mr. Wells accordingly declared the -old records closed from the date of his proclamation. The certificates -granted thereon, as well as the enrollment, were pronounced null and -void. He then authorized the opening on June 1, 1865, of a new set of -books, the enrollment to be made in accordance with the qualifications -prescribed by the constitution and laws of Louisiana. The old -registration having been made under an order of General Banks this -announcement led at once to a difference between the Department -Commander and the acting Governor. Many names recorded on the old books -were alleged to have been those of colored men, and a circumstance -presently to be related tends to support the assertion. - -About that time the Confederate Governor, Allen, transferred to Federal -officials all the important military records in his possession, and from -his capital at Shreveport published a communication in which he -announced his administration closed on that day. He said in part: “The -war is over, the contest is ended, the soldiers are disbanded and gone -home, and now there is in Louisiana no opposition whatever to the -Constitution and laws of the United States.”[448] - -On June 10 an address to the people of thirty-five parishes was issued -by the new Governor, who congratulated them on their return to the -protection of the national flag. It was not with the past, he reminded -them, but with the present and the future that their welfare was bound -up. They were exhorted to go manfully to work and reëstablish civil -government. The submission to law and the prompt acquiescence of those -recently hostile to the United States he regarded as a hopeful sign. -Even the soldiers, he said, returned to their homes better and wiser -men, promising by a cheerful obedience to law to atone for past errors. -All citizens were urged to imitate their example. Provisional -appointments to county offices would be made until they could be filled -by election. In naming persons for such places the Governor promised to -be guided by the recommendation of the people if they selected men of -good reputation who had taken the amnesty oath, which would be a -prerequisite in every case. If the people did not act promptly he would -feel compelled to make appointments upon the best information -obtainable. If errors were made, then citizens would be themselves to -blame for neglecting promptly to suggest the proper persons. A -provisional judiciary would also be constituted. - -Important elections, he announced, would take place in the autumn, when -Representatives to Congress and members of a Legislature would be -chosen. If each parish was provided with the proper officers to open the -polls an election for governor and other State officers would take place -at the same time. The people addressed were informed that in making the -new constitution its framers did not intend to deprive them of their -rights. The response to this appeal was a local reorganization in nearly -all the parishes affected. - -Governor Wells, on September 21, in a second order appointed the 6th of -November succeeding as the day for holding the election, and also -defined the qualifications of voters. White male citizens of the United -States who had attained the age of twenty-one years and had resided -twelve months in the commonwealth were declared entitled to exercise the -suffrage. Evidence was also required of every elector that he had taken -the oath of amnesty contained in the proclamation of December 8, 1863, -or that prescribed, May 29, 1865, by Mr. Johnson. The excepted classes -could vote only upon receiving a special pardon from the President. In -other respects the election would be conducted in accordance with the -constitution of 1852. - -By a Democratic convention, held October 2 in New Orleans, at which -twenty-one parishes were unrepresented, Mr. Wells was unanimously -nominated for Governor. The preamble to a body of resolutions adopted on -that occasion asserts that the issue which for four years had tried the -strength of the Government had been made openly and manfully; that the -decision having been adverse they now came forward in the same spirit of -frankness and honor to support the Federal Government under the -Constitution. - -The “National Democratic” party they believed to be the only agency by -which radicalism, to which they imputed a tendency toward consolidation, -could be successfully encountered, and through which the General -Government could be restored to its pristine purity. On the subject of -reorganization they endorsed President Johnson’s policy, which, it was -alleged, preserved unimpaired the rights of the States and maintained -their equality in the Union. - -Noticing a question already assuming importance, they declared that, in -accordance with the constant adjudication of the Federal Supreme Court, -persons of African descent could not be regarded as citizens of the -United States; that under no circumstances could there exist any -equality between the white and other races; that as the national -Government was instituted by, so it was designed to be perpetuated for -the exclusive benefit of, white men. For the time they were content with -this oblique reference to the subject of negro suffrage. Another -resolution advised the calling of a convention to frame a constitution -for the State, that of 1864 being characterized as the creation of -fraud, violence and corruption. - -This convention, which admitted the effectual abolition of slavery in -the South, assumed that those who had sustained loss by the policy of -emancipation could rightfully petition Congress for compensation. The -repeal was also advocated of those statutes and ordinances not in -harmony with the Federal Constitution. Believing it consonant with “the -chivalrous magnanimity” of President Johnson the convention earnestly -appealed for an early general amnesty and a prompt restitution of -property. - -Almost a month preceding the meeting of this convention an address was -circulated by the “National Conservative Union” party, whose -representatives assembled one week later than the Democratic delegates. -Its members opposed both an extension of suffrage to negroes and the -calling of a new constitutional convention. Like the Democratic -delegates they endorsed the reconstruction policy of the President. They -approved the attitude of their conservative Northern friends who opposed -radicalism and an elevation of the freedmen to political equality with -whites. The doctrine of secession was repudiated, and to the payment of -all obligations created in carrying on the war they declared themselves -inflexibly opposed. They, too, favored the speedy passage of an act of -general amnesty as well as a repeal of the confiscation law. - -Governor Wells was also the choice of this convention. He accepted both -nominations and perceived no inconsistency in doing so, never, he -asserted, having been a strict party man. Mr. Wells, who had formerly -been a Red River planter, proved his loyalty to the Federal Government -by coming within the Union lines as soon as they were established, and -bringing with him his slaves, thereby endangering somewhat his -ownership. - -Though he had not yet returned to his home, the friends of Henry Watkins -Allen, the late Confederate executive, named him as their candidate for -governor. - -In the election, which was held at the appointed time, the entire vote -polled was 27,808, of which Governor Wells received 23,312, and -ex-Governor Allen, 5,497. In every county except one the Democratic -ticket for members of the Legislature was successful. - -Perhaps the most instructive incident of this contest was the part -played by those known as “Radical” Republicans. These held a -mass-meeting in the city of New Orleans on November 13 at which were -adopted resolutions claiming the election to Congress of Henry C. -Warmoth as territorial Delegate. When he subsequently appeared in -Washington his case was brought to the attention of the House by -Thaddeus Stevens, who offered, December 20, 1865, what purported to be a -certificate of Warmoth’s election as Delegate from the “Territory of -Louisiana.” On request of the Pennsylvania leader this document was -referred to the Joint Committee on Reconstruction.[449] - -This extreme element, which assumed to regard Louisiana as a Territory, -polled 19,000 votes, most of which were alleged to have been cast by -colored men. It declared the State organization repugnant to the Federal -Constitution both in law and effect. The President, it was asserted, -could not restore Louisiana by proclamation, for reinstatement could be -accomplished in a constitutional manner only by petitioning Congress for -admission whenever a majority of the people deemed such a course -expedient, and the temper of the whites, nine tenths of whom were -disloyal, rendered it inadvisable at that time to take such a step. The -meeting rejoiced that the Republican party in the North had triumphed in -the recent elections, for these victories pointed to ultimate success. -The premature admission of Louisiana Congressmen, by placing the Union -people under rebel rule, would be disastrous. However, as loyal citizens -they would confine themselves to peaceable means of redress. - -Warmoth appears shortly before the end of the war to have gone into -Louisiana with the Union army, in which he is said by one authority to -have acquired the reputation of a brave soldier and by another to have -merited dismissal from its ranks.[450] By organizing the freedmen and -insisting upon their political rights he won their confidence; his -shrewdness and engaging address retained their gratitude. In this -election his adherents not only sought to determine the Federal -relations of Louisiana, but also conferred upon negroes the privilege of -voting, for there was then no law of either the General or State -government investing them with any such right. - -The Legislature, which was convoked in special session, assembled at New -Orleans on the 23d of November. The Governor’s message on that occasion -related chiefly to such local objects as required the attention of the -lawmaking body. By recommending an election of United States Senators -Mr. Wells repudiated the action of the General Assembly, which, at the -preceding session, had appointed Messrs. Smith and Cutler to represent -the State. Acting upon the Governor’s suggestion, the latter was again -chosen, with Hahn for his colleague. These appointments were intended to -fill vacancies caused by the withdrawal, February 5, 1861, of John -Slidell and Judah P. Benjamin. - -One of the first acts of the lower House was the selection of a -committee to consider a resolution which provided for assembling a -convention to draft a State constitution. For reasons already assigned -the majority report of this committee recommended the calling of a -convention and counselled the Governor to order an election in which the -question could be voted on by the people. The minority recognized the -constitution of 1864 as binding, and on the ground of public economy -preferred its amendment, especially as it had already acted favorably on -the abolition of slavery. The adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment and -the repeal of the ordinance of secession were mentioned by them as -conditions essential to the recognition of Louisiana as a State and as -indispensable to a restoration of all the privileges which that -condition implied. - -As early as February 17 preceding the Legislature established under the -constitution of 1864 had ratified the Thirteenth Article amending the -Constitution. By a vote of two to one the Assembly again approved that -action. The session came to an end on the 22d of December. - -This commonwealth, a veritable Eden when the strife began, had been -sadly changed in its progress. A generous Government, indeed, by -repairing the levees protected her fairest parishes from inundation. The -same beneficent authority maintained many public institutions of charity -that must else have ceased their noble work. Distress and want had -already invaded that once prosperous community, and in the city of New -Orleans alone 16,000 persons were dependent upon and maintained by -Federal bounty. Silence reigned in the great cotton market of the world. -The wreck of her public finances has elsewhere been described. Her -opulent commerce had been destroyed, agriculture everywhere languished. -Plantations that but lately teemed with rich harvests showed the effects -of interrupted cultivation, and the mighty river that had annually -poured into her metropolis the productions of a dozen States now flowed -untroubled to the Gulf. - -To show the attitude of Congress toward the Alexandria government events -in Virginia have in part been anticipated. The Legislature of the loyal -portion of that Commonwealth was composed of members from only ten -counties and parts of other counties. It was by delegates from this -restricted area that the constitution of 1864 was framed and adopted. - -By this instrument the elective franchise was confined to male whites -that had attained the age of twenty-one years, who had resided twelve -months in the State and were willing to swear support of the Federal -Constitution and the restored government; but officials and voters were -required in addition to make oath, or affirmation, that they had not, -since January 1, 1864, voluntarily given aid or assistance to those in -rebellion against the General Government. The Assembly, however, was -empowered, when it was deemed safe to do so, to restore to citizenship -all who would be disfranchised by this provision of the organic law. - -Involuntary servitude was also abolished. While great numbers of negroes -were thus set at liberty, nothing was then done to elevate them to the -dignity of citizens. The question of making them voters was, of course, -still more remote. - -The General Assembly was prohibited from making provision for the -payment of any debt or obligation created in the name of the -Commonwealth by the pretended State authorities at Richmond; and it was -also forbidden to permit any county, city or corporation to levy or -collect taxes for the discharge of any debt incurred for the purpose of -aiding any rebellion against the State or the United States, or to -provide for the payment of any bonds held by rebels in arms.[451] - -The Confederate capital, long deemed impregnable, fell on the 2d of -April. Within a week came tidings of the surrender of Lee’s entire army, -greatly reduced in numbers, it is true, but hitherto the main reliance -of the Confederacy. Mr. Lincoln, apparently, was not altogether without -expectation of some such fortunate outcome of the extensive preparations -that had been made for ensuring the success of the final campaign, and -on the following day, April 10, 1865, he sent from Washington to the -executive head of the restored State this telegram: - - =Governor Pierpont=, _Alexandria, Virginia_: - - Please come up and see me at once.[452] - - =A. Lincoln.= - -Mr. Pierpont, as the writer has been credibly informed, called by -request on President Lincoln during the week of his assassination, -evidently in response to this telegram, when they spent three hours -together in conversation. No third party appears to have been present at -their consultation. The topic discussed it is not difficult to imagine. -Shortly before his death, which occurred in March, 1899, Governor -Pierpont informed his daughter that he never believed Andrew Johnson -carried out Mr. Lincoln’s idea in the reconstruction of Virginia.[453] -That policy, however, had not then, April 10, assumed definitive form in -the mind of the President himself, for he expressly stated to Mr. -Pierpont that he had no plan for reorganization, but must be guided by -events. His last public utterance establishes the correctness of this -statement. - -Four weeks later President Johnson by executive order recognized the -Alexandria establishment, and toward the close of the same month, May -26, 1865, Mr. Pierpont, with other members of his government, arrived in -Richmond. The sneer of Thaddeus Stevens that the archives and property -of loyal Virginia were conveyed to the new capital in an ambulance -affords at least an adequate idea of the feeble condition of the -restored State. But notwithstanding the absence of all pomp and his lack -of the usual emblems of authority the Governor, we are told, was -received in a very flattering manner. - -Virginia, which emerged from the struggle crippled by the loss of an -important part of her domain, suffered more in the destruction of the -elements of wealth than any of her errant sisters, and though entering -somewhat reluctantly on a career of rebellion, she was the only member -of the Confederacy that was permanently weakened. Industry could never -repair the alienation of her territory. While it may appear that the -General Government acted harshly toward a State to which the Union owed -so much, the preceding pages show clearly that the loss of her -trans-Alleghany counties was due chiefly to an unwise administration of -her internal affairs. Notwithstanding the statement of Mr. Blaine, the -writer does not think that Virginia was singled out for punishment. But -even apart from her dismemberment the ravages of war fell most heavily -on the Old Dominion. There it was that the Army of the Potomac and the -Army of Northern Virginia contended longest for supremacy. Troops in -their marches and countermarches foraged liberally on her people, -sometimes without distinction of friend or foe. Concrete illustrations -will occur to every reader acquainted with the military history of the -great conflict. The devastation of the Shenandoah valley was only a -striking example of what was constantly occurring within more restricted -areas of the State. Barns and dwelling houses, fences and crops perished -in the universal destruction. Cattle were either killed or carried off, -and even the implements of husbandry were frequently devoted to the -flames. The injury thus sustained by agricultural interests was followed -in many districts by an alarming scarcity of food during the ensuing -years, and to escape starvation numbers of her citizens fled from once -happy homes. Newspaper correspondents in their progress through the -State describe scenes of wretchedness and distress. In exploring for -their journals wide regions that had recently been the theatre of war -they witnessed spectacles of want, hunger and despair. Uncultivated -tracts in the wake of the armies contributed to heighten the picture of -desolation. Richmond, the centre of so many interesting historical -associations, though long exempt from pillage, perished ultimately in a -conflagration. In short, nearly every landmark of prosperity was effaced -by the calamities of war. - -To repair these ravages, to repeople these solitudes, to revive commerce -and agriculture, to restore tranquillity and maintain order was the -stupendous task before Governor Pierpont, in whose public career it may -be regarded as the second stage. After the formation of West Virginia, -in which he had acted a conspicuous and honorable part, and one that can -scarcely be overrated, his exertions barely sufficed to preserve the -continuity of a loyal government in his native State. In the former -undertaking he had the coöperation of nearly every person of -consideration beyond the Alleghanies. His efforts in Richmond, however, -received but indifferent support. Whites of little influence and negroes -who were still but prospective citizens made up the greater number of -his adherents. A handful of secessionists, it is true, set the example -of obedience to the laws, though they found among their late associates -but few imitators. It was from such material and in such circumstances -that Mr. Pierpont was to reconstruct the grand old Commonwealth. The -Governor, however, applied himself at once to the duties imposed by his -office. He appointed persons to reorganize the various counties by -holding elections for local officers, though in numerous instances he -merely authorized to act for the preservation of peace those citizens -whom the military officers might select. The difficulties of the -situation were such that he summoned the Legislature to meet in special -session at Richmond on the 20th of June. - -In response to this request the lawmaking body assembled at the -appointed time. The Executive message on that occasion related concisely -what had been done by the restored government subsequent to June, 1861. -It also stated that since his arrival at the capital the Governor had -conversed with intelligent men of every shade of political opinion and -representing every part of Virginia. He was convinced, he said, that if -the test of loyalty prescribed by their constitution was enforced in the -election and qualification of officers, it would render organization -impracticable in most of the counties. It was folly to suppose that a -State could be administered “under a republican form of government where -in a large portion of the State, nineteen twentieths of the people are -disfranchised and cannot hold office. But, fortunately, by the terms of -the constitution, the General Assembly has control of this subject. The -restricting clauses of the constitution were devised in time of war.... -Men accept the facts developed by the logic of the past four years, -declare that they have taken the oath of allegiance to the Government of -the United States without mental reservation, and intend to be, and -remain, loyal to the Government of their fathers. It would not be in -accordance with the spirit of that noble Anglo-Saxon race, from which we -boast our common origin, to strike a fallen brother, or impose upon him -humiliating terms after a fair surrender.”[454] - -For the oath required by the State constitution he suggested the -substitution of that prescribed by the President, or one of similar -character; he also recommended the passage of an act to legalize -marriage between persons of color, and the appointment of a day for -holding elections of Representatives to Congress and for members of the -Legislature in those counties where none had been chosen. - -The subject of disfranchisement was immediately taken up in both Houses, -and the result of their action was to allow the suffrage to those who, -upon taking the amnesty oath, had not held office under the Confederacy -or its State governments. Those who had done so could neither vote nor -hold office. The Legislature submitted to the people, to be determined -at the election in October succeeding, the question of removing this -restriction upon officeholders. - -This action of the Assembly was followed by the appearance of a large -number of competitors for office, and considerable interest was -awakened. Finding, however, that they would be unable to take the oath -required by Congress many of the candidates for the national Legislature -withdrew. The President was asked by some citizens of Albemarle County -whether, in his opinion, Congress would probably insist upon the oath. -The following reply to their inquiry was made by Attorney-General Speed: - - The President has referred to me your letter, dated Charlottesville, - Virginia, September, 1865, and I am instructed by him to say that he - has no more means of knowing what Congress may do in regard to the - oath about which you inquire than any other citizen. It is his - earnest wish that loyal and true men, to whom no objections can be - made, should be elected to Congress. - - This is not an official letter, but a simple expression of - individual opinion and wish.[455] - -The election was held on October 12, the vote polled being the smallest -ever given in the history of the State. In the first eight Congressional -districts, however, it exceeded 40,000. The constitutional amendment met -with very little opposition, many counties voting unanimously to remove -the restriction upon the suffrage.[456] The Assembly then chosen -convened at Richmond on December 4, 1865, the time fixed for the meeting -of Congress. - -While it is true that there were grounds for apprehension regarding the -stability of the new governments instituted in these four States, the -principal cause of anxiety to the Administration was the disorganized -political and social condition of the remaining members of the late -Confederacy. It was universally agreed that with the destruction of its -military power the authority of that government was completely -extinguished. From that moment until the revival within them of Federal -laws these commonwealths were destitute of all legislation of a general -character. Under our dual principle of government, however, this could -be endured temporarily. But the absence of a central organism would soon -be evident in the reappearance of those alarming symptoms which marked -American political and industrial life in the critical period between -the Treaty of Paris, in 1783, and the inauguration, nearly six years -later, of the present national system. In that unhappy interval, -however, the authority of the various States was ample for the -regulation of domestic affairs, while in the deranged and confused times -succeeding the Rebellion seven entire commonwealths were left without -any general or any particular government. Their territory, indeed, had -passed under control of the Union forces, for when the Administration of -Jefferson Davis was overthrown the disloyal State establishments, of -which it was only an emanation, fell likewise. Though internal progress -was not seriously to be expected in this situation, tolerable order was -preserved by Federal soldiers, who occupied the entire region between -the Potomac and the Rio Grande, for even in those States reorganized -under Executive auspices civil authority was not yet established on a -foundation sufficiently secure to maintain itself without assistance -from the military power of the nation. - -Besides the absence of all civil government there were other elements of -discord that tended to increase the confusion in these States. Their -population, it need scarcely be observed, was not homogeneous. The -decree of emancipation together with the incidents of war had brought -freedom to almost the entire slave population of the South. This was -soon to be confirmed by the proposed constitutional amendment, which was -designed both to place beyond question the status of freedmen and to -strike the shackles from the limbs of the last bondman in the loyal as -well as in the disloyal States. About the middle of December nearly -4,000,000 negroes bereft of the hand that bestowed their daily -sustenance found themselves suddenly dependent for support upon their -own exertions. The General Government, it is true, by creating the -Bureau of Freedmen and Refugees, diminished considerably the danger from -this source, though this relief by no means solved the problem of -transforming the recent slave into a useful member of society; besides, -the bureau itself subsequently degenerated into a fruitful source of -abuse. - -Nor were Southern whites by any means unanimous as to the best policy to -adopt in the circumstances in which an unsuccessful rebellion had placed -them. Between Union men and secessionists there existed a feeling of -extreme bitterness. Even among members of the latter class there was -considerable difference of opinion, as in North Carolina, where the -former Whigs, by the moderation of their views as much as by constantly -agitating the question of reconstruction, had somewhat embarrassed the -Richmond authorities while war was still flagrant. Add to these causes -of disorder the discontent of thousands of disbanded soldiers who -returned in the gloom of defeat not infrequently to ruined homes and -wasted fields. Then, too, there was the disappointment and humiliation -naturally felt by a brave and impulsive people who had fought gallantly -in support of a cause condemned, indeed, by the civilized world, but -believed by them to be not only just but indispensable to their -prosperity and happiness. - -Though a volume could be profitably employed in describing, town by town -and county by county, the extent of destruction inflicted on the South, -a few brief paragraphs must suffice to suggest an imperfect idea of the -enormous loss of wealth sustained by that section. The wreck of four -members of the Confederacy has been noticed in the preceding pages. That -rapid sketch, however, took no account of the damage to individuals by -the liberation of their slaves, for, except in those instances where -negroes left the commonwealth, that was not in any sense a loss to the -State. If it were, a community, by reducing to servitude a part of its -inhabitants, could at any time increase the amount of its capital. It is -only from the slaveholder’s point of view, therefore, that emancipation -can be regarded as a pecuniary loss. Immense damage was sustained by -both North and South in the withdrawal of millions of men from the -various fields of production. The energy of these multitudes, which was -rapidly making the United States the most opulent and powerful nation on -the globe, had exerted itself for four years in the destruction of -former accumulations. - -Almost at the moment that the star of the Confederacy had begun to -decline the imperial State of Georgia, hitherto exempt from punishment, -was wasted by fire and sword. Sometimes the Southern, sometimes the -Northern army stripped the country of everything capable of supporting -life. Crops had been harvested, indeed, but this served only to -facilitate their destruction. In the retreat of Johnston and the advance -of Sherman toward Atlanta highways had been injured, bridges burned and -many lines of railroad completely destroyed. Dwellings, when they -interfered with military operations, were levelled by even the -Confederate army, and the Union forces could not be expected to show -greater consideration for the property of public enemies. General Hood -not only wasted the vast stores accumulated in Atlanta but burned -habitations when they stood in the way of his fortifications. Though -winter was rapidly approaching, the Federal commander deemed it -necessary after the capture of that stronghold to expel from their -abodes a considerable part of its population. A brief truce, it is true, -enabled the miserable inhabitants to remove a part of their effects -farther south; thousands, outcasts from their ruined homes, were thus -driven to wander among strangers whose bounty had already been taxed by -earlier fugitives; both classes were dependent for their maintenance on -the precarious charity of an impoverished people. Crowded dwellings -forced great numbers in the inclement weather to seek shelter in the -neighboring forests, where they found a safe refuge, indeed, but a -scanty subsistence. Over the region traversed by Sherman and Johnston -the forces of Hood soon after traced a devastating march northward to -Dalton. The mischiefs of the great march to Savannah have frequently -been described. Its beginning was announced by the blaze of burning -buildings, and when the last of the Federal soldiers had set their faces -toward the sea the city of Atlanta was little more than a mass of -smoking ruins. Though the region traversed was probably the richest in -the State, extensive misery accompanied the progress of the army. The -meat and the vegetables needed for his command were taken by the Union -General. Horses, mules and wagons were freely appropriated; slaves also -were assisted to escape from their masters. Mills and cotton-gins were -frequently devoted to the flames. In Milledgeville factories, -storehouses and public buildings were destroyed. The principal edifices -of Macon perished about the same time. Indeed, Augusta was the only -considerable place in the State that escaped serious harm. The people in -northwestern Georgia were in the utmost destitution, large families -being frequently for whole days without food; venerable persons of both -sexes, sinking under the weight of years and infirmities, often walked -fifteen and even twenty miles to procure food enough to prevent -starvation. The injury to all the usual means of transportation greatly -increased the difficulty of bringing relief. When the conflict had -ended, however, Federal officers did what they could to alleviate the -almost universal distress, and their magnanimity was not without -influence on the future conduct of many an ex-Confederate veteran. - -South Carolina, the fatal State that woke the sword of war, did not -suffer greatly in the earlier stages of the conflict, though even then -her foreign commerce was extinguished and her agriculture interrupted -along the coast. Before its close, however, she was destined to -experience most of its horrors. A restless generation of agitators had -assiduously inculcated the notion that the South was ruthlessly -oppressed by Yankee avarice. This teaching bore fruit, and the people of -South Carolina, coming to regard themselves as little better than -tributary slaves, were easily persuaded to resort to the wager of -battle. With the progress of the contest this proud State was growing -weaker within, hostile pressure was constantly increasing from without. -Time at length and the fortunes of war had brought round their revenge, -and when the veterans of Sherman turned northward from Savannah the -Palmetto State was powerless to prevent, or seriously to retard, their -advance. Transportation was greatly embarrassed by the destruction of -the bridges as well as the tracks of almost every important railway -within the State. Immense quantities of cotton and numbers of cotton -warehouses, uncounted dwellings and depots, machine shops and foundries, -as well as several sailing vessels and steamboats were consumed by -flames. Besides these blackened memorial’s of disaster and defeat, the -stately cities of Charleston and Columbia were almost simultaneously -laid in ruins by great conflagrations. The inability of the civil -authorities to furnish food for his army constrained General Sherman to -forage for supplies. In this manner all the cattle, hogs, sheep and -poultry, even the little stores of meal, treasured as the last barrier -against want, were consumed, and the people left entirely without -subsistence. To prevent general starvation the Confederate commander was -compelled to distribute the rations of his soldiers among the wretched -inhabitants. From various causes many ancient and wealthy families found -themselves suddenly reduced to a condition of beggary, and so low was -the condition of the public treasury that the Legislature as early as -the mid-summer of 1865 had already begun seriously to discuss the -question of repudiation. - -With some slight alterations this picture of South Carolina’s ills will -serve for that of her northern and more deserving sister, so far at -least as concerns those parts overrun by the contending hosts. The -cessation of hostilities stopped the carnival of death and silenced the -engines of destruction before half of North Carolina’s territory had -been crossed. From the first years of the war there were numerous -instances of privation among the loyalists of that State. Toward its -close the more favored classes also began to feel the pressure of want. -The negroes required and received assistance from the Freedmen’s Bureau. -The whites, refugees as well as secessionists, were aided by the -commanders of the rival forces. - -Florida, fortunately for her people, was so remote from the principal -scenes of war that she felt few of its evils. Battles, it is true, -occurred within the State, but they were as skirmishes compared to the -bloody engagements which took place elsewhere. The same observations are -substantially true of Texas. A fringe of Mississippi’s territory, too, -had been swept by the furnace-blast of war. The extensive movements -around Corinth, Iuka, Vicksburg, Jackson and Port Hudson will suggest -the extent of destruction that visited the northern half of that State. -There existed considerable privation in that section, though no general -distress as in other members of the Confederacy. - -All the Gulf States, however, were not equally fortunate. Though long -impending, the fate of Alabama came swiftly. Almost in the same hour she -was invaded from the north and menaced from the south. A large portion -of her material resources was already exhausted when the cavalry raids -of General Wilson spread terror and devastation through the interior -counties. The city of Selma was laid in ashes; smaller towns and -villages were likewise consumed by flames; schools and colleges, private -buildings and public edifices perished in the universal wreck. Monuments -of ruin were everywhere conspicuous throughout a region the most -productive, probably, in all the South. Silence and desolation reigned -where but lately stood proud and hospitable mansions. Nor was the -destruction of wealth or its elements the only injury sustained, for -industry would soon repair the losses of capital. Labor itself had been -severely crippled. Of the army of 122,000 soldiers which Alabama -furnished to the cause of secession 35,000, it was estimated, had been -left on the field of battle, and at least an equal number had been -disabled for life. Mobile, enriched by the cotton trade, was silent as -some ancient necropolis. Her splendid commerce was ruined; her stately -ships were gone, and the wave broke unheeded on the shores of her -deserted harbor. - -This hurried summary conveys only a very inadequate notion of the -complex problem which Mr. Johnson was forced to consider. His arduous -duty was to repair the ravages of military violence, to evoke order from -the discord of civil strife, to heal the wounds which the imperious -power of slavery had inflicted upon industries and institutions; in a -word, to restore the harmony of that Republic founded by the wisdom of -Washington and preserved by the policy of Lincoln. The sentiments of the -Chief Magistrate who was about to attempt this difficult but -indispensable task it is now time to consider. His deliberate -conclusions and his spontaneous utterances are best examined, it is -believed, in something like chronological order. - -On June 9, 1864, almost a year before his accession to the Presidency, -he had said in addressing the people of Nashville: - - But in calling a convention to restore the State, who shall restore - and reëstablish it?... Shall he who brought this misery upon the - State be permitted to control its destinies? If this be so, then all - this precious blood of our brave soldiers and officers so freely - poured out will have been wantonly spilled.... - - Why all this carnage and devastation? It was that treason might be - put down and traitors punished. Therefore I say that traitors should - take a back seat in the work of restoration. If there be but five - thousand men in Tennessee loyal to the Constitution, loyal to - freedom, loyal to justice, these true and faithful men should - control the work of reorganization and reformation absolutely. I say - that the traitor has ceased to be a citizen, and in joining the - rebellion has become a public enemy. He forfeited his right to vote - with loyal men when he renounced his citizenship and sought to - destroy our Government.... If we are so cautious about foreigners - who voluntarily renounce their homes to live with us what should we - say to the traitor, who, although born and reared among us, has - raised a parricidal hand against the Government which always - protected him? My judgment is that he should be subjected to a - severe ordeal before he is restored to citizenship.... Before these - repenting rebels can be trusted, let them bring forth the fruits of - repentance.... Treason must be made odious, and traitors must be - punished and impoverished. Their great plantations must be seized, - and divided into small farms, and sold to honest, industrious men. - The day for protecting the lands and negroes of these authors of the - rebellion is past. It is high time it was.[457] - -Though he had never been accustomed to conceal his opinions on questions -of public interest, and though there was no reason for supposing that -his views on reorganization had changed in the months intervening -between the Nashville speech and his inauguration, there was -considerable curiosity, if not indeed impatience, to learn his -sentiments on the paramount issue before the nation. Even the -unparalleled excitement and profound regret occasioned by the -assassination of Mr. Lincoln could not make men forget the grave -questions which the changed conditions of the Union presented for the -consideration of statesmen. Therefore the brief remarks addressed by the -new Executive to those who were present at his inauguration were eagerly -scrutinized for some indication of the principles which he was likely to -adopt in the conduct of his Administration. The absence, however, of -even a hint on that interesting subject gave universal disappointment, -and anxious patriots were not reassured by his failure to announce any -expression of a purpose to continue the policy of his predecessor. By -his intimate friends this omission was construed as an intention to -pursue in dealing with the South a less generous course than, it was -believed, Mr. Lincoln had marked out. - -Among the more extreme “Radicals” this surmise occasioned little regret, -for they did not object to the accession of an Executive made, as they -believed, of sterner stuff than the late incumbent. From his fierce -denunciation of secessionists both while military governor of Tennessee -and subsequently, it was generally understood that more stringent -methods would be adopted by Mr. Johnson than had hitherto been employed. -Among other things he said in his inaugural: “As to an indication of any -policy which may be pursued by me in the administration of the -Government, I have to say that that must be left for development, as the -administration progresses. The message or declaration must be made by -the acts as they transpire. The only assurance that I can now give of -the future, is by reference to the past.”[458] - -Delegations of citizens who waited upon him to tender their cordial -support were assured in the most explicit terms that his past course -was an indication of what his future policy would be. Three days after -entering upon the duties of his office a deputation of distinguished -persons called on Mr. Johnson under circumstances at once unusual and -touching. The remains of the late President still lay in the White -House. Before the sad procession of the dead left the national Capital -for Springfield, Governor Oglesby, with other gentlemen from Illinois, -called to assure the new Executive of their respect and confidence. -His record, they declared, gave assurance to their State that in his -hands they could safely trust the destinies of the Republic. The -President responded in a speech discussing a far wider range of topics -than he had treated in his inaugural. Appropriate reference to his -predecessor, the tragical close of whose career was scarcely alluded -to in his first address, was made in this more extended discourse. He -spoke with unaffected and profound emotion. “The beloved of all hearts -has been assassinated,” said he, “and when we trace this crime to its -cause, when we remember the source whence the assassin drew his -inspiration, and then look at the result, we stand yet more astounded -at this most barbarous, most diabolical act.... We can trace its cause -through successive steps back to that source which is the spring of -all our woes. No one can say that if the perpetrator of this fiendish -deed be arrested, he should not undergo the extremest penalty of the -law known for crime: none will say that mercy should interpose. But is -he alone guilty? Here, gentlemen, you perhaps expect me to present -some indication of my future policy. One thing I will say: every era -teaches its lesson. The times we live in are not without instruction. -The American people must be taught—if they do not already feel—that -treason is a crime and must be punished.... When we turn to the -criminal code we find arson laid down as a crime with its appropriate -penalty. We find theft and murder denounced as crimes, and their -appropriate penalty prescribed; and there, too, we find the last and -highest of crimes,—treason.... Let it be engraven on every mind that -treason is a crime, and traitors shall suffer its penalty.... I do not -harbor bitter or resentful feelings towards any.... When the question -of exercising mercy comes before me it will be considered calmly, -judicially—remembering that I am the Executive of the Nation. I know -men love to have their names spoken of in connection with acts of -mercy, and how easy it is to yield to that impulse. But we must never -forget that what may be mercy to the individual is cruelty to the -State.” - -Commenting on this speech Mr. Blaine, from whom it is quoted, says that -it “was reported by an accomplished stenographer, and was submitted to -Mr. Johnson’s inspection before publication. It contained a declaration -intimating to its hearers, if not explicitly assuring them, that ‘the -policy of Mr. Lincoln in the past shall be my policy in the future.’ -When in reading the report he came to this passage, Mr. Johnson queried -whether his words had not been in some degree misapprehended; and while -he was engaged with the stenographer in modifying the form of -expression, Mr. Preston King, of New York, who was constantly by his -side as adviser, interposed the suggestion that all reference to the -subject be stricken out. To this Mr. Johnson promptly assented. He had -undoubtedly gone farther than he intended in speaking to Mr. Lincoln’s -immediate friends, and the correction—inspired by one holding the -radical views of Mr. King—was equivalent to a declaration that the -policy of Mr. Lincoln had been more conservative than that which he -intended to pursue.”[459] - -To a deputation of New Hampshire citizens he said in part: “This -Government is now passing through a fiery, and, let us hope, its last -ordeal—one that will test its powers of endurance, and will determine -whether it can do what its enemies have denied—suppress and punish -treason.” Though he had been urged, he asserted, by friends whose good -opinion he valued, he refrained from foreshadowing in a public manifesto -the policy which would guide him. He further observed on this occasion: -“I know it is easy, gentlemen, for any one who is so disposed, to -acquire a reputation for clemency and mercy. But the public good -imperatively requires a just discrimination in the exercise of these -qualities.... To relieve one from the penalty of crime may be productive -of national disaster. The American people must be taught to know and -understand that treason is a crime.... Treason is a crime, and must be -punished as a crime. It must not be regarded as a mere difference of -political opinion. It must not be excused as an unsuccessful rebellion, -to be overlooked and forgiven. It is a crime before which all others -sink into insignificance; and in saying this it must not be considered -that I am influenced by angry or revengeful feelings.” He added, that to -those who had been deluded and deceived by designing men, to those who -had been only technically guilty of treason, he would accord amnesty, -leniency and mercy. On the instigators of rebellion, however, should be -visited “the full penalty of their crimes.”[460] - -Replying, April 21, to an address of Governor Morton, who introduced a -delegation from Indiana, he said: “Mine has been but one straightforward -and unswerving course, and I see no reason why I should depart from -it.... - -“I hold it as a solemn obligation in any one of these States where the -rebel armies have been driven back or expelled—I care not how small the -number of Union men, if enough to man the ship of State—I hold it, I -say, a high duty to protect and secure to them a republican form of -government. This is no new opinion.... In adjusting and putting the -government upon its legs again, I think the progress of this work must -pass into the hands of its friends. If a State is to be nursed until it -again gets strength, it must be nursed by its friends, and not smothered -by its enemies.”[461] To this delegation he declared himself not less -opposed to consolidation than to dissolution and disintegration. In a -brief reply on the same day to a deputation from Ohio he added nothing -of value to these observations, and on the 24th of April he addressed in -a similar strain a body of exiles from the South. - -“The colored American asks but two things,” said the spokesman of a -negro delegation about the same time, “that he have, first, complete -emancipation, and secondly, full equality before American law.” To this -the President replied, among other things, that he feared leading -colored men did not “understand and appreciate the fact that they have -friends on the south side of the line. They have, and they are as -faithful and staunch as any north of the line. It may be a very easy -thing, indeed popular, to be an emancipationist north of the line, but a -very different thing to be such south of it. South of it, it costs a man -effort, property, and perhaps life.”[462] - -Two months later, June 24, in replying to an address of a South Carolina -committee, he said in part: “The friction of the rebellion has rubbed -out the nature and character of slavery. The loyal men who were -compelled to bow and submit to the rebellion should, now that the -rebellion is ended, stand equal to loyal men everywhere. Hence the wish -of reconstruction, and the trying to get back the States to the point at -which they formerly moved in perfect harmony.” He reminded them that as -an institution slavery was gone, and said there was no hope that the -people of South Carolina would be admitted into either the Senate or the -House of Representatives until by their conduct they had afforded -evidence of this truth. In their circumstances the true policy was to -restore the State government, not through military rule, but by the -action of the people.[463] - -Desiring to relieve all loyal citizens and well-disposed persons from -unnecessary trade restrictions, and to encourage a return to peaceful -pursuits, the President removed, April 29, 1865, the interdict on all -domestic and coastwise intercourse in that portion of the late -Confederate States east of the Mississippi and within the lines of -national military occupation. From this order, however, certain named -articles contraband of war were excepted. Military and naval regulations -in conflict with his proclamation were revoked. On May 22 following he -announced that ports in the same district would be reopened to foreign -commerce after July 1, 1865, though certain places in Texas were still -denied this privilege. - -The insurrection hitherto existing in Tennessee was declared at an end -on June 13, 1865. The authority of the United States, this Proclamation -asserted, was unquestioned within the limits of that commonwealth, and -duly commissioned Federal officials were in undisturbed exercise of -their functions. All disabilities attaching to the State and its -inhabitants were therefore removed; but nothing contained in the order -was to be construed as affecting any of the penalties and forfeitures -for treason which had previously been incurred. - -Ten days later, June 23, the blockade of Galveston and other ports -beyond the Mississippi was rescinded. These were to be opened to foreign -trade on the 1st of July succeeding. It was ordered, August 29, 1865, -that after September 1 all restrictions upon internal, domestic and -coastwise commerce be removed, so that even articles contraband of war -might be imported into and sold in the late insurgent States, the -necessity for prohibiting intercourse in those articles having in great -measure ceased. - -In an order dated May 9, 1865, the President declared null and void all -acts and proceedings of the military and civil organizations of Virginia -which had been in rebellion against the General Government; also that -all persons who should exercise or attempt to exercise any authority, -jurisdiction or right under Jefferson Davis, and his confederates, or -under John Letcher or William Smith,[464] and their confederates, or any -pretended commission or authority issued by them, or any of them, since -April 17, 1861, would be deemed and taken as in rebellion against the -United States, and dealt with accordingly. By the same order the -authority of the United States was revived within the geographical -limits known as Virginia, and the heads of the several Executive -Departments were instructed to enforce therein all Federal laws the -administration of which belonged to their respective offices. - -To carry into effect the constitutional guaranty of a republican form of -government and “afford the advantage and security of domestic laws, as -well as to complete the reëstablishment of the authority of the laws of -the United States, and the full and complete restoration of peace within -the limits aforesaid, Francis H. Pierpont, Governor of the State of -Virginia,” was assured of such assistance from the Federal authorities -as was believed necessary in any lawful measures that he might adopt for -extending the State government throughout that Commonwealth.[465] - -The Secretary of the Treasury was directed to nominate without delay -assessors of taxes and collectors of customs and internal revenue, and -such other officers of his Department as were authorized by law, to -execute the revenue laws of the United States. Preference in making -appointments was to be given to qualified loyal residents of the -districts in which their respective duties were to be performed; but if -suitable persons could not be found residing there, then citizens of -other States or districts should be named. - -In the matter of appointments similar instructions were given to the -Postmaster-General, who was empowered to establish post offices and post -routes, and to enforce the postal laws of the United States in the State -of Virginia. - -The heads of the remaining Executive Departments, State, War, Navy and -Interior, were likewise ordered to enforce the acts of Congress -pertaining to their respective offices. The judge of the United States -District Court for Virginia was directed to hold courts in that -Commonwealth, while it was made the duty of the Attorney-General to -instruct the proper officers to libel and bring to judgment, -confiscation and sale, property subject to confiscation, and to provide -for the administration of justice within the said State in all matters -of which the Federal courts had cognizance. - -It was this recognition of his government, and this assurance of -support, that induced Mr. Pierpont less than three weeks afterward to -remove his capital from Alexandria. An account of this event as well as -of the nature of the Governor’s duties in his enlarged jurisdiction, has -been anticipated. - -In recognizing Mr. Pierpont as Governor of Virginia, President Johnson -merely concluded to retain for reconstruction what had already been -accomplished by the loyal minority of that Commonwealth. Nor is it easy -to perceive why, by rejecting what had been done, he should have -increased the difficulties of a situation even then sufficiently -complicated. While military governor of Tennessee he had executed, and, -so far as appears, without remonstrance, all the measures recommended by -Mr. Lincoln, so that when he succeeded to the Presidency he was to some -extent committed to the policy of his predecessor. He preserved his -consistency by endeavoring to maintain that system in which he had -formerly acquiesced, and in sustaining the reconstructed governments of -Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee and Virginia it is somewhat hazardous to -affirm that he acted unwisely. More than this the adherents of President -Lincoln could not reasonably have expected. Mr. Johnson was not, -however, required by any consideration of moment to apply that mode of -restoration to the seven remaining States; nor is it by any means -certain that he had a legal right to do so. With President Lincoln the -problem was to preserve the Union. To effect that object he believed it -necessary to institute loyal governments, and his action in so doing -appears to have been clearly within his powers as Commander-in-Chief. -Had his course been unwise or even prejudicial to national interests, -the reorganization of those States was still a legitimate war measure to -which his discretion undoubtedly extended. When Andrew Johnson became -President, however, the nature of the problem had greatly changed, for -even though no proclamation had yet announced the termination of the -Rebellion, hostilities had entirely ceased before he issued the first of -his orders on reconstruction. It was only by something like a legal -fiction, therefore, that the war powers could longer be exercised. It is -believed that his failure to recognize the different circumstances was -an error of judgment. The danger of a renewal of the conflict was not -sufficiently real to justify a continuance of the unlimited authority -that might be deemed necessary in time of war. He was aware that -Congress had refused to admit representatives or to count electoral -votes from those States reorganized during the Rebellion, when the -action of the Executive rested on the firm, if somewhat undefined, -foundation of the war powers. After a majority, even in these -circumstances, had pronounced against that system, on what ground could -the new President base his expectation of success? Without first -assuring himself of the coöperation of the Legislative branch he should -not have undertaken the arduous task of reviving Union governments in -those commonwealths where even the very image of civil authority had -been effaced. Perhaps he had been convinced that the method of -restoration was analogous to the process of terminating war with a -foreign power in which the initiative is to be taken by the Executive -Department of Government. On this subject Mr. Blaine acutely remarks, -that, “There is nothing of which a public officer can be so easily -persuaded as of the enlarged jurisdiction that pertains to his -station.”[466] It was while executing his measures of reconstruction -that Mr. Lincoln discovered the real sentiments and, to his surprise, no -doubt, encountered the determined opposition of Congress. In the case of -his successor the same excuse cannot be urged, for he was aware of the -temper of the Republican majority, and appears to have consulted only -his courage in espousing a cause already condemned by many of the most -influential leaders of the party to which he principally owed his -election. - -As the order recognizing the Alexandria government marked no distinct -Executive policy, speculation could still amuse or employ itself on the -expected announcement by the new President. The first step in that -momentous undertaking was the appointment, May 29, 1865, of William W. -Holden as Provisional Governor of North Carolina. The order promulgating -that measure was as follows: - - Whereas the fourth section of the fourth article of the Constitution - of the United States declares that the United States shall guarantee - to every State in the Union a republican form of government, and - shall protect each of them against invasion and domestic violence; - and whereas the President of the United States is, by the - Constitution, made commander-in-chief of the army and navy, as well - as chief civil executive officer of the United States, and is bound - by solemn oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the - United States, and to take care that the laws be faithfully - executed; and whereas the rebellion, which has been waged by a - portion of the people of the United States against the properly - constituted authorities of the Government thereof, in the most - violent and revolting form, but whose organized and armed forces - have now been almost entirely overcome, has, in its revolutionary - progress, deprived the people of the State of North Carolina of all - civil government; and whereas it becomes necessary and proper to - carry out and enforce the obligations of the United States to the - people of North Carolina, in securing them in the enjoyment of a - republican form of government: - - Now, therefore, in obedience to the high and solemn duties imposed - upon me by the Constitution of the United States, and for the - purpose of enabling the loyal people of said State to organize a - State government, whereby justice may be established, domestic - tranquillity insured, and loyal citizens protected in all their - rights of life, liberty, and property, I, Andrew Johnson, President - of the United States, and Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy of - the United States, do hereby appoint William W. Holden, Provisional - Governor of the State of North Carolina, whose duty it shall be, at - the earliest practicable period, to prescribe such rules and - regulations as may be necessary and proper for convening a - convention, composed of delegates to be chosen by that portion of - the people of said State who are loyal to the United States, and no - others, for the purpose of altering or amending the constitution - thereof; and with authority to exercise, within the limits of said - State, all the powers necessary and proper to enable such loyal - people of the State of North Carolina to restore said State to its - constitutional relations to the Federal Government, and to present - such a republican form of State government as will entitle the State - to the guarantee of the United States therefor, and its people to - protection by the United States against invasion, insurrection, and - domestic violence; _Provided_, that in any election that may be - hereafter held for choosing delegates to any State convention, as - aforesaid, no person shall be qualified as an elector, or shall be - eligible as a member of such convention, unless he shall have - previously taken the oath of amnesty, as set forth in the - President’s proclamation of May 29, A. D. 1865, and is a voter - qualified as prescribed by the Constitution and laws of the State of - North Carolina, in force immediately before the 20th day of May, - 1861, the date of the so-called ordinance of secession; and the said - convention when convened, or the Legislature that may be thereafter - assembled, will prescribe the qualifications of electors, and the - eligibility of persons to hold office under the Constitution and - laws of the State, a power the people of the several States - composing the Federal Union have rightfully exercised from the - origin of the Government to the present time. - - And I do hereby direct: - - _First._ That the military commander of the Department, and all - officers and persons in the military and naval service aid and - assist the said Provisional Governor in carrying into effect this - proclamation, and they are enjoined to abstain from, in any way, - hindering, impeding or discouraging the loyal people from the - organization of a State Government, as herein authorized. - -Then followed instructions, similar to those contained in the order of -May 9, relative to Virginia, directing the heads of the several -Executive Departments to enforce those Federal laws in North Carolina of -which the administration belonged to their respective offices. - -Somewhat earlier on the same day was published an Amnesty Proclamation, -renewing in effect the provisions of that issued by Mr. Lincoln on the -8th of December, 1863. It increased, however, the number of classes -excepted from the benefits of the original offer by adding the -following: - - All persons who have been or are absentees from the United States - for the purpose of aiding the rebellion. - - All military and naval officers in the rebel service, who were - educated by the Government in the Military Academy at West Point or - the United States Naval Academy. - - All persons who held the pretended offices of governors of States in - insurrection against the United States. - - All persons who left their homes within the jurisdiction and - protection of the United States, and passed beyond the Federal - military lines into the pretended confederate States for the purpose - of aiding the rebellion. - - All persons who have been engaged in the destruction of the commerce - of the United States upon the high seas, and all persons who have - made raids into the United States from Canada, or been engaged in - destroying the commerce of the United States upon the lakes and - rivers that separate the British Provinces from the United States. - - All persons who, at the time when they seek to obtain the benefits - hereof by taking the oath herein prescribed, are in military, naval, - or civil confinement, or custody, or under bonds of the civil, - military, or naval authorities, or agents of the United States, as - prisoners of war, or persons detained for offences of any kind, - either before or after conviction. - - All persons who have voluntarily participated in said rebellion, and - the estimated value of whose taxable property is over twenty - thousand dollars. - - All persons who have taken the oath of amnesty as prescribed in the - President’s proclamation of December 8, A. D. 1863, or an oath of - allegiance to the Government of the United States since the date of - said proclamation, and who have not thenceforward kept and - maintained the same inviolate.[467] - -The proclamation provided, however, that persons belonging to the -excluded classes could make special application for pardon, when such -liberal clemency would be exercised by the President as was deemed -consistent with the facts in each case, and with the peace and dignity -of the United States. - -Secretary Seward, who attested the proclamation, approved its general -tenor as well as its details. At first he appears to have opposed the -“Twenty-thousand-dollar exclusion,” but finally yielded to the arguments -of the President, who by this description had hoped to include a -numerous class that did not come under any of those specified. In this -respect it possessed the comprehensive as well as the convenient -character of a general warrant. All attempts to fix responsibility for -secession have proved futile, and it is difficult to explain the -President’s attitude toward Southern men of property unless, indeed, he -meant to humiliate a class that he personally disliked, or, perhaps, he -intended to act upon the principle that to be mild it is necessary first -to appear cruel. Precisely why the other classes were excepted from the -offer of indemnity the reader of Rebellion literature need not be -informed. The amnesty proclamation applied to all the insurgent States. - -Like the “Louisiana plan,” the order appointing Mr. Holden was based on -that clause of the Federal Constitution which guarantees “to every State -in this Union a republican form of government.” It was in his character -of Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, as well as Executive, that -he assumed to appoint a provisional governor. The Rebellion, which in -its progress had “deprived the people of the State of North Carolina of -all civil government,” he described as having been “almost entirely -overcome.” This condition rendered it necessary to fulfill the Federal -obligation to secure to the people of that State a republican form of -government. The order being self-explanatory, it only remains to observe -that none but “loyal people” were to participate in electing delegates -to the convention, which it was made the duty of the Governor to -convoke. The term “loyal people” included all who would take the oath -and receive the pardon provided for in the proclamation. These were -required to be qualified voters under the laws in force immediately -before the act of secession. By this provision the negroes of the State -were excluded from the electoral people, and the work of reconstruction -left entirely in the hands of the whites. The convention chosen by these -citizens, or the Legislature that might be thereafter assembled, was -authorized to “prescribe the qualifications of electors, and the -eligibility of persons to hold office under the constitution and laws of -the State, a power,” added the order, which “the people of the several -States composing the Federal Union have rightfully exercised from the -origin of the Government to the present time.” - -Governor Holden in a proclamation of June 12, 1865, announced his -appointment and declared his purpose to order an election of delegates -to a State convention, the object of calling which was briefly noticed. -He also made known his intention to commission justices of the peace for -the purpose of administering the oath of allegiance and opening the -polls. He urged the people to resume their accustomed pursuits; refugees -were encouraged by an offer of protection to return to the State, and -freedmen were instructed in the duties peculiar to their altered -circumstances. - -By a second proclamation, dated August 8, the choice of delegates to the -proposed convention was fixed for September 21 succeeding. Some delay in -appointing a date for holding the election was occasioned by a desire to -afford the people an opportunity of enrolling their names and obtaining -the required certificates. - -By such voters as were not included in any of the excepted classes, -together with the few who had been able to procure the Presidential -pardon, full delegations were chosen in all but three counties. The -details of this election accessible to the writer are exceedingly -meagre. Owing much to the timely publication and the admirable character -of the orders of General Schofield, who had exercised the functions of -military governor until superseded by Mr. Holden, the contest appears to -have been free from unusual violence, though newspaper correspondents, -it is true, reported disturbances at several polling places and mention -rumors of rioting. - -The convention, which assembled at Raleigh on October 2, was composed -for the most part of members who had either openly opposed or -reluctantly joined the secession movement. There were few, however, who -had not given aid and comfort to the enemy. In other words, they were -Whigs and conservative Democrats. Every representative readily took the -oath to support the Constitution of the United States. The convention -organized by electing Edwin G. Reade, an ex-member of the Thirty-fifth -Congress, as president. On taking his seat Mr. Reade made an appropriate -and conciliatory address. - -The Provisional Governor also submitted to the members of the convention -a brief message in which he observed that their duties were too plain to -require any suggestions from him. North Carolina, he said, attempted in -May, 1861, to separate herself from the Union. That attempt involved her -in protracted and disastrous war. She entered the rebellion a -slaveholding and emerged from it a non-slaveholding State. “In other -respects,” he declared, “so far as her existence as a State and her -rights as a State are concerned, she has undergone no change.”[468] He -assumed that the convention would insert in the organic law a provision -forever prohibiting involuntary servitude in North Carolina. The -language abolishing that institution, the form of the resolution -abrogating the ordinance of secession and the nature of the action to be -taken on the war debt were the most important questions before the -convention. - -On October 7 the repealing ordinance was passed unanimously in the -following terms: - - The ordinance of the convention of the State of North Carolina, - ratified on the 21st day of November, 1789, which adopted and - ratified the Constitution of the United States, and also all acts - and parts of acts of the General Assembly ratifying and adopting - amendments to the said Constitution, are now, and at all times since - the adoption and ratification thereof, have been, in full force and - effect, notwithstanding the supposed ordinance of the 20th of May, - 1861, declaring the same to be repealed, rescinded, and abrogated; - and the said supposed ordinance is now, and at all times hath been, - null and void.[469] - -The resolution abolishing slavery, reported on the following day, was -adopted on the 9th of October, and is as follows: - - _Be it declared and ordained by the delegates of the people of the - State of North Carolina in convention assembled, and it is hereby - declared and ordained_, That slavery and involuntary servitude, - otherwise than for crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly - convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited within the - State.[470] - -Not without some reluctance there was also adopted a resolution -prohibiting any future Legislature from assuming or paying any State -debt created directly or indirectly for the purpose of aiding the -Rebellion. There seems to have been in the convention a strong element -opposed to the passage of such a measure, or at all events who preferred -to refer it to a popular vote. The decision of the convention on this -subject appears to have been influenced by a telegram from the President -to Governor Holden, in which the former says: - - Every dollar of the debt created to aid the rebellion against the - United States should be repudiated finally and forever. The great - mass of the people should not be taxed to pay a debt to aid in - carrying on a rebellion which they in fact, if left to themselves, - were opposed to. Let those who have given their means for the - obligations of the State look to that power they tried to establish - in violation of law, Constitution, and will of the people. They must - meet their fate. It is their misfortune, and cannot be recognized by - the people of any State professing themselves loyal to the - Government of the United States and in the Union....[471] - -The convention adjourned October 19 to reassemble on the fourth Thursday -of May, 1866. Judge Reade, its president, previously delivered a -farewell address, in which he said: “Our work is finished. The breach in -the Government, as far as the same was by force, has been overcome by -force; and so far as the same has had the sanction of legislation, the -legislation has been declared to be null and void. So that there remains -nothing to be done except the withdrawal of military power when all our -governmental relations will be restored, without further asking, on the -part of the United States. The element of slavery, which so long -distracted and divided the sections, has by an unanimous vote been -abolished. Every man in the State is free. The reluctance which for a -while was felt to the sudden and radical change in our domestic -relations—a reluctance which was made oppressive to us by our kind -feelings for the slave, and by our apprehensions of the evils which were -to follow him—has yielded to the determination to be to him, as we -always have been, his best friends; to advise, protect, educate and -elevate him; to seek his confidence, and to give him ours, each -occupying appropriate positions to the other.... It remains for us to -return to our constituents and engage with them in the great work of -restoring our beloved State to order and prosperity.”[472] - -An election, fixed for November 9, was ordered by Mr. Holden for the -choice of Governor, members of a General Assembly, county officers and -Representatives in Congress. On the same occasion the people were to -vote on the ordinance abolishing and prohibiting slavery. The action of -the convention on the Confederate debt being final, that subject was not -referred to the popular judgment. - -On behalf of the convention the president and other delegates soon after -adjournment proceeded to Washington to acquaint Mr. Johnson with the -result of their deliberations. They related to him what has already been -placed before the reader. As the convention had yielded what was -involved in the war, President Johnson was requested to declare on the -part of the Federal authorities that the governmental relations of North -Carolina had been reconciled. Notwithstanding what had been done they -feared that their State delegation would be excluded from Congress by -the imposition of a test oath which few men in that commonwealth could -take. The convention, therefore, petitioned Congress, through Mr. -Johnson, to repeal the requirement. The President, after expressing his -satisfaction with what North Carolina had done, reminded the delegates -that to make restoration practicable one thing still remained to be -accomplished, namely, their acceptance of the amendment abolishing -slavery throughout the United States. - -The ordinances submitted to the people were ratified at the November -election, when Jonathan Worth was chosen Governor over Mr. Holden by a -majority of 6,730, in a total of 58,554 votes. The repeal of the -secession ordinance was ratified by a vote of 20,506 to 2,002, and that -prohibiting slavery by 19,039 against 3,970. - -In a dispatch of November 27, President Johnson, thanking the -Provisional Governor for the efficient manner in which he had executed -his duties, said that the result of the election was greatly to damage -the prospects of the State in the restoration of its government, that if -the action and spirit of the Legislature were in the same direction it -would greatly increase the harm already done, and might prove fatal. He -hoped the mischief would be repaired.[473] - -Meanwhile the Legislature during a brief session ratified, with only six -dissenting votes, the Thirteenth Amendment, and elected John Pool and -William A. Graham United States Senators. Seven Representatives in -Congress had been previously chosen. - -Mr. Holden, who continued to perform the functions of his office until -the inauguration of his successor on the 15th of December, probably owed -his appointment to his reputation as a Democratic editor. Though his -rise to political prominence was similar to that of the President, he -had not the latter’s inflexibility of principle. A secessionist in 1856, -when the success of Fremont appeared probable, he soon began to recede -from that position, and in 1859 was opposed to disunion; subsequently he -drifted with the popular current and even went so far in an advanced -stage of the Rebellion as to advocate a “last-dollar-and-last-man” -resolution. But even this, together with the expression of extreme -opinions, did not restore him to public confidence, and before the end -of the war the _Standard_, which he edited, became the organ of the -disaffected. Notwithstanding this wavering and inconsistent career the -fact that he was generally regarded as an enemy of secession singled him -out as the proper person to reorganize the government of North Carolina. - -Though the President was not indifferent to the demoralized condition of -his native State, that consideration alone does not appear to have -induced him to begin the process of reconstruction with that -commonwealth. There is strong testimony to prove that Mr. Lincoln had -prepared a similar proclamation for restoring the former relations of -North Carolina, and on July 8, 1867, General Grant testified before the -Joint Committee on Reconstruction that he had twice heard read at -meetings of Mr. Lincoln’s Cabinet a paper embodying the same provisions -as that published by President Johnson. - -Before taking the second step a brief interval elapsed; perhaps the -President was hesitating; however this may be, he informed Hon. George -S. Boutwell that “the measure was tentative.” The fears of the -Massachusetts statesman and his concern for harmony in the Republican -party, of which he was an able and honored leader, induced him, in -company with Senator Morrill, of Vermont, to call on the President. -During their conversation Mr. Johnson, when the dangers of his policy -were indicated, assured his visitors “that nothing further would be done -until the experiment had been tested.”[474] - -Notwithstanding this deliberate assurance, the President at that time -appears to have almost determined on the system that he intended to -adopt, for scarcely two weeks had passed when he appointed, by a -proclamation similar to that for North Carolina, William L. Sharkey, -Provisional Governor of Mississippi. Within a month from the date of Mr. -Holden’s appointment others were made for all the remaining States -except Florida, the order for reorganizing which was delayed till July -13.[475] - -The origin and development of the Executive plan having now been traced -with some degree of minuteness, it is not the design of this essay to -pursue circumstantially the institution of that system in the six -remaining States. By proclamations almost identical with that issued in -the case of North Carolina, provisional governors were appointed in all -of those commonwealths before the middle of July. Though the method of -reorganization in these States presented similar features, several were -distinguished in some respects from the others. Observations on those -differences will employ nearly all that remains to be said on -Reconstruction under President Johnson. - -The appointment of Mr. Holden alarmed Republican leaders; the successive -proclamations for restoring the other States directed public attention -to the questions involved in reconstruction. Seeing that Congress was -not in session, that the President had assumed an expectant attitude, -and that every plan of reunion proposed was liable to serious objection, -it is not a matter of wonder that the recent Confederate authorities -attempted of themselves to restore Federal relations. - -These were among the considerations that induced Governor Clarke, of -Mississippi, to summon the Legislature of that State to meet on May 18. -In his address convoking the disloyal assembly he urged the people, in -order to remove the necessity for sending Federal troops among them, to -restore and preserve peace. The Legislature came together accordingly, -and, among other measures, provided for the election, on June 19, of -delegates to a State convention. Before that date, however, the -President had appointed William L. Sharkey, an eminent jurist, -Provisional Governor, thus ignoring both the measures of Mr. Clarke and -the insurgent assembly. The latter was dispersed by a military order, -while the Governor was carried off to a fortress in Boston harbor. - -Mr. Sharkey, in a dutiful and able address, appointed August 7 as the -day for holding an election of delegates to a State convention which was -to meet at the city of Jackson one week later. In this proclamation, he -said: “The negroes are now free—free by the fortunes of war—free by -proclamation—free by common consent—free practically, as well as -theoretically, and it is too late to raise questions as to the means by -which they became so.”[476] Though the Governor, to avoid the delay of -separate county organization, had appointed many local officials who had -held their posts during the Rebellion, he required all of them to take -the oath of allegiance prescribed by the President. - -The convention, which assembled at the appointed time, declared the -ordinance of secession null and void, prohibited slavery and made it the -duty of the next Legislature to provide for the protection of the person -and the property of freedmen. The lawmaking body was also to take -measures for guarding both the negroes and the commonwealth against any -evils that might arise from sudden emancipation. The first Monday in -October was appointed for the election of State officers and members of -Congress. A memorial was also adopted urging the President to remove the -colored troops from the State. The members, acting apparently in their -individual capacity, united in a petition for the pardon of Jefferson -Davis and of Governor Clarke. The amendment of the State constitution -abolishing slavery was adopted by the decisive vote of 86 to 11. After -South Carolina, Mississippi contained the greatest proportion of slaves, -and was thus very deeply involved in the system. - -While the convention was in session the President sent to Governor -Sharkey a telegram in which he made the following remarkable suggestion: - - I am gratified to see that you have organized your convention - without difficulty.... If you could extend the elective franchise to - all persons of color who can read the Constitution of the United - States in English and write their names, and to all persons of color - who own real estate valued at not less than two hundred and fifty - dollars and pay taxes thereon, you would completely disarm the - adversary and set an example the other States will follow. This you - can do with perfect safety, and you would thus place Southern States - in reference to free persons of color upon the same basis with the - free States. I hope and trust your convention will do this, and as a - consequence the radicals, who are wild upon negro franchise, will be - completely foiled in their attempts to keep the Southern States from - renewing their relations to the Union by not accepting their - Senators and Representatives.[477] - -From the view point of practical politics this recommendation was -undoubtedly a wise one, but it will scarcely be contended that it was -the suggestion of enlightened statesmanship. The South, distrusting the -President’s sincerity, refused to adopt his suggestion. The -communication is reproduced, not to show that the President was not -always impelled by the highest motives so much as to show that even -before Congress had assembled he had already come to regard as “the -adversary” those whose exertions secured his election. - -In his proclamation appointing a date for the election of delegates -Governor Sharkey advised the people, when it might be necessary in -consequence of the remoteness of a military force, to form a county -patrol for the apprehension of offenders. Information having reached him -that in many parts of the State organized bands had been robbing and -plundering, and that the Federal troops were insufficient to suppress -these disorders, he urged citizens, especially the young men who had “so -distinguished themselves for gallantry,” to organize promptly in each -county volunteer companies, one of cavalry and one of infantry if -practicable, to assist in detecting, punishing and preventing crime. - -From his headquarters at Vicksburg, General Slocum, the Federal -commander, immediately published an order to prevent the proposed -reorganization of the militia. The contemplated force, he said, would be -numerically superior to his own, and, as many of the Union troops on -duty in Mississippi were freedmen, collisions would be unavoidable. The -crimes referred to by Mr. Sharkey were, the General asserted, committed -against Northern men, Government couriers and negroes. Southerners, it -was true, had been halted by these marauders, but were promptly released -and informed that they had been stopped by mistake. Citizens who -recognized the persons were unwilling to disclose the names of these -lawless members of the community. The State, too, he declared, had not -yet been relieved from the attitude of hostility which she assumed -against the General Government. Those engaged in attempts to organize -the militia would be arrested. - -Fearing that the President would not support General Slocum, Carl -Schurz, who had been sent South on a mission to assist in carrying out -the Administration policy, expressed in a communication to the President -some doubt as to the wisdom of the Governor’s action. To this the -President, in a reply of August 30, said he presumed that General -Slocum, without first consulting the Government, would issue no order -interfering with Mr. Sharkey in his effort to restore the functions of -the State government. In the matter of organizing patrols Mr. Johnson -took the same view as the Governor, and in that connection said, “The -people must be trusted with their government, and, if trusted, my -opinion is that they will act in good faith and restore their former -constitutional relations with all the States composing the Union.”[478] - -The lapse of fifteen months had worked a revolution in the opinions of -the President. Circumstances, it is true, had changed since the delivery -of his Nashville speech; the main question, however, had not greatly -altered, for it was still important to determine the political people of -the late insurgent States. From declaring that “rebels” must take a back -seat in the work of restoration, the President had come to believe that -“the people must be trusted with their government.” It is not to convict -Mr. Johnson of inconsistency that his opinions are here brought into -juxtaposition, but rather to inquire whether every important -consideration for ignoring secessionists in 1864 had disappeared by -1865. - -On representation from the Provisional Governor that the Federal -commander interfered to prevent the execution of his proclamation for -reorganizing the militia, the President on September 2 required General -Slocum to revoke his military order. Under instructions somewhat -peremptory in tone, that officer two days later rescinded his -proclamation. - -The condition of the freedmen, as well as their exact legal status, -became about this time the subject of much discussion in Mississippi. -While many continued in the service of their old masters, numbers roamed -about the country in idleness, and nearly all of them had very -extravagant notions of their newly acquired rights and privileges. -Though the whites admitted of necessity the complete freedom, they were -for the most part unprepared to grant equal rights to negroes. Between -them and their employers, however, there occurred but little serious -trouble. All labor was contracted for, and owners of plantations, -apprehensive that labor would be difficult to secure at the beginning of -the season, were anxious to make contracts for the year 1866. Toward the -close of September the assistant commissioner of the Freedmen’s Bureau -turned over to the civil authorities all the business of his court. To -get rid of military tribunals, Governor Sharkey promised that in all -cases involving the rights of negroes their testimony would be accepted. - -In the election, which was held on October 9, General Benjamin G. -Humphreys, late of the Confederate army, was chosen Governor; -immediately thereafter he was pardoned by the President. Five -Representatives in Congress were also elected. By the Legislature, which -convened and organized one week later, Governor Sharkey was appointed -United States Senator to fill the unexpired term of Jefferson Davis. For -the long term, Mr. J. L. Alcorn was elected. The legislation relative to -freedmen will be subsequently considered. - -Besides his complaint to the President relative to the interference of -General Slocum with the proposed reorganization of the militia, Governor -Sharkey expressed dissatisfaction with the military authorities who -refused to obey writs of _habeas corpus_ issued by local judges. To this -Secretary Stanton replied that the grant of a provisional government did -not affect the proper jurisdiction of military courts, and that this -jurisdiction was still called for in cases of wrong done to soldiers, -whether white or colored, and in cases of wrong done to colored -citizens, and where the local authorities were unable or unwilling to do -justice, either from defective machinery, or because some State law -declared colored persons incompetent as witnesses. Mississippi was to a -considerable extent still under military law, and the suspension of the -writ of _habeas corpus_ had not been revoked. To a similar remonstrance -the Secretary of State replied that, the commonwealth being still under -martial law, the military power was supreme. - -On receiving tidings of General Johnston’s surrender, Governor Brown, of -Georgia, called a session of the Confederate Legislature, but General -Gilmore, who commanded the department including that commonwealth, -issued a counter-proclamation annulling the late Executive’s order. -General Wilson, in writing the ex-Governor, used expressions that were -needlessly harsh, and whether the language was his own or that of the -President, to whom the commander ascribed it, the style was neither -dignified nor magnanimous. Whoever may have been responsible for the -phraseology, the Union General appears to have believed in a rigorous -exercise of the rights of conquest. With the defeat of this attempt of -the recent authorities to restore their commonwealth to its old status, -Georgia remained in military hands till the appointment, June 17, of -James Johnson as Provisional Governor. - -In the work of reconciling the people of that State the Provisional -Executive was assisted by a sensible address of ex-Governor Brown, and -by the support of many leading secessionists. Now that the -“irrepressible conflict” had been settled, the people appeared anxious -for the reorganization of their State. The 4th of October was early -fixed as the date for holding an election of delegates. The suffrage of -citizens was solicited and received by candidates of ability and -character. These were pledged to advocate the necessary measures for -restoring their commonwealth. - -The convention assembled at Milledgeville on October 25, was called to -order by the Provisional Governor, and elected Herschel V. Johnson as -its president. Instead of declaring the nullity of the secession and -kindred ordinances the convention “repealed” them. On the question of -repudiating the war debt the vote stood 133 to 117 in favor of the -proposition. This resolution, however, was not carried until November 7, -and appears even then to have been passed only after considerable -pressure from Washington, whence the President directed or assisted by -telegraph the proceedings in all the reconstruction conventions. The war -debt thus declared void amounted to $18,135,775. The necessity for this -action is evident; the hardships occasioned thereby can be easily -imagined. - -The State constitution, which was thoroughly revised, recognized the -changes that had occurred in civil and social affairs. In that -instrument the freedom of slaves was expressly declared, and the -Legislature was required to make regulations respecting the altered -relations of this class of persons. The constitution as thus amended was -unanimously adopted by the convention. - -Though Georgia was not the most loyal supporter of Jefferson Davis in -the time of his prosperity, now that adversity had overtaken him, the -convention, in a memorial to President Johnson, invoked the Executive -clemency in behalf of their late chief. The convention assumed for the -people their share in the crime for which Mr. Davis and a few others -were undergoing punishment. - -As in the case of Mississippi, the President approved the organization -of “a police force” in the several counties, for the purpose of -arresting marauders, suppressing crime and enforcing authority. - -The Legislature, which was elected November 15, assembled at -Milledgeville on the 4th of December following. With its proceedings we -are not now concerned more than to observe that the Thirteenth Amendment -was adopted by that body five days subsequently.[479] The measures of -the Georgia Assembly were not before Congress when it convened. - -Like the chief magistrates in several other Southern States, the -Confederate Governor of Texas, when convinced after the surrender of -General Kirby Smith that the war had ceased, took steps toward bringing -his commonwealth into its old practical relations with the Union. He -accordingly ordered an election of delegates to a convention to be held -on June 19, but was anticipated by President Johnson, who two days -earlier had appointed Andrew J. Hamilton Provisional Governor. Though -the latter did not promptly appoint a day for holding the election, he -announced his intention of doing so at an early date. There was probably -in the minds of the less intelligent Texans a notion that emancipation -was to be gradual, or that it was not yet an accomplished fact. To -dispel any such idea the new Executive circulated an address which -informed the public that if, “in the action of the proposed convention, -the negro is characterized or treated as less than a freeman,” Senators -and Representatives from Texas would vainly seek admission to the halls -of Congress. The choice of delegates having been fixed for January 8, -1866, an account of the convention or of the proceedings in the Assembly -subsequently organized in that State does not fall within the scope of -this work. In the interval justice was administered by officers -temporarily commissioned for that purpose. - -The negro population, which, because of the influx from other Southern -States, had doubled since 1860, presented a difficult problem in the -reorganization of Texas. They knew little of the uses of freedom and -were kept systematically at work only by the candid admonitions of -General Granger and the Governor. Toward the close of December, however, -a better feeling prevailed among them; but it appears to have been a -serious problem to have kept the freedmen of Texas steadily at work. -Planters throughout the State lost heavily by their inability to engage -or to retain in their service laborers enough to gather the standing -cotton crop. The full consideration of this subject is inseparable from -an analysis of Texan legislation relative to freedmen. Though well -advanced, the reconstruction of Texas under the Executive plan was not -completed before the meeting of the Thirty-ninth Congress. - -Nothing in the reorganization of Alabama or of South Carolina calls for -especial mention. The same is true of Florida. Both the spirit and -tendency of Southern legislation, however, require to be noticed, and -with that examination a brief recapitulation will complete this -investigation. - -Before concluding this inquiry two related topics require briefly to be -noticed, namely, the character of the reconstruction conventions, and -the _personnel_ as well as the spirit of the legislatures organized -under their authority. As to the former it may be observed that there -were several modes in which constitutional conventions could have been -assembled; all, however, were objectionable because of an element of -irregularity. Considering them chronologically, rather than logically, -the first was the method employed by the Union men of western Virginia. -The Wheeling convention of June, 1861, was composed of delegates chosen -at elections called, not by the constituted authorities, for they were -already committed to a policy of rebellion, but by a spontaneous popular -movement inaugurated by loyal and influential leaders. The work of this -body, even though revolutionary, or at least irregular in its origin, -was acquiesced in by the people affected and subsequently approved by -the General Government. So few, however, were the loyalists of the -insurgent States generally, that it was not practicable elsewhere in the -South to reorganize governments in a similar manner. - -A second mode was that adopted by Mr. Lincoln. Under this method, the -President, as Commander-in-Chief, protected Union minorities in their -efforts to reëstablish local governments in harmony with the Federal -Constitution. This plan, it is evident, could be justified merely as a -military measure, and, therefore, was lawful only during the continuance -of the Rebellion. On the return of peace all such provisional schemes -would disappear unless tolerated by the neglect or confirmed by the -legislation of Congress. The conventions held under this theory rested -on the authority of the commanding officer, who was himself acting by -Executive direction. In reorganizing the government of Louisiana, -General Banks, it will be remembered, declared that the fundamental law -of that commonwealth was martial law, which was no more than his -arbitrary will. In purging the electoral people and amending the -constitution of that State he acted in strict conformity with that -assumption. If in the preceding pages the reconstruction measures of Mr. -Lincoln have been characterized as legitimate, it must not be supposed -that it was intended to assert that they would have been lawful in time -of peace, for under the American system it has never been deemed -competent for the national Executive to call a convention. Though the -establishments instituted under his authority, except in the case of -Tennessee, never received the permanent sanction of Congress, the -conventions which organized these governments stand on a foundation -somewhat different from those assembled by the appointees of President -Johnson, for in the summer of 1865 the plea of military necessity could -no longer be urged. If, therefore, the conventions held in Louisiana, -Arkansas and Tennessee were tainted with irregularity, those assembled -in the remaining States were undoubtedly revolutionary. Technically, -however, the conventions of both classes stand on the same footing. -Governor Perry, of South Carolina, regarded as revolutionary the body -which he convoked to reorganize his commonwealth, and for that reason, -as he alleged, dissolved the convention before it had taken final action -on the important question of the Southern debt. - -The course of the Confederate governors of Mississippi, Georgia and -Texas, who summoned the insurgent legislatures of their respective -States for the purpose of calling conventions, suggests a third mode in -which the machinery of government could have been set in motion. This -plan, however, presented an evident difficulty, inasmuch as these -assemblies could not have been recognized without admitting in some sort -the validity of the secession and kindred ordinances. Mr. Lincoln, it is -true, intended, before hostilities had ceased, to permit the members of -the Virginia Legislature to meet as influential individuals for the -purpose of recalling their State troops from the Confederate army. The -surrender of Lee occurring soon after, and the President’s action having -been misunderstood, he withdrew this permission, and did it the more -readily as the necessity which suggested it had passed completely away. -The department commanders prevented any response to the proclamations of -the Executives in the three States named above, and President Johnson by -his prompt appointment of provisional governors ignored or anticipated -their action. To say nothing of the revolutionary course contemplated by -the ex-Confederate governors, the success of their plan required the -approval or at least the connivance of Federal authorities. - -Still another manner of proceeding was for Congress, by calling or -authorizing conventions, to inaugurate the movement for reconstruction; -but the power of the national Legislature extends only to the passage of -enabling acts for Territories, and these commonwealths appear to have -been neither constitutional Territories nor constitutional States. -However, as some irregularity was inseparable from any system of -reorganization, the Legislative branch of Government was the authority -least objectionable for controlling informal changes in the nature of -the Union. If powers not conferred by the Constitution must be assumed, -it is better in the interests of civil liberty for the representatives -of the people to transcend the organic law. - -The second mode, it need scarcely be observed, was that embodied in the -Executive plan. The conventions which assembled under encouragement and -direction of President Johnson had an opportunity unequaled since the -formation of the Constitution of winning the gratitude of the nation. By -adopting an enlightened and humane policy they could have furnished an -example of patriotism that would serve to influence the deliberations -not only of the first assemblies to meet under the new order, but of all -future legislatures in those States. It is well known that they did not -prove equal to this emergency; the concessions to Northern opinion were -not gracefully yielded, and lost much of their merit by having been -extorted from the fears of the delegates. In some instances the -conventions, by assuming functions of the ordinary legislative -character, transcended their powers, and many of them “repealed” the -ordinances without condemning the principle of secession. They amended -and even adopted constitutions that were never submitted to the people. -The civil rights of the negro were abandoned to the mercy of those who -had fought to perpetuate human servitude. No provision was made for -freedmen in the fundamental law, it having been assumed that the new -legislatures could be trusted to extend justice equally to all classes -in the community. In a word, those were disappointed who had expected -from the conventions a display of civic virtues commensurate to the -occasion. - -The remaining topic, that is, the character of the reconstructed -governments as well as the spirit and tendency of their legislation, may -in this place be briefly dismissed. Not, indeed, that the subject is -unimportant, for it was mainly upon this question that the Thirty-ninth -Congress justified its refusal to admit members from the South, and -vindicated its rigorous treatment of the subjugated States. While an -investigation of public opinion in that section is essential to a -correct understanding of legislative action, the full consideration of -the subject belongs properly to a treatise on Congressional -reconstruction, a theme to which this essay is only introductory. For -the present purpose, therefore, a brief outline must suffice. - -Though the reconstruction conventions were correctly regarded as -revolutionary, that character would not affect the legislatures -instituted by their authority if the people concerned acquiesced in -their proceedings. Americans of that day were not altogether indifferent -to the sacred right of revolution, even if the principle was not so -highly esteemed as formerly. An objection far more serious than the -irregular origin of these conventions was the spirit which animated -Southern legislators. - -When the Thirty-ninth Congress convened at its first session members had -before them only the merest fragments of the mass of testimony -subsequently reported by the Joint Committee on Reconstruction, though -even then they possessed evidence of the temper of the Southern mind -sufficient, they believed, to recommend the most deliberate procedure. -It would not be difficult to collect from contemporary literature proofs -of hostility to the General Government sufficient to justify the -attitude of Congress when it assembled on the 4th of December, 1865. -From various sources the Northern people had caught glimpses of the -actual condition of affairs within the late Confederacy. These -manifestations of unfriendliness to the Union were enough to excite -suspicion, and, in a matter affecting the future welfare of a great and -powerful nation, suspicion is a just ground for inquiry. - -The alacrity with which the Southern people rushed to battle, as well as -the vigor with which they prosecuted the war, was a phenomenon not more -remarkable than the unanimity and promptness with which they apparently -acquiesced in the result. It was long before the people of the North -could believe that the rebellion was anything more than a leaders’ -insurrection, and they could not easily be persuaded after its close -that those who had fought so desperately to destroy, were sincere in -their professions of loyalty to, the Union. It was not unnatural, -therefore, that the late adversaries of the South would look with -suspicion on her instant submission. With few exceptions Southern -statesmen seemed desirous of effecting an early reunion. While various -reasons might be assigned to explain this dutiful and almost unlimited -obedience, it is certain that the argument chiefly relied upon by the -provisional governors was that it was only by such a course that they -could hope soon to be relieved of the presence among them of Yankee -soldiers. Apprehension that more burdensome conditions might be imposed -by Stevens and other radical leaders in Congress was, perhaps, not -altogether without influence in producing this general acquiescence in -the policy of the President.[480] As every citizen who engaged in -rebellion had forfeited both his life and his estate, it would be -prudent temporarily to conceal any feeling of resentment, or any desire -of revenge. These considerations were not without influence on the -conduct of both the leaders and the people. With the quick upgrowth, -however, of a feeling of personal safety, encouraged, no doubt, by a -lavish distribution of pardons, and with an expectation, not unfounded, -that reconciliation would speedily be followed by either a restoration -of, or indemnity for, confiscated property, this policy of conformity -would vanish. Thus under exterior tranquillity rankled bitter memories -of disaster and defeat nourishing a state of unrest which even the -unquestioned influence of their late commanders could not always keep -from expressing itself in acts of violence. However, as Henry Winter -Davis had foretold, the Southern population generally put on the seemly -garb of peace and observed the form of holding elections. - -Notwithstanding that many of their most enlightened citizens -recommended, and that their most trusted leaders enjoined, submission to -the new order, the transition from a state of hostility was marked even -at the outset by acts of the highest indiscretion. Nor were these -confined to irresponsible individuals whose utterances might have been -justly regarded as the momentary inspiration of passion. Some of the -acts referred to were the deliberate convictions of legislative bodies, -and, as these measures appear to have escaped criticism, they may fairly -be supposed to reflect the sentiments of the South. In the circumstances -this was especially unfortunate, postponing as it did the day of peace -and reconciliation; it afforded also a decent pretext to the “Radicals,” -if they desired one, for excluding the Southern delegations from -Congress. It justified inquiry, and investigation was fatal to Southern -claims of universal submission. - -Though the exclusion of representatives undoubtedly intensified, it did -not occasion the change in Southern feeling, for the Mississippi -measures, presently to be noticed, were passed before the meeting of -Congress. Acts of frequent occurrence tended to confirm the worst fears -of that body, and long before the Joint Committee had completed their -labors they were supplied with new species of violence if any -description of outrage was lacking to crown their indictment. With due -allowance for the fact that during many years preceding the war outrages -were much more numerous in the slave than in the free States, it soon -became apparent that it was unsafe to leave to the justice of Southern -courts either the few Unionists who had remained faithful in that -section or the recently enfranchised slaves. The estimation in which the -former were held appears in the fact that in competition for office they -were uniformly defeated by ex-Confederate candidates, sometimes by -unpardoned, and even unrepentant ones. The feeling toward freedmen was -one of extreme bitterness. Overlooking scattered acts of violence and -outrage of which negroes were generally, though not always, the victims, -Southern hostility toward them found unmistakable expression in the -November legislation of Mississippi. On the 22d of that month was -enacted a law regulating the relation of _master_ and _apprentice_ in -the case of “freedmen, free negroes and mulattoes.” Among other things -this statute provided: - - That it shall be the duty of all ... civil officers ... in this - State to report to the probate courts of their respective counties, - semiannually, ... all freedmen, free negroes, and mulattoes, under - the age of eighteen, within their respective counties, beats or - districts, who are orphans, or whose parent or parents have not the - means, or who refuse to provide for and support said minors, and - thereupon it shall be the duty of said probate court to order the - clerk of said court to apprentice said minors to some competent and - suitable person, on such terms as the court may direct, having a - particular care to the interest of said minors: Provided, That the - former owner of said minors shall have the preference, when in the - opinion of the court, he or she shall be a suitable person for that - purpose. - - Sec. 2.... That the said court shall be fully satisfied that the - person or persons to whom said minor shall be apprenticed shall be a - suitable person to have the charge and care of said minor, and fully - to protect the interest of said minor. The said court shall require - the said master or mistress to execute bond and security, payable to - the State of Mississippi, conditioned that he or she shall furnish - said minor with sufficient food and clothing, to treat said minor - humanely, furnish medical attention in case of sickness, teach or - cause to be taught him or her to read and write, if under fifteen - years old, and will conform to any law that may be hereafter passed - for the regulation of the duties and relation of master and - apprentice: Provided, that said apprentice shall be bound by - indenture, in case of males until they are twenty-one years old, and - in case of females until they are eighteen years old. - - Sec. 3.... That in the management and control of said apprentices, - said master or mistress shall have power to inflict such moderate - corporeal chastisement as a father or guardian is allowed to inflict - on his or her child or ward at common law: Provided, That in no case - shall cruel or inhuman punishment be inflicted. - - Sec. 4.... That if any apprentice shall leave the employment of his - or her master or mistress, without his or her consent, said master - or mistress may pursue and recapture said apprentice, and bring him - or her before any justice of the peace of the county, whose duty it - shall be to remand said apprentice to the service of his or her - master or mistress; and in the event of a refusal on the part of - said apprentice so to return, then said justice shall commit said - apprentice to the jail of said county, on failure to give bond, - until the next term of the county court; and it shall be the duty of - said court, at the first term thereafter, to investigate said case, - and if the court shall be of opinion that said apprentice left the - employment of his or her master or mistress without good cause, to - order him or her to be punished, as provided for the punishment of - hired freedmen, as may be from time to time provided for by law, for - desertion, until he or she shall agree to return to his or her - master or mistress: Provided, that the court may grant continuances, - as in other cases; and provided further, that if the court shall - believe that said apprentice had good cause to quit his said master - or mistress, the court shall discharge said apprentice from said - indenture, and also enter a judgment against the master or mistress, - for not more than one hundred dollars, for the use and benefit of - said apprentice, to be collected on execution, as in other cases. - - Sec. 5.... That if any person entice away any apprentice from his or - her master or mistress, or shall knowingly employ an apprentice, or - furnish him or her food or clothing, without the written consent of - his or her master or mistress, or shall sell or give said apprentice - ardent spirits, without such consent, said person so offending shall - be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction - thereof before the county court, be punished as provided for the - punishment of persons enticing from their employer hired freedmen, - free negroes or mulattoes.[481] - -In the matter of apprenticing minors it will be observed that the former -owner, when a person satisfactory to the court, was to have the -preference; in the event of his death his widow or other member of his -family was, if deemed suitable, to have the preference in -re-apprenticing the minor. When there was no record testimony of the -date of birth, judges of county courts were empowered to fix the age of -the minor. The act was to go into force immediately after its -passage.[482] - -The act of November 25, conferring civil rights on emancipated slaves, -provided: - - That all freedmen, free negroes and mulattoes may sue and be sued, - implead and be impleaded in all the courts of law and equity of this - State, and may acquire personal property and chooses in action, by - descent or purchase, and may dispose of the same, in the same - manner, and to the same extent that white persons may; Provided, - that the provisions of this section [1] shall not be so construed as - to allow any freedman, free negro or mulatto, to rent or lease any - lands or tenements, except in incorporated towns or cities in which - places the corporate authorities shall control the same. - - * * * * * - - Sec. 5.... That every freedman, free negro and mulatto, shall, on - the second Monday of January, one thousand eight hundred and - sixty-six, and annually thereafter, have a lawful home or - employment, and shall have written evidence thereof, as follows, to - wit: if living in any incorporated city, town or village, a license - from the mayor thereof, and if living outside of any incorporated - city, town or village, from the member of the board of police of his - beat, authorizing him or her to do irregular and job work, or a - written contract, as provided in section six of this act, which - licenses may be revoked for cause, at any time, by the authority - granting the same. - - Sec. 6.... That all contracts for labor made with freedmen, free - negroes and mulattoes, for a longer period than one month shall be - in writing and in duplicate, attested and read to said freedman, - free negro or mulatto, by a beat, city or county officer, or two - disinterested white persons of the county in which the labor is to - be performed, of which each party shall have one; and said contracts - shall be taken and held as entire contracts, and if the laborer - shall quit the service of the employer, before the expiration of his - term of service, without good cause he shall forfeit his wages for - that year, up to the time of quitting. - - Sec. 7.... That every civil officer shall, and every person may - arrest and carry back to his or her legal employer any freedman, - free negro or mulatto, who shall have quit the service of his or her - employer before the expiration of his or her term of service without - good cause, and said officer and person shall be entitled to receive - for arresting and carrying back every deserting employee aforesaid, - the sum of five dollars, and ten cents per mile from the place of - arrest to the place of delivery, and the same shall be paid by the - employer, and held as a set-off for so much against the wages of - said deserting employee: Provided, that said arrested party after - being so returned may appeal to a justice of the peace or member of - the board of the police of the county, who on notice to the alleged - employer, shall try summarily whether said appellant is legally - employed by the alleged employer and has good cause to quit said - employer; either party shall have the right of appeal to the county - court, pending which the alleged deserter shall be remanded to the - alleged employer, or otherwise disposed of as shall be right and - just, and the decision of the county court shall be final. - - Sec. 8.... That upon affidavit made by the employer of any freedman, - free negro or mulatto, or other credible person, before any justice - of the peace or member of the board of police, that any freedman, - free negro or mulatto, legally employed by said employer, has - illegally deserted said employment, such justice of the peace or - member of the board of police, shall issue his warrant or warrants, - returnable before himself, or other such officer, directed to any - sheriff, constable or special deputy, commanding him to arrest said - deserter and return him or her to said employer, and the like - proceedings shall be had as provided in the preceding section; and - it shall be lawful for any officer to whom such warrant shall be - directed to execute said warrant in any county of this State, and - that said warrant may be transmitted without indorsement to any like - officer of another county, to be executed and returned as aforesaid, - and the said employer shall pay the cost of said warrants and arrest - and return, which shall be set off for so much against the wages of - said deserter. - - Sec. 9.... That if any person shall persuade or attempt to persuade, - entice or cause any freedman, free negro or mulatto, to desert from - the legal employment of any person, before the expiration of his or - her term of service, or shall knowingly employ any such deserting - freedman, free negro or mulatto, or shall knowingly give or sell to - any such deserting freedman, free negro or mulatto, any food, - raiment or other thing, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, - and upon conviction shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars - and not more than two hundred dollars and the costs, and if said - fine and costs shall not be immediately paid, the court shall - sentence said convict to not exceeding two months’ imprisonment in - the county jail, and he or she shall moreover be liable to the party - injured in damages: Provided, if any person shall, or shall attempt - to persuade, entice, or cause any freedman, free negro or mulatto, - to desert from any legal employment of any person with the view to - employ said freedman, free negro or mulatto, without the limits of - this State, such person, on conviction, shall be fined not less than - fifty dollars and not more than five hundred dollars and costs, and - if said fine and costs shall not be immediately paid, the court - shall sentence said convict to not exceeding six months’ - imprisonment in the county jail. - -This arbitrary and cruel act, wholly inconsistent with a state of -personal freedom, by forbidding the lease to freedmen, free negroes and -mulattoes of either lands or tenements outside of cities, not only made -of the emancipated slaves a landless and homeless class, but deprived -them of all hope of rising out of that condition. On the second Monday -of January, 1866, less than two months after the passage of this act, -and annually thereafter, they were required to have a lawful home or -employment, and to possess written evidence thereof. This requirement -extended to the doing of even irregular and job work, and a written -contract for all labor for a longer period than one month. If the -laborer, without good cause, left the service of his employer before the -expiration of his term, he forfeited all wages for that year up to the -time of quitting. As the freedmen were wholly without representation in -the State judiciary, the master class could in every instance determine -the sufficiency of the cause. The intermarriage of the races was made a -felony, and the white or the black person convicted of that crime was to -be confined in the State penitentiary for life.[483] Southern whites had -no objection to the personal attendance, even in first-class railway -coaches, of colored servants, but as other than a servant, the freedman -was considered exceedingly obnoxious, and this sentiment was enacted -immediately before either of the statutes mentioned, into a law which -excluded negroes from riding in cars of the first class.[484] - -There was some apprehension lest this and similar legislation would lead -to bloody outbreaks. The colored race generally was growing distrustful -and discontented. The fear of violence was probably not unconnected with -the passage of a law approved November 29, which provided: - - Sec. 1.... That no freedman, free negro or mulatto, not in the - military service of the United States Government, and not licensed - so to do by the board of police of his or her county, shall keep or - carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk, or - bowie-knife, and on conviction thereof, in the county court, shall - be punished by fine, not exceeding ten dollars, and pay the costs of - such proceedings, and all such arms or ammunition shall be forfeited - to the informer, and it shall be the duty of every civil and - military officer to arrest any freedman, free negro or mulatto, - found with any such arms or ammunition, and cause him or her to be - committed for trial in default of bail. - - Sec. 2.... That any freedman, free negro or mulatto, committing - riots, routs, affrays, trespasses, malicious mischief and cruel - treatment to animals, seditious speeches, insulting gestures, - language or acts, or assaults on any person, disturbance of peace, - exercising the function of a minister of the Gospel without a - license from some regularly organized church, vending spirituous or - intoxicating liquors, or committing any other misdemeanor, the - punishment of which is not specifically provided for by law, shall, - upon conviction thereof, in the county court, be fined not less than - ten dollars and not more than one hundred dollars, and may be - imprisoned, at the discretion of the court, not exceeding thirty - days. - - Sec. 3.... That if any white person shall sell, lend or give to any - freedman, free negro or mulatto, any fire-arms, dirk or bowie-knife, - or ammunition, or any spirituous or intoxicating liquors, such - person or persons so offending, upon conviction thereof, in the - county court of his or her county, shall be fined, not exceeding - fifty dollars, and may be imprisoned at the discretion of the court, - not exceeding thirty days.... - - Sec. 4.... That all the penal and criminal laws now in force in this - State, defining offences, and prescribing the mode of punishment for - crimes and misdemeanors committed by slaves, free negroes or - mulattoes, be and the same are hereby re-enacted, and declared to be - in full force and effect, against freedmen, free negroes and - mulattoes, except so far as the mode and manner of trial and - punishment have been changed or altered by law. - - Sec. 5.... That if any freedman, free negro or mulatto, convicted of - any of the misdemeanors provided against in this act, shall fail or - refuse, for the space of five days after conviction, to pay the fine - and costs imposed, such person shall be hired out by the sheriff or - other officer, at public outcry, to any white person who will pay - said fine and all costs, and take such convict for the shortest - time.[485] - -Though the General Government was solemnly pledged to guarantee the -entire freedom of the negro, he was completely disarmed by these -statutes, which were to be administered by men who had been but recently -serving the Confederate cause. The purpose of the last measure is -rendered clear by Section 4, which reënacted against freedmen all the -penal and criminal laws that had applied to slaves. It revived, in -short, the black code of _ante bellum_ times. - -Persons convicted of vagrancy, under an amendatory act, approved -November 24, 1865, were subject to a fine not exceeding one hundred -dollars and costs, besides a maximum imprisonment of ten days. The first -section, which defined who were vagrants, was general in its -application. The provisions especially affecting freedmen were the -following: - - Sec. 2.... That all freedmen, free negroes and mulattoes in this - State, over the age of eighteen years, found on the second Monday in - January, 1866, or thereafter, with no lawful employment or business, - or found unlawfully assembling themselves together either in the day - or night time, and all white persons so assembling with freedmen, - free negroes or mulattoes, or usually associating with freedmen, - free negroes or mulattoes on terms of equality, or living in - adultery or fornication with a freedwoman, free negro or mulatto, - shall be deemed vagrants, and on conviction thereof shall be fined - in the sum of not exceeding, in the case of a freedman, free negro - or mulatto, fifty dollars, and a white man two hundred dollars, and - imprisoned at the discretion of the court, the free negro not - exceeding ten days, and the white man not exceeding six months. - - * * * * * - - Sec. 5.... That all fines and forfeitures collected under the - provisions of this act shall be paid into the county treasury for - general county purposes, and in case any freedman, free negro or - mulatto, shall fail for five days after the imposition of any fine - or forfeiture upon him or her for violation of any of the provisions - of this act, to pay the same, that it shall be, and is hereby made - the duty of the sheriff of the proper county to hire out said - freedman, free negro or mulatto, to any persons who will, for the - shortest period of service, pay said fine or forfeiture and all - costs: Provided, a preference shall be given to the employer, if - there be one, in which case the employer shall be entitled to deduct - and retain the amount so paid from the wages of such freedman, free - negro or mulatto, then due or to become due; and in case such - freedman, free negro or mulatto cannot be hired out, he or she may - be dealt with as a pauper.[486] - - * * * * * - -No extended knowledge of human affairs is necessary to perceive that, by -a rigorous enforcement of these laws, the great mass of freedmen could -be easily restored to a state of practical servitude during the season -when their labor was desirable, and that for the remainder of the year -their condition would be little better than that of the pauper. That the -two races were regarded as equal before the law will scarcely be -contended. An act approved December 1 made it a misdemeanor in certain -cases for either a white or a black man to hunt hogs or other stock upon -any lands other than his own; the white man was liable, on conviction, -to a fine of from $100 to $500, or imprisonment from one to three months -in the county jail, or both, at the discretion of the court. For the -same offence no imprisonment was provided in the case of freedmen, and -the fine was fixed between $10 and $20. The latter, however, could be -hired at public outcry to the lowest bidder who would pay the fine and -cost. The employer, it was provided, was to have the preference in -hiring.[487] - -The Legislature first to meet under the reformed government not only -expressed for the people of Mississippi no profound regret for resisting -the Federal authority, but left no doubt in what estimation it held -those who fought for Southern independence by releasing ex-Confederate -soldiers from indictments for misdemeanors committed before the -war.[488] In perfect harmony with the spirit of this act of oblivion was -one which changed the name of Jones County to that of Davis, and the -name of Ellisville in the same county to Leesburg.[489] This, it should -be observed, was only three days before the meeting of Congress. - -This legislation, by no means the most severe enacted under the new -governments, marks in Southern sentiment a reaction no less unexpected -than the complete and almost instantaneous submission following the -surrender of Johnston. The sudden change in opinion has been ingeniously -and even absurdly accounted for. In the latter class of explanations may -be included the notion that the people of the South were exasperated by -the interference of Congress, that body, as already mentioned, not -having convened till after the passage of the obnoxious laws. On the -other hand, it was not generally known, even in Mississippi, that the -President in the work of reorganization had resolved to ignore the -coördinate political branch of Government; he had, indeed, fairly -signified to Governor Sharkey the position that he intended to assume, -but his communication to that official, which was never designed for -publication, was not immediately circulated through the State; the -knowledge, therefore, that the Executive had concluded to oppose the -policy of Congress could not have been a factor in disturbing the brief -repose of the seceding States, and we must seek elsewhere for the cause. - -In many of the insurgent commonwealths rebellion had involved almost -every citizen in the guilt of treason, almost every estate in the -liability to confiscation. The President and his advisers hoped by a -generous distribution of pardons to win the esteem and confidence of -this numerous and influential class, and to leave to “Radical” members -of Congress the ungrateful office of punishment. This policy contributed -to awaken the undaunted spirit of the South, and was, no doubt, an -element in unsettling the conditions that prevailed after the surrender. -Northern magnanimity, which was content to regard the defeat of -secession as sufficient discipline for the rebellious States, and the -attitude of the Democratic party were also important influences in -misleading the South. More responsible for the reaction, however, than -any of these was the unsatisfactory administration of the Freedmen’s -Bureau. The testimony of General Grant can be cited to prove that, while -accomplishing much that was desirable, this institution was retarding -somewhat the progress of reconstruction. In a hurried tour of the late -Confederate States he had observed that it was not conducted with good -judgment or economy, and remarked in his report to the President that -“the belief widely spread among the freedmen of the Southern States, -that the lands of their former owners will, at least in part, be divided -among them, has come from the agents of this bureau. This belief is -seriously interfering with the willingness of the freedmen to make -contracts for the coming year.... Many, perhaps the majority, of the -agents of the Freedmen’s Bureau advise the freedmen that by their own -industry they must expect to live. To this end they endeavor to secure -employment for them, and to see that both contracting parties comply -with their engagements. In some instances, I am sorry to say, the -freedman’s mind does not seem to be disabused of the idea that a -freedman has the right to live without care or provision for the future. -The effect of the belief in division of lands is idleness and -accumulation in camps, towns, and cities.”[490] - -Though its management was open to criticism, the necessity for the -existence of the bureau, to afford at least temporary protection to the -newly enfranchised, was perceived and acknowledged by the General. It -probably accorded well with the political aspirations of bureau agents -to create in the minds of freedmen a belief that the Government would -give to each of them “forty acres of land and a mule”; for this -expectation would be a pledge of allegiance to the Federal -representative, without the approval of whom no negro could seriously -hope to secure so enviable a start in his career of freedom. - -That confusion would follow the violent overthrow of a long-established -industrial system was to be expected, and it was not unnatural for the -South to ascribe to the influence of bureau agents much of the mischief -inseparable from immediate emancipation. While the complaints of the -late insurgents were commonly considered with deference, it was scarcely -to be expected that they would not sometimes be despised, and it would -be easy to impute to their discontent every outrage reported to the -officers of the bureau or the commanders of the posts. Though Federal -representatives as a rule labored faithfully to restore and preserve -order, it would be singular if some of them, assuming the arrogant -manner of conquerors, did not occasionally depart from that system of -conciliation which the generous nature of Mr. Lincoln had adopted. - -These were among the causes of the Southern reaction. It is no -justification of these severe and even cruel enactments to show, as Mr. -Herbert has done, that similar laws disgraced the statute books of many -Northern States. In the settlement then in progress the Southern people -conceded nothing of importance that was not won in the war, and if they -were as sincere in their desire for reunion as some writers contend, -they should not have feared the paradox of improving by their example -the ancient legislation of the free States, or have been alarmed at the -innovation of reducing to practice the principles of the Declaration of -Independence. - -It is not to be denied that there was considerable ground for complaint -because of the influence of many employees of the bureau in demoralizing -the Southern system of labor, but the further punishment of a race that -had been trodden down by oppressive generations does not commend itself -as either a humane or an enlightened remedy; besides, the South was -greatly indebted to the fidelity of the negro, who during the war -possessed, without abusing, the opportunity as well as the capacity for -mischief. On the other hand, there was some obligation to Northern men -for their magnanimity, and under wiser counsels their wishes, and even -their prejudices, would have been respected. In the victorious section -public opinion, then in the formative stage, was watching anxiously the -progress and the proceedings of the new governments. Except a few -extremists, the voters of the loyal States did not dream at that time, -as was persistently asserted at the South, of forcing negro suffrage on -the rebellious States. They did, however, desire to see embodied in the -new State constitutions such provisions as would establish before the -law the equality of all classes. - -While the policy of President Johnson did not altogether escape -criticism at the South, so general and so prompt was the acquiescence in -his plan, that when Congress convened nearly all the States recently in -rebellion had remodeled their governments and elected members of -Congress who were at the national capital waiting to be admitted to -seats. Without separately considering the new establishments, they may -be described concisely and with sufficient accuracy as governments -differing but little from those extinguished by the fall of the -Confederacy. The members of the former, it is true, had taken an oath of -allegiance, and the influence of that act upon their conduct will -presently be noticed. Though it certainly was not the original -intention, and appears never to have become the fixed purpose of Mr. -Johnson to entrust to enemies of the Government the work of restoring -the insurgent States, the result of his endeavors was that -reconstruction was left almost exclusively in the hands of those who had -attempted to destroy the Union. It was precisely such a contingency that -Mr. Lincoln had in mind when he declared in his message of December 8, -1863, that, “An attempt to guarantee and protect a revived State -government, constructed in whole or in preponderating part from the very -element against whose hostility and violence it is to be protected, is -simply absurd.”[491] - -This deliberate statement, as well as the subsequent administrative acts -of Mr. Lincoln, sufficiently disposes of the notion that he favored a -rather loose system of reconstruction. Without attempting to distinguish -between theories really identical, there was still a considerable -difference in the reorganization effected under the two Executives. The -conditions which confronted the President and Congress in December, -1865, could have arisen only from disregarding the principle laid down -by Mr. Lincoln. From his solemn and reiterated declarations there can be -little doubt that he would have rejected without hesitation any system -of which the first fruits were little more than a nullification of his -decree of emancipation. - -Notwithstanding his tireless threats of severity, we can easily perceive -in the reorganization directed by Mr. Johnson, a noticeable falling back -from the Executive plan of December, 1863, as announced and enforced by -his predecessor. Nor did this retrogression proceed from the greater -humanity, but rather from the greater weakness of the new President. -Even in the matter of fealty there was a difference; for while the -conflict was still doubtful, the taking of an oath of allegiance to the -General Government was a serious step for the Southern Unionist, because -the record thereafter singled him out, if not for destruction, at least -for annoyance, or for punishment by the friends of secession, and, -perhaps, the oath then effected some such object as it was designed to -accomplish. When war had ceased, however, there was no longer a choice -of sides, and thenceforth universal swearing as an instrument of -government became practically worthless. It was not regarded, at all -events, as an efficient security for the future. Mr. Johnson probably -continued to exact oaths of allegiance because they were formerly of -value in distinguishing the friends from the enemies of the Government. -Though professing the same general opinion on the subject of amnesty, -the principles on which the two Presidents granted pardons were -sufficiently distinct. - -We have seen that President Johnson, who had once declared that “rebels” -should take a back seat in the work of reconstruction, so far changed -his opinion that he subsequently said the people must be trusted in the -restoration of their governments; he likewise modified his early -impressions as to the permanence of the establishments instituted under -his predecessor, for it was his original opinion that those governments -were merely provisional in their nature, and would require the -confirmation or the approval of Congress. Ultimately, however, he came -to regard himself as the judge of their sufficiency. The evidence of -this is conclusive. In a telegram of July 14, 1865, to Governor Sharkey, -Secretary Seward said: - -“The government of the State [Mississippi] will be provisional only -until the civil authorities shall be restored, with the approval of -Congress. Meanwhile military authority cannot be withdrawn.”[492] - -If it be contended that Mr. Seward made this important declaration upon -his personal responsibility the argument fails, because in a dispatch to -Governor Marvin, of Florida, dated September 12, 1865, nearly two months -later, the Secretary of State repeated the substance of the message in -language even more explicit. On that occasion he said: “It must, -however, be distinctly understood that the restoration to which your -proclamation refers will be subject to the decision of Congress.”[493] - -The determination of President Johnson to retain the members of Mr. -Lincoln’s Cabinet would indicate his original intention of applying to -the subjugated States the system adopted by his predecessor. The -influence which led to the modification of the method of enforcing -without abandoning the principles underlying that plan it is not easy to -discover. His change of attitude toward the South has been variously -explained. By Mr. Blaine it has been ascribed to the flattery of -Southern leaders, as well as to the personal influence of Secretary -Seward, whose wide culture, and consequent humanity, would favor a -policy of conciliation. Without intending to underestimate the -insinuating address of the New York statesman it may be observed that -his powers of persuasion appear to have exerted themselves with most -success in the direction of the President’s inclination. The attention -of Southern leaders, a class of men by whom the President had hitherto -been ignored, deserves, however, to be noticed in any enumeration of -even the probable cause of the change. Another theory has it that Mr. -Johnson both feared and hated several of the leading Republicans, -because of their connection with a movement to procure his resignation -from the Vice-Presidency, a station which, they believed, he had -disgraced by appearing in an intoxicated state to take the oath of -office. His desire to punish those who had constituted themselves -custodians of the national dignity, it is asserted, was a principal -motive in his surrender to the South. A more reasonable explanation of -the change which occurred in the President’s attitude toward his own -section is that offered by Dr. Chadsey, who regards Mr. Johnson as an -inconsistent advocate of State Sovereignty.[494] In this principle he -believed as firmly as Jefferson Davis himself, though unlike the -Confederate chieftain he refused, by stopping short of secession, to -accept its logical results. Nearly all his administrative acts are those -which might have been expected from a Democrat of the strict -construction school, and Andrew Johnson never professed allegiance to -any other political party. - -The governments of which the reorganization has been described in the -preceding pages continued in operation until suspended by the -Reconstruction Act of March 2, 1867. Except Texas all these -establishments, as previously observed, had sent members to the -Thirty-ninth Congress. Their claims to seats, it is well known, were -completely ignored, and a select body, consisting of nine members from -the lower and six from the upper House, was appointed to investigate the -condition of the late Confederate States, and to report whether any of -them were entitled to representation in either branch of Congress. With -the conclusions of the celebrated Joint Committee this essay is not -concerned further than to observe that on the recommendation of the -majority the Tennessee delegation was admitted on the 24th of July, -1866. Long before that event, however, the task of restoring the Union -had been taken altogether out of Executive hands. - -If we reflect how much swifter in a political organism is the progress -of ruin than that of repair, and consider that four years had been -abandoned to the destruction and disorders of civil war, we cannot but -be surprised at the attempt of the President, single-handed, to adapt -and execute in less than three months a series of measures designed to -restore tranquillity and revive prosperity among the impoverished -inhabitants of a wasted country. In this view his failure in the work of -reconstruction can excite little astonishment. One reason for this -precipitate action was a desire to reunite the sections before the -meeting of Congress, and it was so far a praiseworthy if not a prudent -course to adopt. But had he proceeded ever so leisurely there would -still have existed undoubted obstacles to success. To say that he was -lacking in the tact of his predecessor, that he was naturally of an -obstinate and even of a combative disposition, and that he possessed -defects, both of temper and judgment, would be merely to repeat a few -trite observations.[495] Conditions were rapidly changing, but with Mr. -Johnson, conditions passed for almost nothing, though in reality -circumstances make legislative acts beneficial or otherwise. Like the -measures of the Thirty-eighth Congress for restoring the Union, those of -Mr. Johnson may be carefully examined without discovering any -considerable traces of originality. Indeed, if we except President -Lincoln, this entire period seems to have been somewhat lacking in -constructive statesmanship, though no branch of the public service was -without officials of integrity, judgment and ability. - -In the course of the preceding pages the inaugurals, the messages, the -letters and other communications of Mr. Lincoln have been freely quoted -to show his opinions on all of the principal and most of the subordinate -phases of reconstruction. To complete the design of this inquiry, there -remains to be considered but a single topic related to the main theme, -namely, the limitations of the Presidential plan for restoring the -Union. Many of these defects having been incidentally noticed, a general -recapitulation does not appear to be required, and the subject, it is -believed, may be appropriately concluded by an examination of those -features of the Executive system which the narrative has not hitherto -sufficiently emphasized. - -This summary disclaims, however, any intention of attempting the -absurdity of testing the statesmanship of Abraham Lincoln by contrasting -a method of reconstruction proposed in 1863 with that deemed adequate by -Congress to meet the changed conditions of 1867. We may, indeed, fairly -and even profitably compare the sentiments of the two political -departments in the summer of 1864, when, for the first time during the -war, they were arrayed in opposition on a fundamental policy of civil -administration. Because of its variance with received notions of -representative government, the so-called “ten _per cent._ principle” -will be first considered. - -The proportion of the political people that Mr. Lincoln offered to -recognize as constituting a State encountered, probably, more opposition -than any single feature of his plan. While its merits and its defects -were equally evident, the latter, as might be expected, were given by -its adversaries the place of prominence in all their criticisms. -Exception was taken as well to the legality as to the expediency of the -principle. The former has been fully discussed, and on that subject all -that need be observed is that President Lincoln believed it -constitutional to preserve the Union, and every measure conducive to -that end he regarded as lawful. - -On the question of expediency, however, several considerations suggest -themselves. Apart from its repugnance to the American idea of majority -rule, its palpable weakness was that governments founded on the consent -of a minimum proportion of the electors would require the support of -Federal power. Here occurs the question, did the forces thus engaged so -greatly impair the efficiency of the main armies as sensibly to retard -the work of destroying the enemy? It cannot be denied that there were -occasions when a few additional regiments could have been employed to -advantage; but neither the reverses nor the disasters of the Union -armies were caused by lack of numbers so much as by the need early in -the war of commanders of military genius. On the other hand, the troops -who sustained the new governments, besides weakening the Confederacy, -were affording protection to organizations that otherwise could not have -been recruited. There is record of not less than sixty-five regiments -furnished by the States restored during the Presidency of Mr. -Lincoln.[496] But even more important than this gratifying result was -the influence which the reinstatement of four seceding commonwealths -exerted on the attitude of those European powers which had proved early -in the conflict their hostility to the United States. The “Johnson -governments,” so-called, were never required to furnish any such -unquestioned evidence of reviving loyalty, and that fact should not be -overlooked in any comparison of the results accomplished by the two -Executives. - -Notwithstanding the general existence of a strong opposition to minority -rule, the revolutionary proceedings in western Virginia were sanctioned -by every department of Government. Members from the loyal eastern -counties were at first admitted to seats in both branches of Congress; -their successors, however, were in turn refused this indulgence until -there was presented the novel spectacle of a single Senator representing -the diminished glory of the Old Dominion. Louisiana, too, which for a -few days was heard in the lower House, was subsequently excluded -altogether by the changing views of Congress. The revived bill of Wade -and Davis provided in one of its many forms for recognizing that State -as well as Arkansas, and even when the extremists obtained control of -Congress the loyal government organized in Tennessee was approved by -avowed opponents of the Executive plan. Mr. Lincoln, indeed, clearly -perceived the inherent weakness of his system, and no one could have -been more anxious than he to secure a wider constituency. These facts -seem to indicate that between him and Congress there was not then so -wide a gulf as, for partisan purposes, is sometimes represented. It is -true that there was a difference of principle between the two -departments; that there was a powerful party in Congress who believed -that reconstruction was essentially a work of peace and, therefore, -pertained exclusively to the national Legislature. The holders of this -view were, doubtless, confirmed in their opinion by a conviction that -the Executive was encroaching on a coördinate branch of government. - -The Presidential system as well as the contemporary theory of Congress -restricted the suffrage of whites, by whom it was almost universally -engrossed at the foundation of the Republic. On the ground of justice -and to encourage the cultivation of civic virtues among the negroes, Mr. -Lincoln would admit those qualified to exercise this important -privilege. His successor acknowledged in a private communication that -for party purposes he favored some extension of the elective franchise -to freedmen. Though Congress advanced rapidly toward negro suffrage, the -first essay of that body in the work of reconstruction included no -provision for conferring on the colored race a right to participate in -government. By Wade and Davis it was not then deemed necessary even as a -defensive power. Only a few bold innovators, considered almost fanatic -on the question, were in favor of bestowing the right to vote on the -multitudes maintained by the Freedmen’s Bureau; it was not then deemed -within the commission of the general Government, the teachings of -political science were still respected by the majority in Congress, and -the fruits of victory, it was hoped, could be secured without a resort -to radical measures. - -The form of an oath to support the proclamations and laws respecting -slavery appeared in the Presidential plan as a condition indispensable -to reinstatement. On this subject the difference between the Executive -and Congress was merely one of degree; for the Wade-Davis bill, -doubtless in imitation of the Presidential system, imposed terms -precedent, and the new constitutions were to repudiate the rebel debt, -abolish slavery and prohibit the higher insurgent officials, civil as -well as military, from holding the office of governor, from serving in -the State legislatures and even from voting. - -By its adversaries the plan of Mr. Lincoln was condemned for its failure -to exact any security for the future beyond the oath of allegiance, the -telegraphic supervision by the President and the power of Congress over -the admission of members. This defect the legislative theory endeavored -to supply, but even the guardianship proposed by Wade and Davis could -give no assurance that the rebellious communities would not, after -reinstatement, eliminate by constitutional amendment the conditions -imposed on their readmission.[497] - -However crude we may now consider Mr. Lincoln’s system it should not be -forgotten that with him the paramount consideration was the overthrow of -the Confederacy. With that purpose all his measures harmonized, and it -is scarcely critical to examine them from any other point of view. How -far necessity, which had originally suggested, would subsequently have -modified his plan it is now impossible to state. Without detracting a -particle from his well-won fame it may be admitted that his method, -which could not have foreseen the rapid succession of changes following -his death, was but indifferently adapted to solve the problem with which -Congress was compelled to deal in 1867; but the measure of permanent -success which attended the deliberate legislation of that body by no -means justifies the conclusion that some other system would have proved -a total failure. With all its immaturity the plan of the President was -not without its advantages. It aimed to restore with as little -innovation as possible the Union of the Fathers; with some exceptions -the natural leaders of Southern society were to participate in the work -of reorganization, and the author of this simple plan approached his -difficult task in a generous and enlightened spirit. - -On the life and character of Abraham Lincoln an admiring generation has -exhausted the language of panegyric; the terms of censure have been -reserved almost exclusively for his method of restoring the Union; but -neither the critic’s ken, nor the ambitious phrase of eulogy, nor all -the thoughts that since his death have dropped from poets’ pens affords -that clear insight into his nature which is unconsciously revealed in -the simple and beautiful exhortation that concludes his last inaugural. -The sentiments which immortalize that celebrated state paper could have -proceeded only from the depths of a noble soul—a soul that would have -imposed silence on the voice of vengeance and would never have consented -to the revenge of section upon section. In this book an endeavor has -been made fully to discuss his plan of reconstruction; the spirit in -which he approached that difficult task is best stated in his own -generous and patriotic words, with which may be fittingly closed this -long though interesting inquiry: “With malice toward none; with charity -for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, -let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s -wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his -widow, and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and -lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.”[498] - - - THE END. - ------ - -Footnote 435: - - Why the Solid South? p. 1. - -Footnote 436: - - This recollection has been verified by correspondence with Col. A. K. - McClure, the gentleman referred to.—=Author.= - -Footnote 437: - - Ex. Doc. No. 70, H. of R., 1 Sess. 39th Cong., p. 78. - -Footnote 438: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 28. - -Footnote 439: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 28. - -Footnote 440: - - Acts of the State of Tennessee, 1865, p. 33. - -Footnote 441: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 779. - -Footnote 442: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 443: - - This election resulted in the choice of Nathaniel G. Taylor, Horace - Maynard, Edmund Cooper, Isaac R. Hawkins, John W. Leftwich, William B. - Stokes, William B. Campbell and Dorsey B. Thomas. The last named, - however, was affected by the Governor’s recount, and Daniel W. Arnell, - who was declared the successful candidate, was admitted to Congress - with the other Tennessee Representatives on the 24th of July, 1866. - See Why the Solid South? pp. 182–183. - -Footnote 444: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 780. - -Footnote 445: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 781. - -Footnote 446: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 447: - - Having been elected United States Senator, Mr. Hahn resigned the - governorship on the 4th of March and was succeeded in office by - Lieutenant-Governor Wells. - -Footnote 448: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 510. - -Footnote 449: - - Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 39th Cong., p. 101. - -Footnote 450: - - Three Decades of Federal Legislation, p. 429; also Why the Solid - South? p. 397. - -Footnote 451: - - Poore’s Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1938 _et seq._ - -Footnote 452: - - Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 670. - -Footnote 453: - - Letter of Mrs. Anna Pierpont Siviter to the author. - -Footnote 454: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 817. - -Footnote 455: - - Ibid. - -Footnote 456: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 817. - -Footnote 457: - - McPherson’s Hand-Book of Politics, 1868, p. 46. - -Footnote 458: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 800. - -Footnote 459: - - Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. pp. 9–11. - -Footnote 460: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 800. - -Footnote 461: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, pp. 45–46. - -Footnote 462: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, pp. 801–802. - -Footnote 463: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 802. - -Footnote 464: - - Letcher and Smith were Governors of Virginia during the war. - -Footnote 465: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 8. - -Footnote 466: - - Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 70. - -Footnote 467: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, pp. 10–11. - -Footnote 468: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 626. - -Footnote 469: - - This ordinance was ratified by a vote of 20,506 to 2,002; Poore’s - Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1419n; also Three Decades of - Federal Legislation, p. 385. - -Footnote 470: - - Ratified by 19,039 to 3,970 votes. Poore’s Charters and Constitutions, - Vol. II. p. 1419n. - -Footnote 471: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 19. - -Footnote 472: - - Harper’s New Monthly Magazine, Vol. XXXII., p. 127. - -Footnote 473: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 628. - -Footnote 474: - - McClure’s Magazine, Dec., 1899, p. 174. - -Footnote 475: - - The Provisional appointments were made in the following order: June - 13, 1865, William L. Sharkey, Mississippi; June 17, James Johnson, - Georgia, and Andrew J. Hamilton, Texas; June 21, Lewis E. Parsons, - Alabama; June 30, Benjamin F. Perry, South Carolina; July 13, William - Marvin, Florida. - -Footnote 476: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 580. - -Footnote 477: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 581. - -Footnote 478: - - Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 583. - -Footnote 479: - - Constitution of the United States, by Francis N. Thorpe, p. 49. - -Footnote 480: - - See Why The Solid South? pp. 9–10, for an ingenious explanation of the - unanimity and promptness with which the Presidential policy of - reconstruction was accepted by the South. - -Footnote 481: - - Laws of Mississippi, pp. 86–88. - -Footnote 482: - - Ibid., pp. 89–90. - -Footnote 483: - - Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 82–86. - -Footnote 484: - - Ibid., p. 231. - -Footnote 485: - - Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 165–167. - -Footnote 486: - - Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 90–93. - -Footnote 487: - - Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 199–200. - -Footnote 488: - - Ibid., pp. 210–211. - -Footnote 489: - - Ibid., p. 240. - -Footnote 490: - - Ann. Cycl., 1866, p. 132. - -Footnote 491: - - Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 780–781. - -Footnote 492: - - Gorham’s Life of Stanton, Vol. II. p. 255. - -Footnote 493: - - McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 25. - -Footnote 494: - - President Johnson and Reconstruction, pp. 33–34. - -Footnote 495: - - In this connection his repudiation of the Sherman-Johnston agreement - will occur to the reader. - -Footnote 496: - - Strait’s Roster of Regimental Surgeons and Assistant Surgeons, p. 314. - This estimate includes all the troops furnished by the new State of - West Virginia. - -Footnote 497: - - The author believes himself fortunate in being able to place before - his readers a letter from the pen of Hon. J. B. Henderson, the only - surviving Senator who participated in the debates summarized in - chapter X., and, so far as the writer is informed, the only living - member who served in the United States Senate during that eventful - period. Coming, as it does, from one who supported many of Mr. - Lincoln’s most cherished measures, the letter will be welcomed as a - valuable historical document. It contrasts forcibly the Presidential - plan with the theory of Senator Sumner, and though written on August - 21, 1901, more than a generation after the occurrence of the principal - events discussed in this book, it is characterized by the clearness - and the energy of expression which marked even the unpremeditated - addresses of the Senator’s Congressional career. On the subject of - reunion he writes as follows: - - “Time, in my judgment, has stamped its approval on Mr. Lincoln’s views - touching the questions of reconstruction during the Civil War. He was - always calm and judicial. He was philosophical in periods of the most - intense excitement. He never lost his head, but under all - circumstances preserved his temper and his judgment. He was not the - buffoon described by his enemies. On the contrary, he was a wise - statesman, a learned lawyer, and a conscientious patriot; and, better - than all, an honest man. - - “The infirmity in Mr. Sumner’s theories of reconstruction came from - the great exuberance of his learning. He ransacked history, ancient - and modern, for precedents growing out of civil wars. But these - precedents all antedated the American Constitution. They grew out of - monarchical systems of government, and had no relation to the - republican forms created by our Constitution. Under our system there - can be no suicide of a State. Individual citizens by rebellion and - disloyalty may forfeit their political rights, but the State as an - entity commits no treason and forfeits no rights to existence. Under - our Constitution the State cannot die. It is the duty of the Federal - Government to see that it does not die—that it shall never cease to - exist. If the State be invaded from without, the duty of the General - Government is to protect and defend it. If domestic violence threatens - the subversion of the local government, the nation’s duty is to - intervene and uphold the hands of those who maintain the laws. The - trustee of an express trust cannot excuse himself to a minority of the - beneficiaries because the majority repudiate his agency. - - “‘The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a - republican form of government.’ No State government is republican in - form that does not acknowledge the supremacy of the Federal - Constitution. This is the essential test of republicanism. No State - can enter the Union without conforming its Constitution to this - supreme organic law. And whenever by force or violence, a majority of - its citizens undertake to withdraw the State from its obedience to - Federal law and to repudiate the sovereignty of the Federal - Government, it at once becomes the duty of Congress to act. - - “This duty of Congress is not to destroy the State or to declare it a - suicide, and proceed to administer on its effects. On the contrary, - the duty clearly is to preserve the State, to restore it to its old - republican forms. Its duty is not to territorialize the State and - proceed to govern it as a conquered colony. The duty is not one of - demolition, but one of restoration. It is not to make a Constitution, - but to guarantee that the old Constitution or one equally republican - in form, and made by the loyal citizens of the State, shall be upheld - and sustained. - - “If a majority of the people of a State conspire to subvert its - republican forms, that majority may be, and should be, put down by the - Federal power, while the minority, however few, sustaining republican - forms may be constitutionally installed as the political power of the - State. - - “These, as I understand, were the views of Mr. Lincoln; and they were - not the views of Mr. Sumner, as enunciated in his resolutions of 1862 - and advocated by him in his subsequent career in the Senate. - - “A departure from these views gave us the carpet-bag governments of - the Southern States, and brought upon us divers other evils in our - ideas and theories of government, whose effects are yet visible.” - -Footnote 498: - - N. & H., Vol. X., p. 145. - - - - - APPENDIX A - THIRTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS - - - SENATE - -First session, July 4, 1861, to August 6, 1861. Republicans (31) in -Roman, Democrats (10) in _Italics_, Unionists (7) in =SMALL CAPITALS=, -vacancies 2. - -Second session, Dec. 1, 1862, to Mar. 4, 1864. - - CALIFORNIA.—_Milton S. Latham_ and _James A. McDougall_ (_vice_ E. - D. Baker, who died). - - CONNECTICUT.—James Dixon and Lafayette S. Foster. - - DELAWARE.—_James A. Bayard_ and _Willard Saulsbury_. - - ILLINOIS.—Lyman Trumbull and Orville H. Browning. - - INDIANA.—Henry S. Lane and _Jesse D. Bright_ (expelled Feb. 5, 1862, - and was succeeded by _David Turpie_). - - IOWA.—James W. Grimes and James Harlan. - - KANSAS.—James H. Lane and Samuel C. Pomeroy. - - KENTUCKY.—_Lazarus W. Powell_ and =Garrett Davis= (_vice_ _John C. - Breckenridge_, expelled). - - MAINE.—Lot M. Morrill and William Pitt Fessenden. - - MASSACHUSETTS.—Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson. - - MARYLAND.—=Anthony Kennedy= and _James A. Pearce_ (died Dec. 20, - 1862, and was succeeded by =Thomas H. Hicks=). - - MICHIGAN.—Zachariah Chandler and Jacob M. Howard. - - MINNESOTA.—_Henry M. Rice_ and Morton S. Wilkinson. - - MISSOURI.—=John B. Henderson= (_vice_ Trusten Polk, expelled) and - =Robert Wilson= (_vice_ Waldo Porter Johnson, expelled). - - NEW HAMPSHIRE.—John P. Hale and Daniel Clark. - - NEW YORK.—Preston King and Ira Harris. - - NEW JERSEY.—John C. Ten Eyck and _John R. Thomson_ (died Sept. 12, - 1862, Richard S. Field was temporarily appointed to fill the - vacancy, and James W. Wall was subsequently elected for the - unexpired term). - - OHIO.—Benjamin F. Wade and John Sherman (_vice_ Salmon P. Chase, who - resigned Mar. 6, 1861). - - OREGON.—Edward D. Baker (died Oct. 21, 1861, and was succeeded by - =Benjamin F. Harding=) and _James W. Nesmith_. - - PENNSYLVANIA.—Edgar Cowan and David Wilmot (_vice_ Simon Cameron, - who resigned in March, 1861). - - RHODE ISLAND.—Henry B. Anthony and James F. Simmons (resigned, - =Samuel G. Arnold= elected to fill the unexpired term). - - VERMONT.—Solomon Foot and Jacob Collamer. - - VIRGINIA.—=Waitman T. Willey= and =John S. Carlile=. - - WISCONSIN.—James R. Doolittle and Timothy O. Howe. - - - HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES - - CALIFORNIA.—Aaron A. Sargent, Timothy G. Phelps, Frederick F. Low. - - CONNECTICUT.—Dwight Loomis, _James E. English_, Alfred A. Burnham, - _George C. Woodruff_. - - DELAWARE.—=George P. Fisher.= - - ILLINOIS.—Elihu B. Washburne, Isaac N. Arnold, Owen Lovejoy, William - Kellogg, _William A. Richardson_, _James C. Robinson_, _Philip B. - Fouke_, _John A. Logan_. - - INDIANA.—_John Law_, _James A. Cravens_, William McKee Dunn, - _William S. Holman_, George W. Julian, Albert G. Porter, _Daniel - W. Voorhees_, Albert S. White, Schuyler Colfax, William Mitchell, - John P. C. Shanks. - - IOWA.—James F. Wilson, William Vandever. - - KANSAS.—Martin F. Conway. - - KENTUCKY.—=James S. Jackson= (died in 1862 and was succeeded by - =George H. Yeaman=), =Henry Grider=, =Aaron Harding=, =Charles A. - Wickliffe=, =George W. Dunlap=, =Robert Mallory=, =John J. - Crittenden=, =William H. Wadsworth=, =John W. Menzies=, =Samuel L. - Casey= (_vice_ Mr. Burnett, expelled). - - MAINE.—John N. Goodwin, Charles W. Walton (resigned, Thos. A. D. - Fessenden elected to fill vacancy), Samuel C. Fessenden, Anson P. - Morrill, John H. Rice, Frederick A. Pike. - - MARYLAND.—=John W. Crisfield=, =Edwin H. Webster=, =Cornelius L. L. - Leary=, _Henry May_, =Francis Thomas=, =Charles B. Calvert=. - - MASSACHUSETTS.—Thomas D. Eliot, James Buffinton, Benjamin F. Thomas - (sometimes classed as a Unionist), Alexander H. Rice, Samuel - Hooper, John B. Alley, Daniel W. Gooch, Charles R. Train, - Goldsmith F. Bailey (died May 8, 1862, and was succeeded by Amasa - Walker), Charles Delano, Henry L. Dawes. - - MICHIGAN.—Bradley F. Granger, Fernando C. Beaman, Francis W. - Kellogg, Rowland E. Trowbridge. - - MINNESOTA.—Cyrus Aldrich and William Windom. - - MISSOURI.—Francis P. Blair, jr. (resigned in 1862), =James S. - Rollins=, =William A. Hall=, _Elijah H. Norton_, =Thomas L. - Price=, _John S. Phelps_, _John W. Noell_. - - NEW HAMPSHIRE.—Gilman Marston, Edward H. Rollins, Thomas M. Edwards. - - NEW JERSEY.—John T. Nixon, John L. N. Stratton, _William G. Steele_, - _George T. Cobb_, _Nehemiah Perry_. - - NEW YORK.—_Edward H. Smith_, _Moses F. Odell_, _Benjamin Wood_, - _James E. Kerrigan_, William Wall, Frederick A. Conkling, _Elijah - Ward_, _Isaac C. Delaplaine_, _Edward Haight_, Charles H. Van - Wyck, _John B. Steele_, Stephen Baker, Abraham B. Olin, _Erastus - Corning_, James B. McKean, William A. Wheeler, Socrates N. - Sherman, _Chauncey Vibbard_, Richard Franchot, Roscoe Conkling, R. - Holland Duell, William E. Lansing, Ambrose W. Clark, Charles B. - Sedgwick, Theodore M. Pomeroy, Jacob P. Chamberlain, Alexander S. - Diven, Robert B. Van Valkenburg, Alfred Ely, Augustus Frank, Burt - Van Horn, Elbridge G. Spaulding, Reuben E. Fenton. - - OHIO.—_George H. Pendleton_, John A. Gurley, _Clement L. - Vallandigham_, _William Allen_, James M. Ashley, _Chilton A. - White_, =Richard A. Harrison=, Samuel Shellabarger, _Warren P. - Noble_, Carey A. Trimble, Valentine B. Horton, _Samuel S. Cox_, - Samuel T. Worcester, Harrison G. Blake, _Robert H. Nugen_, William - P. Cutler, _James R. Morris_, Sidney Edgerton, Albert G. Riddle, - John Hutchins, John A. Bingham. - - OREGON.—George K. Shiel. - - PENNSYLVANIA.—_William E. Lehman_, _Charles J. Biddle_, John P. - Verree, William D. Kelley, William Morris Davis, John Hickman, - _Thomas B. Cooper_ (died April 4, 1862, and was succeeded by John - D. Stiles), _Sydenham E. Ancona_, Thaddeus Stevens, John W. - Killinger, James H. Campbell, =Hendrick B. Wright=, _Philip - Johnson_, Galusha A. Grow, James T. Hale, _Joseph Baily_, Edward - McPherson, Samuel S. Blair, John Covode, _Jesse Lazear_, James K. - Moorhead, Robert McKnight, John W. Wallace, John Patton, Elijah - Babbitt. - - RHODE ISLAND.—=George H. Browne=, =William P. Sheffield=. - - TENNESSEE.—=Horace Maynard.= - - VERMONT.—Ezekiel P. Walton, Justin S. Morrill, Portus Baxter. - - VIRGINIA.—=Charles H. Upton=, =Edmund Pendleton=, =William G. - Brown=, =Jacob B. Blair=, =Killian V. Whaley=, =Joseph E. Segar=. - - WISCONSIN.—John F. Potter, Luther Hanchett (died Nov. 24, 1862, and - was succeeded by Walter McIndoe), A. Scott Sloan. - - - DELEGATES FROM TERRITORIES - - COLORADO.—Hiram P. Bennett. - - DAKOTA.—John B. S. Todd. - - NEBRASKA.—Samuel G. Daily. - - NEVADA.—_John C. Cradlebaugh._ - - NEW MEXICO.—John S. Watts. - - UTAH.—_John M. Bernhisel._ - - WASHINGTON.—James H. Wallace. - - - - - APPENDIX B - THIRTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS - - - SENATE - -First regular session, Dec. 7, 1863, to July 4, 1864. - -Second session from Dec. 5, 1864, to March 3, 1865. - - CALIFORNIA.—John Conness and _James A. McDougall_. - - CONNECTICUT.—James Dixon and Lafayette S. Foster. - - DELAWARE.—_Willard Saulsbury_ and _George Read Riddle_ (_vice_ - Senator _Bayard_, who resigned). - - ILLINOIS.—_William A. Richardson_ and Lyman Trumbull. - - INDIANA.—_Thomas A. Hendricks_ and Henry S. Lane. - - IOWA.—James Harlan and James W. Grimes. - - KANSAS.—Samuel C. Pomeroy and James H. Lane. - - KENTUCKY.—=Garrett Davis= (Senator =Davis= is sometimes mentioned as - a Democrat) and _Lazarus W. Powell_. - - MAINE.—Lot M. Morrill and William Pitt Fessenden (resigned in 1864, - and was succeeded by Nathan A. Farwell). - - MASSACHUSETTS.—Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson. - - MARYLAND.—=Reverdy Johnson= and =Thomas H. Hicks= (died Feb. 13, - 1865). - - MICHIGAN.—Zachariah Chandler and Jacob M. Howard. - - MINNESOTA.—Alexander Ramsey and Morton S. Wilkinson. - - MISSOURI.—John B. Henderson (sometimes mentioned as a Unionist) and - B. Gratz Brown (_vice_ Waldo Porter Johnson, expelled, Robert - Wilson having been appointed _pro tem._). - - NEW HAMPSHIRE.—Daniel Clark and John P. Hale. - - NEW JERSEY.—_William Wright_ and John C. Ten Eyck. - - NEW YORK.—Edwin D. Morgan and Ira Harris. - - OHIO.—Benjamin F. Wade and John Sherman. - - OREGON.—Benjamin F. Harding and _James W. Nesmith_. - - PENNSYLVANIA.—_Charles R. Buckalew_ and Edgar Cowan. - - RHODE ISLAND.—William Sprague and Henry B. Anthony. - - VERMONT.—Solomon Foot and Jacob Collamer. - - VIRGINIA.—=Lemuel J. Bowden= and =John S. Carlile= (sometimes - mentioned as a Democrat). - - WEST VIRGINIA.—Waitman T. Willey and Peter G. Van Winkle. - - WISCONSIN.—James R. Doolittle and Timothy O. Howe. - - NEVADA.—James W. Nye and William M. Stewart. - - - HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES - - CALIFORNIA.—Thomas B. Shannon, William Higby, Cornelius Cole. - - CONNECTICUT.—Henry C. Deming, _James E. English_, Augustus - Brandegee, John H. Hubbard. - - DELAWARE.—Nathaniel B. Smithers. - - ILLINOIS.—Isaac N. Arnold, John F. Farnsworth, Elihu B. Washburne, - _Charles M. Harris_, Owen Lovejoy (died Mar. 25, 1864, and was - succeeded by Ebon C. Ingersoll), Jesse O. Norton, _John R. Eden_, - _John T. Stuart_, _Lewis W. Ross_, _Anthony L. Knapp_, _James C. - Robinson_, _William R. Morrison_, _William J. Allen_, _James C. - Allen_. - - INDIANA.—_John Law_, _James A. Cravens_, _Henry W. Harrington_, - _William S. Holman_, George W. Julian, Ebenezer Dumont, _Daniel W. - Voorhees_, Godlove S. Orth, Schuyler Colfax, _Joseph K. Edgerton_, - _James F. McDowell_. - - IOWA.—James F. Wilson, Hiram Price, William B. Allison, J. B. - Grinnell, John A. Kasson, A. W. Hubbard. - - KANSAS.—A. Carter Wilder. - - KENTUCKY.—Lucien Anderson, =George H. Yeaman=, =Henry Grider=, - =Aaron Harding=, =Robert Mallory=, Green Clay Smith, Brutus J. - Clay, William H. Randall, =William H. Wadsworth=. - - MAINE.—_Lorenzo D. M. Sweat_, Sidney Perham, James G. Blaine, John - H. Rice, Frederick A. Pike. - - MARYLAND.—John A. J. Cresswell, Edwin H. Webster, Henry Winter - Davis, Francis Thomas, _Benjamin G. Harris_. - - MASSACHUSETTS.—Thomas D. Eliot, Oakes Ames, Alexander H. Rice, - Samuel Hooper, John B. Alley, Daniel W. Gooch, George S. Boutwell, - John D. Baldwin, William B. Washburn, Henry L. Dawes. - - MICHIGAN.—Fernando C. Beaman, Charles Upson, John W. Longyear, - Francis W. Kellogg, _Augustus C. Baldwin_, John F. Driggs. - - MINNESOTA.—William Windom, Ignatius Donnelly. - - MISSOURI.—=Francis P. Blair=, jr. (seat successfully contested by - Samuel Knox of St. Louis), Henry T. Blow, _John G. Scott_, Joseph - W. McClurg, Sempronius H. Boyd, _Austin A. King_, Benjamin F. - Loan, _William A. Hall_, _James S. Rollins_. - - NEW HAMPSHIRE.—_Daniel Marcy_, Edward H. Rollins, James W. - Patterson. - - NEW JERSEY.—John F. Starr, _George Middleton_, _William G. Steele_, - _Andrew J. Rogers_, _Nehemiah Perry_. - - NEW YORK.—_Henry G. Stebbins_ (resigned in 1864 and was succeeded by - _Dwight Townsend_), _Martin Kalbfleisch_, _Moses F. Odell_, - _Benjamin Wood_, _Fernando Wood_, _Elijah Ward_, _John W. - Chanler_, _James Brooks_, _Anson Herrick_, _William Radford_, - _Charles H. Winfield_, _Homer A. Nelson_, _John B. Steele_, _John - V. L. Pruyn_, _John A. Griswold_, Orlando Kellogg, Calvin T. - Hulburd, James M. Marvin, Samuel F. Miller, Ambrose W. Clark, - _Francis Kernan_, DeWitt C. Littlejohn, Thomas T. Davis, Theodore - M. Pomeroy, Daniel Morris, Giles W. Hotchkiss, Robert Van - Valkenburg, Freeman Clark, Augustus Frank, _John B. Ganson_, - Reuben E. Fenton (resigned Dec. 10, 1864). - - OHIO.—_George H. Pendleton_, _Alexander Long_, Robert C. Schenck, - _J. F. McKinney_, _Frank C. Le Blond_, _Chilton A. White_, _Samuel - S. Cox_, _William Johnson_, _Warren P. Noble_, James M. Ashley, - _Wells A. Hutchins_, _William E. Fink_, _John O’Neill_, _George - Bliss_, _James R. Morris_, _Joseph W. White_, Ephraim R. Eckley, - Rufus P. Spaulding, James A. Garfield. - - OREGON.—John R. McBride. - - PENNSYLVANIA.—_Samuel J. Randall_, Charles O’Neill, Leonard Myers, - William D. Kelley, M. Russell Thayer, _John D. Stiles_, John M. - Broomall, _Sydenham E. Ancona_, Thaddeus Stevens, _Myer Strouse_, - _Philip Johnson_, _Charles Dennison_, Henry W. Tracy, _William H. - Miller_, _Joseph Bailey_, _Alexander H. Coffroth_, _Archibald - McAllister_, James T. Hale, Glenni W. Scofield, Amos Myers, _John - L. Dawson_, James K. Moorhead, Thomas Williams, _Jesse Lazear_. - - RHODE ISLAND.—Thomas A. Jenckes, Nathan F. Dixon. - - VERMONT.—Frederick E. Woodbridge, Justin S. Morrill, Portus Baxter. - - VIRGINIA.—Had Senators but no Representatives. =Joseph Segar=, - =Lucius H. Chandler= and =Benjamin M. Kitchen=, claimants for - seats, were not admitted. - - WEST VIRGINIA.—Jacob B. Blair, William G. Brown, Killian V. - Whaley.[499] - - WISCONSIN.—_James S. Brown_, Ithamar C. Sloan, Amasa Cobb, _Charles - A. Eldridge_, _Ezra Wheeler_, Walter D. McIndoe. - - - DELEGATES FROM TERRITORIES - - ARIZONA.—Charles D. Poston. - - COLORADO.—Hiram P. Bennett. - - DAKOTA.—William Jayne (seat successfully contested by John B. S. - Todd). - - IDAHO.—William H. Wallace. - - MONTANA.—Samuel McLean. - - NEBRASKA.—Samuel G. Daily. - - NEVADA (admitted as a State).—Gordon N. Mott (Henry G. Worthington - was elected Representative when Nevada became a State). - - NEW MEXICO.—Francisco Perea. - - UTAH.—_John F. Kenney._ - - WASHINGTON.—_George E. Cole._ - ------ - -Footnote 499: - - The West Virginia Representatives took their seats Dec. 7, 1863. - - - - - INDEX - - - _A_ - - Abolition societies, Southern, ended by new industrial era, 5 - - Adams, Charles Francis, 50 - - Alabama, in Federal control, 50; - Arkansas Legislature addressed by commissioner from, 77; - insurrection in, 314; - injury sustained by, 437 - - Alabama, The, 50, 288 - - Albemarle, The, destruction of, 288 - - Alexandria, capital of loyal Virginia, 129; - convention meets at, 130; - blockade of, rescinded, 133; - Legislature assembles at, 137; - ceases to be capital, 446; - recognition of government of, marks no distinct Executive policy, 448 - - Alleghany Mountains, Virginia divided by, 96 - - Allegiance, oath of, 24; - Governor Johnson’s modification of, 27; - registration of, 28; - required of Louisiana voters, 45; - value of, 487 - - Allen, Henry Watkins, end of administration of, 418; - mentioned for governor of Louisiana, 422 - - Amendment, Thirteenth, Hampton Roads conference refers to, 399; - adoption of, by Georgia Legislature, 466 - - Amnesty and Reconstruction, Lincoln’s proclamation of, 23, 24, 25, 224; - authority for, 24; - classes excepted from benefits of, 25; - explanation of, 28; - applied in Louisiana, 61; - Howard’s reference to, 365; - Johnson’s proclamation of, 450; - Seward’s approval of, 451; - all insurgent States affected by, 452. - See Reconstruction - - Anthony, Lieutenant-Colonel, arrest of, 169 - - Antietam, Md., Lee defeated at, 186 - - Arkansas, effect of Union victories in, 10; - enrolling agent sent to, 27; - loyal part of, 77; - Alabama commissioner addresses Legislature of, 77; - position of, 77; - interests of, 77; - opposition to separate State action in, 77; - convention bill passed by, 77; - conditional secession defeated in, 78; - influence of President’s inaugural in, 78; - secession of, 78; - secession favored by Governor of, 78; - military preparations in, 78; - confiscation ordinance of, 78; - Confederate Congress admit delegates from, 79; - convention conflicts with government of, 79; - military division of, 79; - dissatisfaction among soldiers of, 80; - troops of, in Confederate army, 80; - indifference of Germans and Irish, 80; - bonds of, 81; - Union sentiment in, 81; - menaced by Federal troops, 81; - flight of Governor, 82; - troops sent to Corinth from, 82; - John S. Phelps, military governor of, 82; - regiments furnished Union army by, 83; - return of leading secessionists, 83; - Federal reverses in, 84; - reconstruction of, 85; - amended constitution of, 88; - Confederate debt repudiated by, 88; - division among Union men of, 88; - Lincoln’s letter on reconstruction in, 89; - Gen. Steele’s address to people of, 90; - election in, 90; - adoption of amended constitution for, 90; - Congressman elected in, 91; - Congress excludes Representatives from, 91; - no Presidential election in, 92, 195; - legality of government of, maintained by Lincoln, 195; - loyal government in, 286; - insurrection in, 314; - Reverdy Johnson favors recognition of, 378; - Thirteenth Amendment ratified by, 409; - slavery abolished by constitution of, 410; - disfranchising act of, 410; - loyal government acquiesced in, 410; - pacification of, 411; - destitution in parts of, 412 - - Arnell, Daniel W., election of, 415 - - Arnold, Isaac N., resolution introduced by, 170 - - Army of the United States, Provost Court of, 40; - discontinuance of enlistments for, 408; - mustering out of volunteers in the, 409 - - Ascension, parish of, vote in, 74 - - Ashley, James M., reconstruction bill reported by, 289; - proposal to confer suffrage on negro soldiers and sailors, 294; - no provision for education of negroes in bill of, 298; - effects of reconstruction bill of, 302; - substitute introduced by, 304; - remarks on reconstruction by, 304; - motives for compromise offered by, 306; - reconstruction bill of, tabled, 311; - revived bill of, 312; - explanation of inconsistency of, 312; - reconstruction bill of, tabled, 313; - remarks on reconstruction by, 313 - - Atlantic Monthly, The, Sumner’s article in, 200 - - - _B_ - - Baker, Joshua, member-elect from Louisiana, 56 - - Baldwin, Augustus C., reconstruction bill opposed by, 241 - - Baltimore convention, Lincoln renominated by, 32; - Lincoln did not openly influence, 34; - adjournment of, 277 - - Bancroft, George, relief meeting presided over by, 150; - address of, 151; - letter of, to Lincoln, 151; - Lincoln’s letter to, 152 - - Banks, N. P., expedition of, 43; - at Port Hudson, 49; - plans for invasion of Texas, 51; - petition of New Orleans convention to, 59; - intention of ordering an election, 61; - Free State General Committee’s attack of, 61; - decides against Free State Committee, 64; - Gen. Shepley’s disagreement with, 64; - Lincoln’s letter to, 65; - reconstruction letter of, 66; - Lincoln appreciates services of, 67; - urged by President to reconstruct Louisiana, 67; - date for election fixed by, 67; - Shepley’s registration approved by, 68; - proclamation by, 69; - order of, relative to election, 69; - letter to Lincoln, 70; - date of delegate election fixed by, 74; - before Congressional committee, 75; - Boutwell’s defence of, 255; - Powell’s criticism of, 346; - Governor Wells not in harmony with, 418 - - Bates, Edward, Attorney-General, letter to A. F. Ritchie, 105; - on admission of West Virginia, 123; - on Norfolk affairs, 135; - letter to Marshal McDowell, 147 - - Batesville, Gen. Curtis’s occupation of, 82 - - Baton Rouge, secession convention in, 36 - - Baxter, Elisha, election of, 91 - - Bayard, James F., 103; - admission of West Virginia Senators opposed by, 193 - - Bell, Joseph M., 40 - - Bell and Everett, vote for in Louisiana, 37 - - Belmont, August, Lincoln’s letter to, 39 - - Benjamin, Judah P., resignation of, 76, 424 - - Bent, Charles, 12 - - Berkeley County, provision for annexing to West Virginia, 110; - annexation of, 127 - - Bingham, John A., debate on West Virginia closed by, 119 - - Black, Jeremiah S., diplomatic mission of, 390 - - Blaine, James G., 73; - existence of schism in Republican party ignored by, 313; - quotation from, 441; - Johnson’s change of policy explained by, 489 - - Blair, Francis P., Sr., Lincoln interviewed by, 390; - camp of Gen. Grant visited by, 391; - Jefferson Davis interviewed by, 391; - plan of reunion proposed by, 391; - Mr. Davis’s letter to, 393; - Lincoln’s letter to, 394; - mission a failure, 394 - - Blair, Montgomery, on admission of West Virginia, 123; - time of emancipation deemed inopportune by, 188; - reply to Sumner by, 208 - - Bliss, C. C., 88 - - Blockade of Louisiana ports, 37 - - Blow, Henry T., remarks on reconstruction by, 301 - - Bonzano, M. F., election of, 76; - seat in Congress claimed by, 341; - report by Committee of Elections on, 341 - - Bordeaux, visit of Confederate naval agent to, 50 - - Border States, Lincoln supported by delegates from, 1; - Cotton States expected aid from, 161; - Lincoln interviewed by Congressmen from, 163, 171; - interests of South bound up with, 171; - majority reply of Congressmen from, 173; - emancipation proclamation did not affect status of slaves in, 383 - - Boreman, Arthur I., 100, 128, 129 - - Bouligny, John E., 43 - - Boutwell, George S., reconstruction speech of, 254; - President Johnson visited by, 458 - - Bowden, Lemuel J., 131, 138 - - Boyers, J. E., 128 - - Bradley, General, 79 - - Bragg, General, raid of, 19 - - Brandegee, Augustus, 342 - - Brazos, battle of, 50 - - Breckenridge, John C., election of, 316 - - Bright, Hon. John, Sumner’s letters to, 200, 290 - - Brooks, James, inquiry of, 225 - - Brown, B. Gratz, substitute of, 264; - amendment of, 272 - - Brown John, 142 - - Brown, William G., bill of, 113; - remarks on admission of West Virginia, 114 - - Brownlow, William G., 7; - unites in call for convention, 21, 29; - nomination of, 31; - election of, 32; - Mr. Johnson’s dispatch to, 414; - remarks on negro suffrage, 416; - policy recommended by, 417 - - Brownson, Orestes, theory of State suicide summarized by, 210 - - Bryant, William Cullen, 150 - - Buchanan, James, election of, 316 - - Buell, General Don Carlos, army of, 3, 10, 19; - treatment of fugitive slaves by, 158 - - Bullett, Cuthbert, Lincoln’s letter to, 39 - - Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands. See Freedmen’s Bureau - - Burke, Edmund, 200 - - Burnside, General Ambrose E., 150 - - Butler, General Benjamin F., 33; - investigation of, 38, 39; - relieved from command, 40; - Lincoln’s letter to, 44; - new department assigned to, 133; - Pierpont criticised by, 134; - Attorney-General criticised by, 135; - Lincoln’s letter to, 136; - department of Virginia commanded by, 143; - fugitive slaves arrive at camp of, 144, 147; - legal defence of attitude toward slaves, 146 - - - _C_ - - Caldwell, A. B., 128 - - California, Upper, 12; - admission of, 13; - first election in, 350 - - Cameron, Simon, Butler’s treatment of slaves approved by, 146 - - Campbell, John A., commissioner to Hampton Roads conference, 393, 395 - - Campbell, William B., election of, 415 - - Canby, General E. R. S., Lincoln’s letter to, 402 - - Carey, John B., fugitive slave law pleaded by, 144 - - Carlile, John S., 98; - election of, 103; - admission of, to United States Senate, 104; - speech on admission of West Virginia, 111; - term expires, 131; - reconstruction speech of, 267 - - Chadsey, Charles E., President Johnson’s surrender to the South - explained by, 489 - - Chandler, Lucius H., Representative-elect from Virginia, 131; - remarks of, 132; - exclusion of, 133 - - Chandler, Zachariah, interest in reconstruction bill, 274; - Sumner’s opposition to Trumbull’s resolution supported by, 380 - - Chase, Salmon P., on admission of West Virginia, 121; - authorized to organize labor of abandoned slaves, 160, 386; - emancipation favored by, 180; - quotation from diary of, 186; - conservatism of Lincoln observed by, 275; - Andrew Johnson takes oath of office before, 408 - - Chattanooga, 4; - taken by Federal forces, 22 - - Clark, Daniel, remarks on reconstruction by, 376 - - Clarke, Governor Charles, insurgent legislature convoked by, 459; - imprisonment of, 460; - petition for pardon of, 460 - - Clarke, Isaac E., 43 - - Cleveland, Tennessee, 4 - - Colfax, Schuyler, on admission of West Virginia, 115 - - Collamer, Jacob, on admission of West Virginia, 111; - substitute of, 328; - amendment of substitute, 334; - defeat of amendment of, 334; - defeat of substitute of, 336; - remarks on electoral vote of Louisiana by, 328, 335 - - Colonization, suggested by Lincoln, 153; - resolutions of Baltimore Union Convention on, 167; - message of Governor Brownlow on, 416 - - Colored troops, Lincoln urges raising of, 20, 22; - General Hunter recommends raising of, 180; - policy of enlistment of, 386 - - Committee, Central Executive of Louisiana, 53 - - Committee, Free State General of Louisiana, 47, 54, 59, 61; - controversy of, with General Banks, 62; - confers with General Shepley, 63; - friends of, protest against election, 70 - - Confederate army, Louisiana troops in, 37; - Arkansas troops in, 80; - driven from western Virginia, 98 - - Confederate Government, offer of Arkansas to, 80; - Arkansas not aided by, 81, 82; - hold of, weakened in Arkansas, 83; - aid from border States expected by, 171 - - Confederate officers, disfranchisement of, 236 - - Confederate States, theory that disunionists were in a minority in, - 192; - functionaries in, not bound by oaths, 204; - governments of, vacated, 205; - governments could be organized by Congress in, 206; - Constitution the only law in, 206; - power of Congress over, 210; - people of, unable to plead Constitution, 212; - original idea relative to reorganization of, 213; - Stevens’s idea of status of, 214; - status of, 260; - approaching disruption of, 286; - rights of citizens in, 366; - political rights of people in, 367; - no foreign engagements entered into by, 391; - anarchy threatens many of, 409, 431; - Federal troops preserve order in, 432; - obstacles to restoration in, 432; - blockade of, 444; - importance of understanding public opinion in, 471; - legislation of, 472; - prompt acquiescence of, 472; - sentiments of citizens of, 474; - Congress excludes delegations from, 474; - reaction in, 482; - Northern example no defence of legislation in, 485; - reconstructed not very different from disloyal governments of, 486; - States represented at opening of 39th Congress, 489; - Congress ignores claims of members from, 490 - - Confiscation, in Arkansas, 78 - - Congress, amnesty authorized by, 24; - President disclaims authority to admit members to, 26; - electoral vote of Tennessee excluded by, 35; - Representatives from Louisiana admitted to, 46; - Louisiana elects members to, 55; - organization of, 55; - Louisiana not redistricted by, 57; - A. P. Field denied admission to, 60; - Louisiana elects members to, 76; - government of Louisiana not recognized by, 76; - electoral vote of Louisiana excluded by, 76; - Arkansas elects members to, 91; - consents to transfer of Virginia counties, 127; - resolution on compensated emancipation passed by, 167; - slavery in Territories abolished by, 170; - confiscation act of, 179; - restored Virginia recognized by, 191; - President in agreement with, 191; - slavery in rebellious States should be ended by, 197; - power possessed over seceding States by, 206; - doctrines of Stevens abhorrent to members of, 216; - unanimity of, 221; - reconstruction discussed by, 224; - form of State government should be determined by, 228; - reconstruction bill passed by, 273; - Lincoln’s contest with, 284; - President disclaims right to admit members to, 287; - constitutional amendment passed by, 288; - exclusion of electoral votes by resolution of, 338; - protest against admission of members to, 341; - power to readmit States resides in, 358; - authority over rebellious States possessed by, 365; - desire to discipline South winning adherents in, 407; - Johnson’s distrust of, 461; - why reconstruction conventions should have been called by, 470; - Southern States reorganized at meeting of, 486; - Johnson intended to be guided by, 488; - Presidential system suspended by legislation of, 489; - Southern members not admitted to, 490; - reconstruction assumed by, 490; - suffrage in the first reconstruction measure, 494 - - Confederate Congress, 36; - admission of Arkansas delegates to, 79 - - Contrabands, multitudes of, in camp of General Butler, 147 - - Constitution, The, those who repudiate cannot plead provisions of, 212, - 213; - ceases to be a restraint on Government, 213; - State in rebellion not embraced by, 214; - scope of not contracted by secession ordinances, 218; - necessity as an interpreter of, 222; - number of States necessary to ratify amendment of, 232; - Georgia adopts Thirteenth Amendment of, 466 - - Constitutional Union men, attitude of, 7 - - Convention bill, defeated by popular vote in Tennessee, 8 - - Convention, Lincoln nominated by the Chicago, 1; - Southern commercial held at Knoxville, 6; - the Greeneville, 9; - the Nashville, 30; - meeting of the Louisiana constitutional, 75; - the Arkansas constitutional, 87; - the Richmond secession, 93; - the Wheeling, 99, 104; - ordinances of the Wheeling, 100; - the Wheeling votes on dismemberment, 101; - the Wheeling adjourns, 101, 107; - the Wheeling authorizes formation of new State, 105; - slavery in the Wheeling, 107; - meeting of the Baltimore Union, 167; - revolutionary character of the Wheeling, 468 - - Conventions, the reconstruction, character of, 468; - irregularity of those called under Presidential plan, 469; - why Congress should have called, 470; - character and work of those called by President Johnson, 470; - origin would not affect work of, if acquiesced in, 472 - - Conway, Martin, speech on West Virginia by, 113 - - Cooper, Edmund, election of, 415 - - Cooper Union, Lincoln’s address in, 1; - relief meeting in, 150 - - Cottman, Thomas, 48; - election of, 56; - Lincoln’s letter to, 64 - - Cotton States, aid from border States expected by, 161 - - Cowan, Edgar, on admission of Mr. Segar, 139; - remarks on electoral vote of Louisiana, 330, 332; - inquiry of, concerning electoral votes, 338 - - Cox, Samuel S., reconstruction speech of, 252 - - Crane, Samuel, 128 - - Cravens, James A., reconstruction speech of, 249 - - Creole, The, 6 - - Crisfield, John W., interview with Lincoln reported by, 163 - - Crittenden, John J., speech on West Virginia by, 116 - - Crittenden Resolution, introduction of, 220; - Mr. Strouse refers to, 249 - - Cruisers, Confederate, 50 - - Curtin, Governor Andrew G., 98 - - Cutler, R. King, Senator-elect from Louisiana, 76, 343, 424 - - - _D_ - - Davis, Garrett, admission of West Virginia Senators opposed by, 128; - resolutions of, 210 - - Davis, Henry Winter, remarks on Louisiana election, 58; - amendment of, 225; - chairman of Committee on Rebellious States, 226; - reconstruction address of, 226; - on Southern loyalists, 231; - on modes of establishing republican governments, 232; - Thirteenth Amendment approved by, 232; - policy of Lincoln criticised by, 232; - protest of against policy of Lincoln, 279; - character of, 283; - - defeat of, for renomination, 284; - postponement of Ashley’s bill opposed by, 295; - reconstruction speech of, 307; - last reconstruction speech in Congress, 310; - alliance with Stevens, 311; - motion relative to Louisiana, 341 - - Davis, Jefferson, Blair’s interview with, 391; - proposal for joint invasion of Mexico entertained by, 392; - letter to Mr. Blair, 393; - on Lincoln’s assassination, 407; - members of Mississippi convention intercede for, 460; - Georgia convention invokes Executive clemency in behalf of, 466 - - Davis-Wade Bill, passed by House, 262; - passed by Senate, 273; - Lincoln’s action on, 273; - proclamation concerning, 277; - no provision for negro suffrage in, 494 - - Dawes, Henry L., on Louisiana Representatives, 56; - on admission of West Virginia, 116; - report on Mr. Segar’s election, 131; - on election of Mr. Chandler, 132; - reconstruction speech of, 295; - Mr. Davis’s criticism of, 306; - bill of Representative Wilson criticised by, 312; - report on election of Mr. Bonzano, 341; - remarks of, 342 - - Delaware, slave interest in, 155; - Lincoln’s bill for compensated emancipation in, 155; - Federalist party in, 157; - Federal interference in, 377 - - Democratic party, defeat of, 1; - vote of, in West Virginia, 129; - reconstruction theory of, 218; - attitude on reconstruction, 220; - negro suffrage opposed by New Orleans convention of, 421; - South misled by attitude of, 483 - - Dennison, Charles, reconstruction speech of, 247 - - Dennison, William, 32 - - Dickinson, Daniel S., 33 - - District of Columbia, slaves not allowed to depart from, 148; - colored persons liable to arrest if found in, 152; - compensation to owners of slaves in, 167 - - Dix, General John A., 33; - treatment of fugitive slaves by, 149 - - Donnelly, Ignatius, reconstruction speech of, 245 - - Doolittle, James R., credentials of Mr. Underwood offered by, 141; - reconstruction bill opposed by, 273; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 324, 326, 333; - remarks on Louisiana, 348; - policy of Administration supported by, 380; - credentials of Mr. Hahn offered by, 383 - - Doubleday, General Abner, treatment of fugitive slaves by, 159 - - Douglas-Lincoln debates, 1 - - Dorr, Thomas W., government under, 350 - - Dunlap, George W., admission of West Virginia opposed by, 214 - - Durant, Thomas J., 47; - Attorney-General of Louisiana, 48; - registry conducted by, 51; - spokesman of planters, 53; - enrollment by, satisfactory to Lincoln, 63; - disagreement with General Banks, 65; - protest of, against election, 348; - recognition of Louisiana opposed by, 378 - - Durell, E. H., 75 - - - _E_ - - East, E. H., 28 - - Edgerton, Joseph K., reconstruction speech of, 219, 301 - - Election, Presidential, loss of a pretext for secession, 1; - in Tennessee, 29; - in Arkansas, 92; - in West Virginia, 129; - electoral votes in, 338; - result of, 339 - - Elections, Committee of, report on Louisiana Representative, 56 - - Electoral College, bill on representation in, 314 - - Eliot, Thomas W., amendment to reconstruction bill offered by, 289; - reconstruction speech of, 292; - Stevens’s interruption of, 294; - Davis’s criticism of, 306; - bill for bureau of emancipation introduced by, 386 - - Emancipation, in Tennessee, 22; - East Tennessee convention favors immediate, 29; - Lincoln’s proclamation of, 47; - proclamation of not to be revoked, 52; - vote on, in West Virginia, 110; - in West Virginia constitution, 125; - Lincoln suggests compensated, 155; - Lincoln considering, 178; - discussion in Cabinet, 180; - draft of proclamation of, 181; - urged by Chicago clergymen, 184; - not hastened by deputations, 186; - Lincoln reads proclamation of, 187; - Sumner proposes to convert proclamation of, into law, 272; - effect of proclamation on status of slaves, 384; - discussed at Hampton Roads Conference, 398; - Lincoln favored gradual, 398 - - Emancipation, compensated, Lincoln prepares bill on, 155; - message refers to, 161; - New York Tribune favors, 164; - resolution of Congress on, 167; - Baltimore Union convention’s resolution on, 167; - House of Representatives appoints committee on, 168 - - Emancipator, The, 5 - - England, Cromwell’s division of, 200 - - Europe, the civil war pleasing to powers of, 393 - - - _F_ - - Federalist, The, 269 - - Fellows, John Q. A., nomination of, 69; - defeat of, 70 - - Fishback, William M., Lincoln’s letter to, 89; - election of, 91 - - Fisher, George P., interest in compensated emancipation, 155 - - Flanders, Benjamin F., election of, 46; - Lincoln’s letter to, 52; - vote received by, 60; - interview with Lincoln, 63; - nomination of, 69; - defeat of, 70; - hostility of Congress toward Louisiana said to have been promoted by, - 73 - - Florida, martial law proclaimed over, 168; - unworthy of a place in the Union, 256; - insurrection in, 314; - damage sustained by, 436; - nature of reorganized government of, 488 - - Florida, The, capture of, 288 - - Forfeiture, State, idea of, 204 - - Forrest, General, 15 - - Fort Donelson, General Grant in possession of, 10 - - Fort Henry, Federal occupation of, 10 - - Fortress Monroe, fugitive slaves at, 144, 385 - - Foster, Lafayette S., reconstruction policy of Lincoln supported by, - 380 - - Fowler, Joseph S., election of, 413 - - France, relations with, 409 - - Franchise, elective, in Tennessee to be fixed by Legislature, 30; - free negroes of Louisiana petition for, 55; - States have always exercised right to confer, 452 - - Franchise, negro, Lincoln’s opinion concerning, 73. - See Negroes - - Frederick City, 184 - - Frederic County, provision for annexing to West Virginia, 110 - - Freedmen, no provision for education of, 298; - Brownlow would admit testimony of, 416; - character of, 416; - Southern feeling toward, 475; - Mississippi legislation relative to, 475 - - Freedmen’s Aid Societies, Lincoln memorialized by, 386 - - Freedmen’s Bureau, act of Congress relative to, 385, 387; - germ of, 386; - duties of commissioner of, 387; - Governor of Arkansas coöperates with, 411; - influence in producing Southern reaction, 483; - political aspirations of agents of, 484 - - Fremont, General John C., proclamation concerning slaves, 148; - Lincoln’s letter to, 148; - reply to Lincoln, 149 - - Fugitive slaves, repeal of acts for rendition of, 144; - exclusion from Department of Washington, 148 - - - _G_ - - Gantt, General E. W., secession abjured by, 83 - - Garrison, William Lloyd, 7 - - Georgia, martial law proclaimed over, 168; - Boutwell would exclude from restored Union, 256; - insurrection in, 314; - injuries sustained by, 433; - Governor Brown’s efforts at restoration of, 465; - appointment of provisional governor for, 465; - leading ex-Confederates aid governor, 465; - reconstruction convention of, 465; - convention repeals secession ordinance, 465; - war debt repudiated by, 465; - slaves freed by constitution of, 466; - Executive clemency in behalf of Jefferson Davis invoked by - convention, 466 - - Germans, The, indifferent to secession, 80 - - Gilmore-Jacquess mission, 389 - - Gooch, Daniel W., reconstruction address of, 250 - - Government, a republican form guaranteed by reconstruction - proclamation, 26; - perfection of Congressional system, 385 - - Grant, General Ulysses S., in possession of Forts Henry and Donelson, - 10; - martial law proclaimed by, 15; - at Mission Ridge and Lookout Mountain, 23; - Lee driven back by, 288; - Blair visits camp of, 391; - influence in bringing about Hampton Roads Conference, 396; - movements by army of, 401; - management of Freedmen’s Bureau criticised by, 484 - - Great Britain, relations with, 409 - - Greeley, Horace, 390 - - Greeneville, Tennessee, 4, 9 - - Grimes, James W., remarks on Louisiana election, 382 - - Gulf, Department of, Butler relieved from command in, 40; - General Banks in command of, 49 - - - _H_ - - Hahn, Michael, election of, 46; - Lincoln’s letter to, 52; - vote of, 60; - nomination of, 69; - election of, 70; - oath of, 72; - Lincoln’s letter to, 73; - election of delegates authorized by, 74; - election called by, 75; - credentials filed in U. S. Senate, 383, 418, 424 - - Hall, Ellery R., 107 - - Hall, John, 107 - - Hale, John P., on admission of West Virginia, 111; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 325 - - Halleck, General H. W., Tennessee included in department of, 20; - General Buell instructed by, 21; - General Banks instructed by, 51; - order on surrender of fugitive slaves, 158 - - Hamilton, Andrew J., appointment of, 467 - - Hampton Roads Conference, 396; - Confederate commissioners to, report failure, 400; - results of, 400 - - Harris, Ira, remarks on Crittenden resolution by, 222; - remarks on electoral vote of Louisiana, 323, 334; - amendment offered by, 334 - - Harris, Isham G., authorized to appoint commissioners, 8; - Legislature convoked at Memphis by, 15 - - Harlan, James, bill of, 195 - - Hawkins, Isaac R., election of, 415 - - Hay and Nicolay, account of Lincoln’s message by, 24; - quotation from history of, 273 - - Helena, Arkansas, Union occupation of, 82, 86 - - Henderson, John B., reply to Lincoln’s appeal, 177; - reconstruction bill opposed by, 273; - recognition of Louisiana favored by, 348; - inconsistency of Sumner exposed by, 375, 377; - inquiry concerning Louisiana loyalists, 378; - letter on reconstruction, 495 - - Hendricks, Thomas A., Republican factiousness agreeable to, 380 - - Hiestand, Judge J., appointment of, 41 - - Holden, William W., appointment of, 448; - proclamation of, 450; - message of, 454; - President Johnson’s telegram to, 455; - public career of, 457; - Republican leaders alarmed at appointment of, 459 - - Holman, William S., resolution introduced by, 222 - - Hood, General J. B., 30 - - Hooker, General Joseph, treatment of fugitive slaves, 158 - - Howard, Jacob M., on electoral vote of Louisiana, 328; - on recognition of Louisiana, 358; - Sumner’s opposition to Trumbull’s resolution supported by, 380 - - Howard, Oliver O., General, Freedmen’s Bureau organized by, 389 - - Howe, Timothy O., speech on Ten Eyck’s amendment, 321 - - Howell, Rufus K., 41 - - Hughes, Augustus de B., 43 - - Humphreys, Benjamin G., election and pardon of, 464 - - Hungary, similarity of ideas lacking in, 237 - - Hunter, General David, freedom of slaves proclaimed by, 168; - authority to arm negroes requested by, 180 - - Hunter, Robert M. T., authorized to act as commissioner, 395 - - Hurlbut, General S. A., on reorganization of Tennessee, 21; - Lincoln’s letters to, 84, 401 - - - _I_ - - Illinois, amendment abolishing slavery adopted by, 384 - - Indiana, troops from, assist western Virginians, 98 - - Intelligencer, The National, 61 - - Ireland, unsuccessful campaign of James II in, 203; - similarity of ideas lacking in, 237 - - Irish, The, indifference to secession, 80 - - - _J_ - - Jacks, T. M., Congressman-elect, 91; - proposed compensation to, 342 - - Jackson, General Andrew, new industrial era marked by inauguration of, - 5; - invasion by way of Mexico expected by, 392 - - Jacquess-Gilmore mission, 389 - - James II, King, abdication of, 202 - - Jefferson County, provision for annexation of, 110; - annexation of, 127 - - Jefferson, Thomas, declaration of, 357 - - Johnson, Andrew, 12; - in Thirtieth Congress, 14; - people of Nashville addressed by, 15; - activity of, 18; - Nashville saved by, 19; - Lincoln’s opinion of, 19; - addresses of, 19; - urged to raise negro troops, 20; - Lincoln’s letter to, 22; - enlarged authority of, 23; - Nashville meeting called by, 27; - election of county officers authorized by, 27; - proclamation of, 31; - nomination of, for Vice-Presidency, 32; - Nashville address of, 32; - letter of, to Mr. Dennison, 32; - popularity in the North, 33; - credentials of West Virginia Senators presented by, 103; - resolution offered by, 221; - election of, as Vice-President, 339; - installation of, as President, 408; - problem confronting, 408; - letter to Governor Murphy, 411; - despatch to Governor Brownlow, 414; - reconstruction policy endorsed by National Democratic party, 420; - Lincoln’s policy alleged to have been changed by, 426; - Pierpont’s government recognized by, 427; - Nashville speech of, 438; - forecast of policy of, 439; - addresses of, 440; - visit of Illinois delegation to, 440; - visit of Indiana delegation to, 442; - visit of negro delegation, 443; - South Carolina delegation addressed by, 443; - blockade partly raised by, 444; - blockade of trans-Mississippi ports rescinded by, 445; - work done for reconstruction retained by, 447; - Lincoln’s policy need not have been adopted by, 447; - at inauguration sentiments of Congress already known to, 448; - results of attempting reunion without coöperation of Congress, 448; - reconstruction of North Carolina begun by, 448; - amnesty proclamation of, 450; - cases excluded from benefits of amnesty, 450; - reconstruction plan of, based on guaranty clause of Constitution, - 452; - telegram to Governor Holden, 455; - visit of North Carolina delegation to, 456; - North Carolina election unsatisfactory to, 457; - interview of Boutwell and Morrill with, 458; - William L. Sharkey appointed Provisional Governor by, 459; - appointment of provisional governors by, 459; - telegram to Governor Sharkey, 461; - attitude of Congress characterized by, 461; - Governor Sharkey’s reorganization of militia approved by, 462; - Mississippi people trusted by, 463; - change in sentiments of, 463, 488; - General Slocum directed to revoke order by, 463; - proceedings in reconstruction conventions directed by, 465; - organization of a police force for Georgia approved by, 466; - policy toward Congress unknown in the South, 483; - prompt acquiescence of South in policy of, 486; - reconstruction theory similar to Lincoln’s, 487; - falling back from Lincoln’s plan, 487; - Lincoln’s Cabinet retained by, 488; - change of attitude of, 489; - influence of Seward upon, 489; - movement to procure resignation from Vice-Presidency, 489; - limitations of, 490; - reconstruction work of, not marked by originality, 491; - negro suffrage, 494 - - Johnson, Bradish, 48 - - Johnson, Herschel V., election of, 465 - - Johnson, James, appointment of, 459, 465 - - Johnson, James M., election of, 91; - proposed compensation to, 342; - election of, 412 - - Johnson, Reverdy, in New Orleans, 38; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 335; - on President’s message, 339; - remarks on recognition of Louisiana, 370; - Sumner’s argument with, 374; - remarks on negro suffrage, 378; - recognition of Arkansas and Louisiana favored by, 378 - - Johnson, R. W., secession of, 91 - - Johnston, General Joseph E., retires to Murfreesboro, 11 - - Jones, Hon. Ira P., 12 - - Jordan, Warren, 27 - - - _K_ - - Kanawha, proposed State of, 105; - change in name of, 107 - - Kearney, General Stephen W., 12 - - Kelley, William D., reconstruction speech of, 252, 291; - proposes amendment of Ashley’s bill, 312; - Field’s assault of, 342 - - Kernan, Francis, bill of Mr. Wilson criticised by, 312 - - Kimball, General, 86 - - King, Preston, Mr. Johnson influenced by, 441 - - Kingwood, Va., Union meeting at, 99 - - Kitchen, Benjamin M., Representative-elect, 131; - denied admission to Congress, 133 - - Knoxville, early capital of Tennessee, 4; - Southern Commercial Convention held at, 6; - taken by Federal forces, 22 - - Kyle, G. H., election of, 412 - - - _L_ - - Lamont, George D., 43 - - Lane, James H., on electoral vote of Louisiana, 337 - - LeBlond, Frank C., reconstruction speech of, 300 - - Lee, General Robert E., Maryland invaded by, 183; - repulse of, 186; - driven back by Grant, 288; - weakness of, 401; - surrender of, 426 - - Leftwich, John W., election of, 415 - - Letcher, Governor John, United States could not recognize, 205, 445 - - Lieber, Dr. Francis, 150, 151; - Sumner’s letters to, 199, 289 - - Lincoln, Abraham, Cooper Union address of, 1; - conservatism of, 1; - nomination of, 1; - border State delegations support of, 1; - popular vote received by, 1; - peer of tried Republican leaders, 1; - policy of, 2; - sympathy for Tennessee loyalists, 3, 10; - Andrew Johnson appointed by, 11; - in Thirtieth Congress, 14; - authority for appointing military governors, 14; - view of their utility, 20; - letter to Governor Johnson, 20, 22; - authority of Johnson enlarged by, 23; - reply to General Rosecrans, 23; - proclamation issued by, 23; - authority to admit members to Congress disclaimed by, 26; - enrolling agents sent to Tennessee, Arkansas, and Louisiana by, 27; - renomination of, 32; - declined to interfere in nominating convention, 34; - reply to protest of McClellan electors, 35; - letter to Cuthbert Bullett, 39; - letter to August Belmont, 39; - Court of Record for Louisiana constituted by, 42; - letter to General Butler and others, 44; - restoration of Louisiana urged by, 44; - letter to General Shepley, 44; - Emancipation Proclamation published by, 47; - requested to order an election, 48; - reply to Louisiana committee, 48; - more advanced ground taken by, 49; - letter to General Banks and others, 51; - urges restoration, 51; - enrollment of Durant approved by, 63; - willingness to recognize part of Louisiana, 63; - letter to Thomas Cottman, 64; - letter to General Banks, 65; - General Banks’s letter to, 66; - Banks’s services appreciated by, 67; - authority conferred on General Banks by, 67; - Banks on Louisiana election, 70; - letter to Governor Hahn, 73; - authority of Mr. Hahn enlarged by, 73; - letter to General Hurlbut, 84; - letter to General Steele, 89; - letter to William M. Fishback, 89; - result of Arkansas election gratifying to, 91; - requests opinion of Cabinet on admission of West Virginia, 119, 124; - approves bill for admission of West Virginia, 125; - proclamation concerning West Virginia, 126; - letter to General Butler, 136; - slavery in first inaugural of, 143; - letter to General Fremont, 148; - General Fremont instructed by, 149; - Bancroft’s letter to, 151; - letter to Mr. Bancroft, 152; - emancipation and colonization suggested by, 153; - advance in position of, 154; - arming of slaves opposed by, 154, 180; - bill for compensated emancipation drafted by, 155; - Mr. Pierce’s interview with, 160; - compensated emancipation proposed by, 161; - further advance in position of, 162; - letter to Henry J. Raymond, 163; - border State Congressmen interview, 163; - letter to James A. McDougall, 165; - proclamation of General Hunter rescinded by, 168; - Sumner’s letter concerning, 170; - border State Congressmen appealed to, 171; - emancipation proposed by, 178; - confiscation act approved by, 179; - draft of emancipation proclamation read by, 181; - rebellious citizens warned by, 183; - Chicago clergymen interview, 184; - resolves to issue postponed proclamation, 186; - meeting of Cabinet, 186; - emancipation proclamation read by, 187; - first inaugural of, 190; - central idea of reconstruction plan of, 190; - confidence in ultimate success, 191; - - Congress substantially agrees with, 191; - change in policy of, 193; - only one plan of reconstruction proposed by, 194; - remarks on Blair-Sumner controversy, 208; - reconstruction plan of, criticised by Henry Winter Davis, 232; - Mr. Donnelly’s character of, 245; - Mr. Boutwell defends reconstruction policy, 254; - treatment of reconstruction bill by, 273; - Sumner’s opinion of, 275; - proclamation on reconstruction bill, 277; - Wade-Davis manifesto concerning action of, 279; - result of contest with Congress, 284; - reëlection of, 286; - silence as to controversy with Congress, 286; - no right over admission of Congressmen claimed by, 287; - adoption of more vigorous measures hinted at, 287; - resolution relative to electoral votes approved by, 339; - electoral votes received by, 339; - popular approval of Thirteenth Amendment pleasing to, 385; - Freedmen’s Aid Societies appeal to, 386; - Mr. Blair’s visit to, 390; - Blair’s mission not officially sanctioned by, 391; - letter to Mr. Blair, 394; - letter to Secretary Seward, 395; - conference opposed by, except on basis of reunion, 397; - last speech on reconstruction, 403; - assassination of, a calamity to the South, 407; - policy would have saved South from many evils, 407; - telegram to Governor Pierpont, 426; - Pierpont’s interview with, 426; - attitude toward Confederate legislatures, 470; - a loose system of reconstruction opposed by, 487; - reconstruction theory of, similar to Johnson’s, 487; - President Johnson retains Cabinet of, 488; - constructive statesmanship of, 491; - a wide constituency favored by, 493; - conditions on returning States imposed by, 494; - Mr. Henderson’s views on, 495 - - Lincoln-Douglas debates, 1 - - Little Rock, seized by Confederate troops, 79; - threatened by Federal forces, 82; - capture of, 83; - loyal newspaper published in,83; - Union convention at, 87 - - Liverpool, abandoned by Confederate naval agent, 50 - - Longyear, John W., reconstruction address of, 244 - - Lookout Mountain, battle of, 23, 224 - - Louisiana, effect of Union victories in, 10; - enrolling agent sent to, 27; - secession spirit in, 36; - secession of, 36; - prosperity at the beginning of the war, 36; - treasury of, 37; - citizens of, in Confederate army, 37; - blockade of ports in, 37; - attitude toward Richmond government, 37; - loyalists of, 37; - secessionists of, intimidated, 38; - activity of Unionists in, 38; - necessity of courts in, 40; - courts established in, 41; - court of record for, 42; - Supreme Court of, 43; - Lincoln urges restoration of, 44; - Union associations request an election, 45; - proclamation for an election in, 45; - members of Congress elected in, 46; - vote cast in, 46; - admission of Representatives to Congress, 46; - named as one of the rebellious States, 47; - parishes excepted from emancipation proclamation, 47; - disagreement among Unionists of, 47; - enrollment of citizens in, 48; - Lincoln visited by committee from, 48; - reorganization interrupted, 49; - portion covered by Union arms, 50; - Lincoln urges reconstruction of, 52; - condition of, 53; - amended constitution of 1852 destroyed by rebellion, 54; - voting in, 55; - franchise asked by free negroes, 55; - credentials of Representatives from, 56; - suppression of election in, 56; - constitution altered by General Shepley, 58; - citizens from, in Union army, 60; - General Banks to order an election in, 61, 64; - - Banks on reconstruction in, 66; - Banks fixes date of election for, 67; - constitution modified by proclamation of General Banks, 68; - provision for voting of loyalists in, 69; - election in, 70; - protest against election in, 70; - Hahn inaugurated Governor, 72; - civil subordinate to military power, 73; - Free State leaders unite with Radicals in Congress, 74; - election in, 74; - vote on constitution, 75; - Legislature chosen in, 76; - Presidential electors appointed for, 76, 195; - Senators elected by, 76; - government of, not recognized by Congress, 76; - electoral vote of, 129, 314; - radicals propose to recognize government of, 290; - insurrection in, 314; - amendment to except from joint resolution, 315; - Ten Eyck’s speech on electoral vote of, 318; - Howe’s speech on electoral vote of, 321; - Trumbull’s speech on electoral vote of, 321; - highest vote cast in, 323; - remarks of Harris on electoral vote of, 323; - speech of Doolittle on electoral vote of, 324; - remarks of Hale on electoral vote of, 325; - remarks of Collamer on electoral vote of, 328; - Howard’s speech on electoral vote of, 328; - Cowan’s remarks on electoral vote of, 330; - Powell on electoral vote of, 331; - Wade’s remarks on electoral vote of, 332; - loss of Ten Eyck’s amendment concerning, 334; - Johnson’s remarks on electoral vote of, 335; - Pomeroy’s amendment, 337; - passage of joint resolution, 338; - Cowan’s inquiry, 338; - Senate debate on recognition of, 341; - Representatives-elect from, 341; - protest against admission of members from, 341; - compensation to claimants from, 341; - United States Senators chosen in, 343; - Trumbull’s resolution relative to, 343; - Powell opposes recognition of, 344; - Henderson favors recognition of, 348; - recognition of, would enfeeble Union, 358; - Howard’s speech on recognition of, 358; - governed by bayonet, 367; - Howard characterizes government of, 369; - Reverdy Johnson’s argument on recognition of, 370, 377; - Sprague’s remarks on election in, 381; - Grimes’s remarks on election in, 382; - slavery in parts of, not affected by emancipation proclamation, 384; - draft in, 417; - election in, 418; - Mr. Wells chosen Governor, 422; - Warmoth elected as Territorial Delegate, 422; - United States Senators chosen, 424; - Thirteenth Amendment ratified by, 424; - injuries which rebellion inflicted on, 424 - - Lovejoy, Owen, resolution offered by, 132; - resolution of, relative to emancipation, 170; - doctrines of Thaddeus Stevens repudiated by, 217 - - Lundy, Benjamin, Genius of Universal Emancipation published by, 5 - - Lyon, General Nathaniel, 79 - - - _M_ - - Madison, parish of, 75 - - Malhiot, E. E., 48 - - Mallory, Robert, yeas and nays on Ashley’s bill demanded by, 311; - bill of Mr. Wilson criticised by, 312 - - Manassas, battle of, 183 - - Mann, W. D., Representative-elect from Louisiana, 76; - seat in Congress claimed by, 341 - - Manumission Intelligencer, The, 5 - - Marcy, William, Secretary, 12 - - Marvin, Governor, Seward’s message to, 488 - - Maryland, attitude on emancipation, 165 - - Mason, James M., 103 - - Mason, Richard B., 13, 14 - - Massachusetts, sentiments on slavery, 375 - - Maynard, Horace, 9, 10; joins in call for convention, 21; - emancipation policy of Lincoln approved by, 177; - election of, 415 - - Memphis, Legislature convenes in, 15 - - Mexico, 12, 13; - French interests in, 50; - invasion of, a part of Napoleon’s policy, 391; - proposal for joint invasion of, 392 - - Mileage, allowed to Arkansas claimants, 91 - - Military commissions, 12 - - Military Governor, office of, 11, 12, 14, 193 - - Minority, loyal, rule by, inconsistent with American principles, 205, - 217; - should institute government for their own protection, 353; - further examination of, 491 - - Mission Ridge, battle of, 23, 224 - - Missouri, provisional government appointed in, 10; - origin of government of, 350 - - Mississippi, State of, in Federal control, 50; - insurrection in, 314; - injury sustained by, 437; - Provisional Governor for, 459; - Governor Clarke summons insurgent Legislature of, 459; - secession ordinance declared null and void, 460; - slavery abolished in, 460; - people advised to form a patrol, 461; - disorder in, 462; - General Slocum prevents organization of militia in, 462; - freedmen of, 463; - election in, 464; - conflict of civil and military authorities, 464; - supremacy of military in, 464; - November legislation of, 475; - practical revival of black code in, 480; - spirit of reconstructed Legislature, 482; - character of reorganized government, 488 - - Monroe Doctrine, Northern Democrats and Republicans adhere to, 392; - Mexico to be conquered under pretence of defending, 393 - - Morrill, Justin S., President Johnson visited by, 458 - - Morton, Oliver P., Governor, President Johnson interviewed by, 442 - - McClellan, electors, protest of, 34; - ticket in Tennessee withdrawn, 35 - - McClellan, George B., General, proclamation concerning slaves, 145; - instructions to, 152; - collapse of Richmond campaign of, 178; - Union army again commanded by, 184; - Lee defeated by, 186; - vote for Presidency received by, 339 - - McCulloch, General, 79 - - McDougall, James A., on admission of Mr. Segar, 139; - Lincoln’s letter to, 165–166 - - McDowell, General Irwin, treatment of fugitive slaves by, 144 - - McDowell, J. L., inquiry concerning fugitive slaves, 147 - - - _N_ - - Napoleon III, 50; - policy of, 391 - - Nashville, occupation of, 10; - panic in, 11; - occupied by General Nelson, 15; - Governor Johnson arrives in, 15; - Governor Johnson addresses people of, 15; - mayor and council imprisoned, 17; - press under restraint, 17; - treatment of clergymen in, 17; - Union convention at, 21; - action of convention, 21; - public meeting at, 27; - convention at, 29; - convention of January, 1865, 30; - Legislature meets at, 32 - - National Conservative Union party, negro suffrage opposed by, 421; - reconstruction policy of Mr. Johnson endorsed by, 421; - Mr. Wells nominated for governor by, 422 - - Navy, proportions of, 286 - - Negroes, free, elective franchise asked by, 55; - North Carolina denies franchise to, 452; - condition of, in Mississippi, 463; - testimony of, 464; - numbers in Texas, 467 - - Nelson, General, enters Nashville, 15 - - Nelson, Thomas A. R., 9 - - New Hampshire, President Johnson addresses citizens of, 442 - - New Mexico, 12 - - New Orleans, State troops from, seize Federal property, 36; - enthusiasm in, 37; - bankruptcy of, 37; - importance to Confederacy, 38; - capture of, 38; - results of Federal occupation of, 39; - members of court of record arrive in, 43; - excepted from emancipation proclamation, 47; - menaced by General Taylor, 49; - General Shepley forbids election in, 56; - amount of taxes paid by, 58; - without civil government, 58; - extent of the State of Louisiana, 75; - constitutional convention in, 75; - unqualified voters enrolled in, 418; - new registration in, 418; - J. Madison Wells nominated by convention held in, 420 - - Newport News, fugitive slaves arrive at, 144, 386 - - New York, electoral vote not counted in Washington’s election, 326 - - Nicolay and Hay. See Hay and Nicolay - - Noell, John W., on admission of West Virginia, 118; - inquiry of, 164 - - Norfolk, Va., destitution in, 133 - - North Carolina, Union victories in, 10; - secession spirit in, 150; - insurrection in, 314; - injuries sustained by, 436; - Provisional Governor appointed for, 448; - “loyal people” of, 452; - suffrage withheld from negroes of, 452; - nearly all counties choose delegates, 453; - ordinance of secession repealed by, 454; - abolition of slavery in, 454; - payment of rebel debt prohibited by, 455; - adjournment of convention, 455; - convention ordinances ratified, 457; - election unsatisfactory to President Johnson, 457; - Thirteenth Amendment ratified by, 457; - Congressmen chosen by, 457; - why President began reconstruction policy with, 458 - - - _O_ - - Oglesby, Governor, President Johnson visited by, 440 - - Ohio, western Virginians assisted by troops of, 98 - - Olin, Abraham B., on admission of West Virginia, 116 - - Olustee, battle of, a result of administration policy, 253 - - Orange, William, Prince of, 203 - - Orleans, courts established in, 41 - - - _P_ - - Paine, Colonel, arrest of, 169 - - Parker, Granville, anti-slavery work of, 108 - - Parliament, absolute power vested in, 203 - - Patterson, David T., election of, 413 - - Patterson, General, proclamation relative to slaves, 145 - - Peabody, Charles A., appointment of, 42 - - Peace and Constitutional Society, in Arkansas, 81 - - Pea Ridge, battle of, 82 - - Pendleton, George H., reconstruction speech of, 257; - votes received by, for Vice-Presidency, 339 - - Pensacola, Florida, Louisiana soldiers vote at, 70 - - Perry, Nehemiah, reconstruction address of, 250 - - Phelps, General John S., alleged opposition to rule of, 38; - military governor, 82 - - Pierce, E. L., labor of abandoned slaves organized by, 160, 386; - Lincoln interviewed by, 160 - - Pierpont, Francis Harrison, chosen Governor of restored Virginia, 101; - inauguration of, 101; - views of the Constitution, 102; - message of, 109; - address of, 128; - elected Governor, 129; - duties of, 133; - protests against military interference, 134; - application for assistance, 191; - Lincoln’s telegram to, 426; - - Lincoln visited by, 426; - reception at Richmond, 427; - the problem confronting, 428 - - Placquemines, voting in parish of, 56; - vote of, 74 - - Poland, similarity of ideas lacking in, 237 - - Polk, President James K., message of, 13 - - Pollard, E. A., quotation from “Lost Cause” of, 400 - - Pool, John, election of, 457 - - Pomeroy, Samuel C., on electoral vote of Louisiana, 330; - amendment offered by, 337; - remarks on reconstruction by, 376; - extent of Congressional power over reconstruction stated by, 377 - - Port Hudson, General Banks at, 49; - fall of, 49 - - Portsmouth, Va., Union vote in, 132; - destitution in, 133 - - Powell, Lazarus W., remarks on Louisiana, 331; - recognition of Louisiana opposed by, 344; - General Banks denounced by, 346; - proclamation of Banks quoted by, 347; - remarks on Trumbull’s resolution by, 373 - - Property, Federal, seizure of, in Baton Rouge, 36 - - - _R_ - - Raleigh, convention assembles at, 453 - - Raymond, Lincoln’s letter to, 163 - - Reade, Edwin G., North Carolina convention presided over by, 453; - farewell address of, 455 - - Reconstruction, in Tennessee, 1; - Lincoln’s proclamation of, 23; - in Louisiana, 36, 44, 61; - loyal minority authorized to restore States, 25; - Lincoln’s plan not indispensable to, 26; - interrupted in Louisiana, 49; - Lincoln’s letter relative to, 51; - President urges in Louisiana, 52; - Banks’s plan of, 66; - proposed for Arkansas, 85; - Lincoln’s letters on, 89; - in Louisiana connected with war powers of President, 36; - emancipation introduced into, 189; - theories and plans of, 190; - central idea of Lincoln’s plan, 190; - both parties agree on Presidential plan, 193; - great number of theories and plans of, 193; - difficulties of, increased by abolition, 194; - Lincoln propounded only one plan of, 194; - “Louisiana plan” and negro suffrage, 195; - sensation caused by Sumner’s scheme of, 198; - final work of, influenced by Sumner’s resolutions, 199; - Stevens’s theory of, 211; - first act of, a modification of Stevens’s theory, 212; - theory held at commencement of rebellion, 213; - Democratic theory of, 217; - Edgerton’s speech on, 219; - attitude of Democratic party toward, 220; - conservative views of Senators on, 220; - House of Representatives on, 220; - resolution of Thaddeus Stevens concerning, 224; - resolution of Henry Winter Davis, 225; - address of Mr. Davis, 226; - of Southern States premature, 230; - President’s plan criticised by Mr. Davis, 232; - address of Representative Scofield on, 236; - address of Representative Williams on, 238; - indemnity, security and punishment, elements of, 240; - bill opposed by Mr. Baldwin, 241; - address of Representative Thayer on, 242; - remarks of Representative Yeaman on, 243; - address of Representative Longyear on, 244; - speech of Ignatius Donnelly on, 245; - speech of Representative Dennison, 247; - remarks of Thaddeus Stevens on, 247; - bill opposed by Representative Strouse, 249; - opposition of Mr. Cravens, 249; - Representative Gooch on, 250; - Representative Perry’s remarks on, 250; - Fernando Wood’s opposition to bill for, 251; - remarks of William D. Kelley on, 252; - speech of S. S. Cox on, 252; - Mr. Boutwell’s speech on, 254; - speech of George H. Pendleton, 257; - bill for, unconstitutional, 258; - Representatives pass bill on, 262; - provisions of bill on, 262; - Senator Wade on, 264; - Senator Carlile’s speech on, 267; - Congress passes bill on, 273; - Lincoln’s treatment of bill on, 273; - interest of Mr. Chandler in bill on, 274; - Lincoln’s proclamation concerning bill on, 277; - notice of in annual message, 286; - progress of, 287; - forced upon attention of Congress by Union victories, 288; - Mr. Ashley reports bill on, 289; - Representative Eliot offers amendment to bill on, 289; - provisions of Ashley’s bill, 289; - revived bill recognizes Louisiana and Arkansas, 289; - new bill a substitute for Wade-Davis bill, 290; - Kelley’s speech on, 291; - Eliot’s speech on, 292; - consideration of bill postponed, 295; - Mr. Dawes resumes debate on, 295; - power conferred on President by bill, 296; - remarks of Fernando Wood on, 300; - speech of Mr. LeBlond on, 300; - remarks of Representative Blow, 301; - speech of J. K. Edgerton, 301; - Edgerton’s summary of bill, 302; - substitute for Ashley’s bill, 304; - further remarks of Ashley on, 305; - Ashley explains compromise, 306; - Henry Winter Davis speaks on, 306; - Mr. Davis’s last words in Congress on, 310; - Mr. Wilson’s bill, 311; - revival of Ashley’s bill on, 312; - defects of Presidential plan of, 358; - Howard’s speech on, 358; - Reverdy Johnson’s remarks on, 370; - Sumner proposes conditions of, 376; - remarks of Senator Clark, 376; - remarks of Senator Pomeroy, 377, 378; - Presidential plan of, ignored by Congress, 385; - Lincoln’s conditions for effecting, 395, 397; - Lincoln’s letter to General Hurlbut on, 401; - Lincoln’s letter to General Canby, 402; - Lincoln’s last words on, 403; - culmination of Presidential plan of, 407; - President Johnson’s policy of, endorsed by Democratic convention, - 420; - views of Louisiana Republicans on, 422; - Andrew Johnson’s views of, in 1864, 438; - Johnson under no obligation to accept Lincoln’s plan of, 447; - Mr. Johnson’s policy of, 449; - steps to, in Mississippi, 458; - obstacles to, in Texas, 467; - conventions called under Presidential plan, 468; - course of Confederate governors relative to, 469; - Lincoln’s intention to employ Confederate legislatures in work of, - 470; - expected results of, 473; - prediction of Henry Winter Davis relative to, 473; - enemies of Union entrusted with, 486; - Lincoln opposed a loose system of, 486; - Lincoln’s and Johnson’s theories identical, 487; - organizations effected under Lincoln different from “Johnson - governments,” 487; - Johnson’s original policy of, 488; - acts of Congress suspend governments established under Presidential - plan, 489; - Joint Committee on, 490; - Presidential plan examined, 491; - the suffrage in the Presidential system of, 494; - precedent conditions for returning States, 494; - Senator Henderson’s letter on Lincoln’s plan, 495 - - Rector, Governor, call for troops, 81; - threat of seceding from Confederacy, 82; - flight of, 82 - - Red River, General Taylor retires to, 50 - - Republican electoral ticket, none offered for suffrage of Tennesseeans - in 1860, 7 - - Republican form of government, Sumner’s resolutions relative to, 196; - position that war was fought to fulfil guaranty of, untenable, 209; - Henry Winter Davis on, 228; - duty of Congress to guarantee, 228; - Mr. Davis on modes of establishing, 232; - Fernando Wood on, 251; - - Pendleton on, 259, 260, 261; - Carlile on, 268, 269; - cannot originate in military orders, 357; - military government not republican under the Constitution, 368 - - Republican party, radical members of, unite with Free State leaders, - 74; - Sumner’s resolutions disavowed by leaders of, 199; - relations of Stevens to, 216; - change in attitude of, 220; - revolutionary policy of, 257; - beginning of division in, 273; - some radical members of, opposed controversy with President, 289; - schism in, 313; - change in sentiments of, 377; - Hendricks on factiousness of, 380; - mass-meeting in New Orleans held by radical members of, 422 - - Representation, basis of, 354 - - Representatives, House of, committee on compensated emancipation - appointed by, 168; - reconstruction views of, 220; - reconstruction bill passed by, 262; - Ashley’s reconstruction bill tabled by, 311, 312; - resolution of Mr. Wilson introduced into, 314; - measure excluding electoral votes of certain States passed by, 314; - constitutional amendment abolishing slavery passed by, 384 - - Revenue, surplus of 1837, distribution of, 157 - - Revolution, American, legal forms not ignored in effecting, 206 - - Revolution, English, 202 - - Reynolds, General, report on government of Arkansas, 412 - - Rhode Island cases, 228 - - Richmond, Arkansas messenger sent to, 80; - secession convention meets in, 93; - work of convention denounced, 100; - fall of, 426 - - Richmond government, offers concessions to western Virginia, 97; - resistance to, 97 - - Riddell, John Leonard, certificate from, 56 - - Riley, General Bennett, 13 - - Ritchie, A. F., letter to Attorney-General Bates, 105 - - Rogers, A. A. C., Congressman-elect, 91; - proposed compensation of, 342 - - Rosecrans, General W. S., inactivity of, 21; - suggestion to Lincoln, 23; - removed from command, 23, 224 - - Ryers, William, election of, 412 - - - _S_ - - Saulsbury, Willard, 103; - on admission of Mr. Segar, 139; - admission of West Virginia Senators opposed by, 193; - Administration criticised by, 377 - - Schenck, General, 251 - - Schofield, General, Governor Holden assisted by, 453 - - Schurz, General Carl, Governor Sharkey criticised by, 462 - - Scofield, Glenni W., address of, 236 - - Sebastian, William K., resignation from United States Senate, 85; - return to loyalty, 85 - - Secession, in Tennessee, 8; - Tennessee abrogates act of, 30; - spirit of, in Louisiana, 36; - ordinance of, 36; - in Arkansas, 78; - Germans and Irish of Arkansas indifferent to, 80; - in Virginia, 93; - western Virginia refuses to acquiesce in, 97; - war powers unlocked by, 213; - attitude of Democratic party toward, 218; - Henry Winter Davis on, 227; - Pendleton on acts of, 259; - Henderson on potency of, 351; - Sumner denies that States were taken out of Union by, 351 - - Secessionists, in Arkansas, 77 - - Segar, Joseph E., on admission of West Virginia, 118; - remarks of, 131; - Committee of Elections reports concerning, 131; - denied admission to Congress, 133; - election to United States Senate, 138 - - Senate, The United States, reconstruction bill in, 264; - exclusion of States from Electoral College, 315; - Trumbull’s resolution abandoned by, 383; - amendment abolishing slavery passed by, 384 - - Seward, William H., on admission of West Virginia, 120; - General McClellan instructed by, 152; - Lincoln broaches emancipation to, 178; - postponement of emancipation recommended by, 182; - Lincoln’s letter to, 395; - injuries prevented attendance at inauguration of Mr. Johnson, 408; - message to Governor Marvin, 488; - President Johnson influenced by, 489 - - Sharkey, William L., appointment of, 459; - address of, 460; - Johnson’s telegram to, 461; - conduct of, criticised by Carl Schurz, 462; - negro testimony to be considered by, 464 - - Shelbyville, Tenn., Andrew Johnson’s address at, 19 - - Shenandoah Valley, discontent of, 96; - proposed annexation to West Virginia, 109 - - Shepley, General George F., appointment of, 39; - system of courts established by, 41; - Lincoln’s letter to, 44; - requested to hold an election, 45; - proclamation for an election issued by, 45; - plan of Louisiana Free State Committee approved by, 48; - Attorney-General for Louisiana appointed by, 48; - orders an enrollment of loyal citizens, 53; - election prohibited by, 56, 58; - conference of Free State Committee with, 63; - disagreement with General Banks, 64, 65; - General Banks approves registration of, 68; - Norfolk proclamation of, 134 - - Sheridan, General Philip H., at Mission Ridge and Lookout Mountain, 23; - a Confederate army destroyed by, 288 - - Sherman, John, on election of Mr. Segar, 140; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 332 - - Sherman, General Thomas W., instructions of War Department to, 149 - - Sherman, General William Tecumseh, projected march of, 286; - safety of, 288 - - Shreveport, movement toward, 51; - ceases to be capital of Louisiana, 419 - - Slavery, abolition of, in British colonies, 6; - to be ignored in reconstruction, 27; - Nashville convention urges abolition of, 29; - amended Tennessee constitution abolishes, 30; - constitution of Arkansas abolishes, 88; - introduction into Virginia, 94; - in the Wheeling convention, 107; - Lincoln’s views of, 143; - Congress claims no right to interfere with, 167; - advance of Northern opinion on, 167; - abolished in District of Columbia, 167; - not possible for negroes freed by war, 194; - reconstruction rendered more difficult by abolition of, 194; - ceases to exist when State ceases to exist, 197; - duty of Congress to put an end to, 197; - recognition of, by a Federal officer analogous to treason, 197; - government should protect persons in a state of, 198; - Chicago platform on, 207; - Emancipation Proclamation not necessary to abolish in seceding - States, 207; - destruction of, not an end of the war, 222; - the one subject of estrangement in the Union, 237; - theory of the Fathers concerning, 237; - anti-slavery amendment recommended to consideration of Congress, 287; - Congress passes joint resolution relative to, 288; - restoration useless with, 352; - sentiments of Massachusetts and South Carolina on, 375; - not affected by emancipation proclamation in certain States, 384; - Congress passes anti-slavery amendment, 384; - amendment ratified by 20 States, 384; - Arkansas abolishes, 410; - Virginia abolishes, 425; - abolition an injury to slave owners, 433; - North Carolina abolishes, 454; - Mississippi abolishes, 460; - Georgia abolishes, 466 - - Slaves, bred in Virginia, 94; - number in Virginia, 94; - in western Virginia, 95; - policy of commanders relative to fugitive, 144, 145, 158, 159; - declared contraband of war, 146; - compensated emancipation of, 153; - colonization of, 153; - abandoned by masters, 160; - to organize labor of abandoned, 160; - General Hunter proclaims freedom of, 168; - Lincoln asserts right to emancipate, 168; - employment of, 169; - confiscation of property in, 179; - proposed emancipation of, 182; - Stevens on employment of, against United States, 212; - abandoned lands to be colonized by, 385 - - Slidell, John, resignation from United States Senate, 423 - - Slocum, General, organization of Mississippi retarded by, 462; - orders of, revoked by President, 463 - - Smith, Caleb B., resignation of, 119 - - Smith, Charles, Senator-elect from Louisiana, 76, 343 - - Smith, General E. Kirby, 50 - - Smith, Governor William, nullity of acts of, 445 - - Snow, William D., election of, 91 - - Society, civil not necessarily identical with political, 354; - political liable to reduction, 354; - political may be reduced by loss of citizenship, 354 - - South Carolina, martial law proclaimed over, 168; - Stevens on secession ordinance of, 215; - Boutwell would exclude from restored Union, 256; - insurrection in, 314; - sentiments on slavery, 375; - damage sustained by, 435; - Mr. Johnson receives citizens of, 443; - revolutionary character of convention, 469 - - Southern States, reorganization of, premature, 230; - black code of, 293; - an asylum for broken-down politicians, 297; - proposed taxation of, 297; - power of Congress over, 362; - not convertible into Territories, 364. - See Confederate States - - Speed, Attorney-General, reply to Albemarle County voters, 430 - - Sprague, William, remarks on Louisiana election, 381 - - Stanton, Edwin M., aids western Virginians, 98; - on admission of West Virginia, 122; - disbanding of army by, 409 - - State, indestructibility of, 192; - suicide of a, 197, 201, 209; - effect of termination of, 197; - slavery terminated by termination of, 197; - Federal restraints upon action of a, 198; - difficulty of defining, 201; - basis of suicide theory, 208; - levying war changes status of, 217; - the people of, constitute the, 218; - constitutions must be formed by people of, 218; - only successful revolution can unmake, 218; - attitude of Democratic party on suicide of, 219 - - St. Bernard, parish of, voting in, 56 - - Steele, General Frederick, Lincoln’s letters to, 85, 86, 89 - - Stephens, A. H., peace commissioner, 395; - Lincoln’s advice to, 399 - - Stevens, Thaddeus, on admission of West Virginia, 117, 214; - reconstruction theory of, 211; - characteristics of, 211; - consistency of, 212; - remarks on slaves employed in hostility to Government, 212; - taxation of seceding States proposed by, 213; - secession discussed by, 215; - relations to his party defined by, 216; - conquered province theory of, 217; - remarks on minority government, 217; - resolution relative to President’s message, 224; - on constitutional amendments, 232; - reconstruction speech of, 247; - distributing President’s message, 288; - Mr. Eliot interrupted by, 294; - remarks of, 342; - credentials of Warmoth offered by, 422; - sneer at Pierpont’s government, 427 - - Stokes, William B., election of, 415 - - Strouse, Myer, reconstruction speech of, 249 - - Suffrage, Representative Kelley on, 291; - provisions of Ashley’s bill on, 294, 304; - a restricted electorate favored by Government, 354; - basis of, 354; - qualifications for, in Massachusetts, 354; - proposal to confer on negroes, 358; - Reverdy Johnson on, 378; - negroes petition for, 413; - Brownlow opposes conferring on negroes, 416; - National Conservative party on, 421; - provision of Virginia constitution on, 425; - North did not intend to force on South, 486 - - Sumner, Charles, on admission of West Virginia, 110; - letter on policy of Lincoln, 170; - faith of, 191; - resolutions of, 196; - sensation produced by restoration scheme of, 198; - letters to Francis Lieber, 199, 289; - public character of, 199; - letters to John Bright, 200, 290; - article in Atlantic Monthly, 200; - Mr. Blair replies to, 208; - preamble to resolutions of, 210; - proposal relative to emancipation proclamation, 272; - estimate of Lincoln, 275; - substitute offered by, 344; - amendment offered by, 356; - Reverdy Johnson’s argument with, 374; - inconsistency of, 375; - conditions of reunion proposed by, 376; - remarks on Trumbull’s resolution, 379, 382; - Howard and Chandler support position of, 380; - remarks on Louisiana election, 382 - - Sumter, influence of fall, on Arkansas, 78 - - Supreme Court, The United States, opinion in Cross _vs._ Harrison, 13; - decision relative to rebellious States, 362 - - - _T_ - - Taliaferro, Robert W., seat in Congress claimed by, 341 - - Taney, Roger B., Chief Justice, quoted by Mr. Davis, 228 - - Tarr, Campbell, 98, 128 - - Taylor, Nathaniel, attitude of loyal Tennesseeans defined by, 7; - election of, 415 - - Taylor, General Richard, 37, 49, 50 - - Ten Eyck, John C., reconstruction bill opposed by, 273; - amendment offered by, 315; - remarks in support of amendment, 318; - defeat of amendment offered by, 334 - - Tennessee, Presidential reconstruction in, 1; - no Republican electoral ticket in, 7; - league with Confederacy authorized by, 8; - turns military force over to the Confederacy, 8; - secession of, 8; - activity of loyalists in, 9; - proposed dismemberment of, 9; - Confederates losing hold of, 10; - derangement of government in, 10; - Legislature assembles at Memphis, 15; - Andrew Johnson appointed military governor of, 15; - condition in the Union, 16; - judges imprisoned, 18; - reprisals on secessionists, 18; - lawlessness of, 18; - citizens in Union army, 20; - included in department of General Halleck, 20; - ready for restoration, 21; - free from armed insurrectionists, 22; - emancipation in, 22; - excluded from effects of emancipation proclamation, 22, 384; - enrolling agent sent to, 27; - county elections in, 27; - returns, 28; - reconstruction in, 29; - Presidential election in, 29, 195; - amended constitution of, 30; - abrogates act of secession, 30; - bonds of disloyal government, 30; - constitution ratified by, 31; - slaves emancipated in, 31; - meeting of loyal Legislature, 31; - McClellan electors, 35; - electoral vote of, 35, 76, 129; - Lincoln maintains legality of government in, 195; - Mr. Davis on Unionists of, 230; - insurrection in, 314; - electoral vote of, 334; - exclusion of electoral votes, 338; - Cowan’s inquiry concerning vote of, 338; - Thirteenth Amendment ratified by, 412; - United States Senators chosen by, 413; - disfranchising act of, 413; - irregularities in election, 414; - negroes and Indians made witnesses, 415; - harshness to traitors favored by, 414; - franchise demanded by freedmen of, 415; - ravages of war in, 417; - insurrection ended in, 444; - Joint Committee recommend admission of, 490 - - Tennessee, Bank of, notes of, irredeemable, 30 - - Tennessee, East, slavery in, 3; - loyalty of, 3; - services in Revolution, 4; - resources of, 4; - anti-slavery journals in, 5; - abolition movement in, 5; - a thoroughfare to the south-west, 6; - Yancey agitates in, 7; - treatment of loyalists in, 9; - importance of, 21; - convention of, revived, 29 - - Tennessee, West, politics influenced by industries of, 4; - martial law in, 15 - - Texas, expedition into, 50, 51; - insurrection in, 314; - damages sustained by, 437; - blockade of, 444; - appointment of Provisional Governor for, 467; - obstacles to restoration in, 467; - negro population of, 467; - reconstruction incomplete, 467; - not represented at opening of Thirty-ninth Congress, 490 - - Thayer, General, 89 - - Thayer, M. Russell, reconstruction address of, 242 - - Thomas, Dorsey B., counted out, 415 - - Thomas, General George, at Mission Ridge and Lookout Mountain, 23; - a Confederate army crippled by, 288 - - Thompson, Jacob, Mr. Black’s visit to, 390 - - Thompson, General Jefferson, 245 - - Treat, Hon. Samuel, excerpt from letter of, 354 - - Tribune, The New York, emancipation favored by, 164; - protest of Wade and Davis printed in, 279 - - Trumbull, Lyman, on admission of Mr. Segar, 139; - remarks on Crittenden resolution, 221; - reconstruction bill opposed by, 273; - speech on Ten Eyck’s amendment, 316; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 321, 327; - resolution offered by, 343; - Sumner’s offer to amend resolution of, 356; - Howard’s speech on resolution of, 358; - Wade moves postponement of resolution, 378; - Powell’s speech on resolution of, 378; - consistency of, 380; - resolution recognizing Louisiana abandoned, 383 - - Tyng, Rev. Doctor, 151 - - - _U_ - - Underwood, John C., Senator-elect from Virginia, 141 - - Union, dismemberment of, 1; - admission of new States into, 207 - - Union army, Arkansas troops in, 83; - troops of restored Virginia in, 109 - - Union associations, demand an election in Louisiana, 45; - delegates appointed by, 47 - - Unionists, importance of Southern, 3; - in Louisiana, 37, 38, 47; - Lincoln’s advice to, 38; - numbers in Arkansas, 77; - loyalty in Arkansas, 88; - conflicting views of, 88; - difficulty of enlisting in Virginia, 133; - oath of allegiance taken by, in North Carolina, 150; - Henry Winter Davis on Southern, 231 - - Union party, vote of, in West Virginia, 129 - - United States, The, policy toward conquered provinces, 12; - Tennessee promised republican form of government by, 16; - oath of allegiance required of Louisiana voters, 45; - policy toward loyal minorities, 105, 349; - policy toward South after rebellion, 190; - number of States not diminished by secession, 192; - republican governments obligatory on members of, 208; - duty of each to be represented in Congress, 208; - union of, perpetual, 218, 219; - Chase’s dictum concerning nature of, 219; - Government not to interfere in affairs of States, 220; - authorized to impose conditions on returning States, 366; - demand for revenue felt by, 409; - disloyal governments not recognized by, 409 - - Universal Emancipation, The Genius of, 5 - - Upshur County, emancipation favored by citizens of, 108 - - - _V_ - - Van Winkle, P. G., election of, 128 - - Vicksburg, surrender of, 49 - - Virginia, rebel government abrogated in, 10; - loyalists without civil government, 93; - secession of, 93; - opposition to secession in, 94; - physical features of, 94; - slavery introduced into, 94; - slaves in, 94; - historical part of, 94; - birthplace of many illustrious Americans, 94; - settlement of trans-Alleghany region, 95; - population of western, 95; - sympathy of people in western, 95; - representation in Legislature, 96; - taxation in, 96; - power in hands of slaveholders, 96; - dismemberment of, discussed, 96; - danger of insurrection in, 96; - change of representation in, 96; - expenditure of revenue, 96; - concessions to western, 97; - western refuses to acquiesce in secession, 97; - the disloyal in, 97; - State officials favor secession, 97; - Federal Government aids western, 98; - ravages of war in western, 98; - movement for dismemberment, 98; - secession denounced by Clarksburgh meeting, 99; - State government reconstituted, 100; - Legislature of restored government, 102; - election of United States Senators, 102; - State of Kanawha to be erected in, 105; - dismemberment ratified, 107; - convention of, 107; - Legislature meets, 109; - Legislature consents to formation of new State, 110; - Assembly consents to transfer of Berkeley County, 126; - act annexing counties to West Virginia, 127; - transfer of Berkeley and Jefferson counties, 127; - opposition to transfer, 127; - removal of capital, 129; - Legislature passes convention bill, 130; - who were voters in, 130; - amended constitution of, 130; - civil in conflict with military authorities, 134; - Legislature meets, 137; - attitude of Congress and army toward, 138; - feebleness of restored government, 138; - admission of Senators from, 141; - disloyal government discusses emancipation, 162; - United States should protect loyalists of, 191; - electoral vote from restored government, 314; - slavery in parts of, excepted from emancipation proclamation, 384; - division permanent, 399; - constitution of 1864, 425; - suffrage in, 425; - slavery abolished in, 425; - prohibitions on Legislature, 425; - President Johnson recognizes government of Pierpont, 427, 445; - ravages of war in, 427; - steps to restoration of, 428; - election in, 431; - acts of secession authorities void, 445; - acts of Congress to be enforced in, 446; - Alexandria ceases to be capital of, 446 - - - _W_ - - Wade, Benjamin F., bill for admission of West Virginia reported by, - 110; - remarks on admission of West Virginia, 111; - reconstruction bill reported by, 264; - address of, 264; - protest of, with Henry Winter Davis, 279; - character of, 283; - on electoral vote of Louisiana, 333; - remonstrance offered by, 343; - postponement of Trumbull’s resolution moved by, 378; - motion to postpone, defeated, 379; - Louisiana election criticised by, 381 - - Wade-Davis bill, House of Representatives passes, 262; - Senate passes, 273; - President’s action on, 273; - President’s proclamation concerning, 277; - revival of, 290; - no provision for negro suffrage in, 494 - - War, expenses of, 161; - condition of cessation of, 161, 397; - obligations between States abrogated by, 214; - Crittenden resolution on objects of, 221; - objects of, 364; - vindictiveness engendered by, 393 - - Ward, Artemus, 186 - - War Department, application of part of contingent fund of, 43 - - Warmoth, Henry C., election of, 422; - elements of political strength possessed by, 423 - - Washburne, Elihu B., remarks of, 342 - - Webster, Daniel, prediction of, 126 - - Welles, Gideon, on admission of West Virginia, 122; - Lincoln broaches emancipation to, 178; - quotation from diary of, 178; - narrative of, 188 - - Wells, J. Madison, proclamation of, 418; - General Banks not in harmony with, 418; - address of, 419; - qualifications of voters defined by, 420 - - Wells, T. M., seat in Congress claimed by, 341 - - Wellsburgh, meeting at, 97; - appointment of commissioners by, 98; - arms and ammunition stored at, 98 - - West Virginia, Congress admits Senators from, 104, 193; - prosecution of war favored by, 104; - stay law passed by, 104; - of revolutionary origin, 105; - convention for, 107; - slavery in, 107; - vote on constitution, 109; - vote on emancipation, 110; - Senate bill for admission of, 110; - allotment of Representatives to, 110; - Sumner on admission of, 110; - proposal to prohibit slavery in, 111; - Senate on admission of, 110; - Senate passes bill to admit, 113; - House bill for admission of, 113; - House on admission of, 113; - House passes bill for admission, 119; - Lincoln approves bill for admission of, 125; - constitutional amendment, 125; - convention approves constitution, 126; - constitution ratified by voters, 126; - becomes a State, 126; - Berkeley County transferred to, 126; - proposal to annex counties to, 127; - election in, 128; - inauguration of, 128; - United States Senators chosen by, 128; - opposition to admission of Senators from, 128; - Democrats alienated by President’s recognition of, 193; - Stevens finds no warrant in constitution for admission of, 214; - strong enough to maintain a loyal government, 230 - - Wheeling, delegate convention at, 99; - resolutions adopted by convention of, 100; - adjournment of convention, 101; - convention reassembles at, 104 - - Whiskey Insurrection, effects on status of Pennsylvania, 335 - - White, R. T. J., 88 - - Whittaker, John S., 41 - - Wickliffe, Charles A., Lincoln interviewed by, 165 - - Willey, Waitman T., election of, 103, 128; - admitted to seat, 104; - on admission of West Virginia, 112; - remarks on credentials of Mr. Segar, 138, 140 - - Williams, General, treatment of fugitive slaves by, 159 - - Williams, Thomas, reconstruction address of, 238 - - Wilson, Henry, on recognition of restored Virginia, 140 - - Wilson, James F., previous question on Ashley’s bill demanded by, 295; - reconstruction bill introduced by, 311; - joint resolution introduced by, 314 - - Wisconsin, electoral vote of, 316 - - Wood, Fernando, reconstruction bill opposed by, 251; - remarks on Ashley’s bill, 300; - remarks on Wilson’s bill, 312 - - - _Y_ - - Yancey, William L., 7 - - Yeaman, George H., reconstruction address of, 243 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES - - - 1. Silently corrected typographical errors. - 2. Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed. - 3. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_. - 4. Enclosed smallcaps font in =EQUALS=. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction, by -Charles H. McCarthy - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LINCOLN'S PLAN OF RECONSTRUCTION *** - -***** This file should be named 56039-0.txt or 56039-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/6/0/3/56039/ - -Produced by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |