310 



CONGRESS, TJ. S. 



such rights. It was argned that the power to 

 take life without due process of law, and with- 

 out trial by jury, was implied because we could 

 take life by court-martial bring a man to the 

 drum-head, condemn him to death, and exe- 

 cute him. It was argued that the power ' to 

 make rules concerning captures on land and 

 water' implies the power to take the property 

 of citizens without making compensation there- 

 for, and without due process of law. "With 

 fervid declamation and with an utterance 

 thickened by intense feeling, the gentleman 

 rushed into these extremes, and pointed out 

 what he would do under these supposed powers 

 to my constituents as well as the constituents 

 of other gentlemen upon this floor. Now, sir, 

 I do not give in to any such interpretation of 

 the Constitution as that. Not one dollar will 

 I vote, not one man will I grant for any such 

 purpose, or to sustain any such interpretation. 

 Nay, more, sir, I will give all that my people 

 have, their cattle on a thousand hills, their 

 slaves, their lands and tenements, their lives, 

 even to the last one of them, to resist any at- 

 tempt to enforce such a construction of the 

 Constitution as that to the ruin of the people 

 of this country. 



" And, sir, I am not one of those who prefer 

 slavery to the integrity and glory and perpetuity 

 of my country. I prefer its renown and its in- 

 tegrity above all property and to my own poor 

 life, and have proven it. All that my people 

 have they are willing to give for the defence 

 of the Constitution and the Union. The glory 

 and renown and preservation of their country 

 is higher than any other earthly consideration. 

 Kentucky has gone into this war to extinguish 

 rebellion by the sword, and she never will lay 

 down that sword while the war is waged in the 

 spirit of the Constitution till that great purpose 

 has been accomplished, and the audacious men 

 who have precipitated this ruin upon the coun- 

 try the leaders and controllers in the council 

 and in the field have been brought to the 

 halter. 



" Is it necessary that I should attempt to 

 answer a constitutionl argument, such as that 

 to which I have referred that Congress has 

 power for the common defence to do anything 

 that can be done that is not forbidden by nat- 

 ural rights? No, sir. I maintain that the 

 Federal Government is not sovereign. I de- 

 clare that sovereignty does not reside in the 

 States, and that there is no such thing as sov- 

 ereignty in this country except the sovereignty 

 of the mass. The Federal Government itself is 

 not sovereign, but limited in many and im- 

 portant particulars. The State Governments 

 are not sovereign. The Federal Government 

 can do nothing that is not permitted to it in 

 that instrument which brought it into being, 

 and upon the preservation of which its exist- 

 ence depends. Yet it is argued that all which 

 is not forbidden by natural right may be done 

 for the common defence. That to preserve the 

 nation we may break open the temple of the 



Constitution, and steal thence ' the life o' the 

 building.' Sir, it is not contrary to natural 

 right to establish a monarchy in this country ; 

 it is not contrary to natural right to pass ex post 

 facto laws ; it is not contrary to natural right 

 to unite Church and State ; it is not contrary 

 to natural right to found orders of nobility ; 

 and yet can all these monstrous things be done 

 to provide for the general welfare and the 

 common defence, whether you base the argu- 

 ment upon the preamble of the Constitution or 

 upon the eighth section of article one to 

 which, I suppose, the gentleman refers which 

 declares that ' the Congress shall have the power 

 to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and 

 excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the 

 common defence and general welfare of the 

 United States ? ' Can it be contended for a 

 moment that such vast and illimitable powers 

 belong to Congress ? No, sir ; Congress can 

 provide for the common defence only in the 

 manner that the Constitution points out, and 

 by the exercise of the powers granted by that 

 instrument. Congress can exercise all those 

 great powers which are conferred upon it by 

 this Constitution for the common defence ; it 

 cannot exercise one solitary power not granted 

 by this instrument, or necessarily inferable from 

 its language. It overthrows our whole theory 

 of government to say that Congress can ex- 

 ercise any power not expressly granted by the 

 Constitution or necessarily implied from the 

 language of that instrument ; all other powers 

 are unnecessary, so determined by that great 

 "work. 



" There are two dangers which threaten the 

 Union. One is a foreign war ; and the other, 

 dissension among the friends of the Union. 

 "We might outlive the storm of foreign war. 



" But, sir, dissension among the friends of the 

 Union would have a far wider result. From 

 the passage of an act of emancipation, the lines 

 of the rebellion would advance ; it would re- 

 ceive a fresh impulse ; its original pretence 

 would be justified as truth. Some of you pro- 

 pose to emancipate the slaves of loyal masters 

 as well as those of rebel masters. Some of the 

 gentlemen say the loyal man has no more right 

 to hold slaves than the rebel ; and with their 

 view of the. institution, they are right ; of 

 course, if slavery is a sin, no man has a moral 

 right to hold slaves. A virtuous man should 

 not commit sin. Then, I say the first attempt 

 to emancipate slaves will necessarily result in 

 the enlargement of the boundaries of the re- 

 bellion. Millions in the revolted States, now 

 faithful, awaiting in silence and grief the com- 

 ing of the banner of their country, with one 

 heart would join the foe. That instant the 

 people of Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland 

 would resist the execution of such an act ; that 

 instant the loyal men of these States, with 

 many of the men from the free States in arms 

 for the maintenance of the Union, but who 

 have not gone into the war for the purpose of 

 freeing slaves, or to accomplish the Africruiiza- 



