354 



CONGKESS, U. S. 



lute powers of war the civil functions of the 

 Government are, for the time being, in abey- 

 ance when in conflict, and all State and nation- 

 al authority subordinated to the extreme au- 

 thority of Congress, as the supreme power, in 

 the peril of external or internal hostilities. 

 The ordinary provisions of the Constitution, pe- 

 culiar to a state of peace, and all laws and mu- 

 nicipal regulations must yield to the force of 

 martial law, as resolved by Congress." _ 



Mr. Browning, of Illinois, followed in oppo- 

 sition to the bill, the object of which he 

 thought could be easily accomplished under the 

 " war powers " of the Government. He said : 

 " This bill has no reference whatever to cap- 

 tured property, but to that which neither has 

 been nor is expected to be captured. Nor is it 

 restricted to property which, by its character 

 and uses, is adapted to aid the rebellion, but 

 strikes at all the property of every kind and 

 character of all the citizens of the seceded States 

 with scarcely an exception. It sweeps away 

 everything, even the most ordinary comforts 

 and necessaries of domestic life, and reduces all 

 to absolute poverty and nakedness. It leaves 

 them the ownership of nothing, and when exe- 

 cuted will leave them the possession and enjoy- 

 ment of nothing. If the bill is constitutional, 

 the instant it passes millions of people in the 

 private walks of life will be stripped of the 

 ownership of everything, and, the moment the 

 strong arm of power can reach them to execute 

 the law, will also be stripped of the possession 

 of everything. They may repent of their past 

 rebellion and return to their allegiance the next 

 day or the next month, but they return bank- 

 rupts and beggars, with nothing on earth to 

 make government desirable. 



" But if this bill passes, would they return? 

 "What possible inducement would they have to 

 do so ? "What could they hope or expect from 

 a Government which had shown itself so stern 

 and remorseless in the execution of vengeance, 

 not upon the guilty few, whose vaulting am- 

 bition conceived the treason and hatched the 

 rebellion, but upon the deluded masses,, who 

 are fitter subjects of commiseration than of ven- 

 geance ? The sure and certain effect of this bill 

 would be to make peace and reunion an im- 

 possible thing. It would fill the hearts of the 

 entire people with despair, and nerve their 

 arms with the energy and desperation which 

 despair inspires. It would turn to the black- 

 ness of night the last glimmering hope of 

 future fraternity between now alienated and 

 exasperated brethren. 



" A simple statement of the case will, I think, 

 demonstrate our want of power to legislate as 

 proposed. If we recognize the existing state 

 of things as war, then we must also recognize 

 the rebels as public enemies, and deal with 

 them according to the rules of war established 

 by the law of nations, which we cannot change. 

 "We must deal with them precisely as we would 

 deal with a foreign nation with which we were 

 at war. And if at war with a foreign nation, 



the law of nations would forbid us to pass a 

 law to confiscate the property of the private 

 citizens of that nation, or even to plunder them 

 when our victorious army had invaded their 

 country. I think it will not be contended that 

 we could do either. Our Constitution, I con- 

 cede, would not restrain us. We would be re- 

 strained by the law of nations. We could con- 

 fiscate all the property which we captured dur- 

 ing the progress of the war; but we would do 

 it under the war power, and not by legislation. 



" If we do not recognize the rebellion as war 

 and the rebels as public enemies, but as insurgent 

 citizens only, and deal with them and treat them 

 as citizens, then we cannot pass the law pro- 

 posed, because the Constitution forbids the en- 

 actment of bills of attainder, and this is, in the 

 meaning of the Constitution, a bill of attain- 

 der. 



" When our arms have triumphed and the 

 rebellion is suppressed and the rebels reduced 

 to obedience, the Government will be restored 

 to its authority over them as citizens, and may 

 pass laws of amnesty, embracing all or any part 

 of them, or elect to treat them as traitors, and 

 indict, convict, and punish them for treason. 

 But this must be done in accordance with con- 

 stitutional provisions aud guarantees, and with- 

 in constitutional limitations ; and we could not 

 even then, in the case of a convicted traitor, 

 confiscate to the extent proposed by this bill. 



"Thus, Mr. President, whether we regard 

 the rebels as public enemies with whom we are 

 at war, or only as insurgent citizens, we are, 

 in either case, without power to pass the bill 

 under consideration. But in renouncing this 

 power of legislation we renounce no power 

 necessary to the defence of the Government 

 and the maintenance of its authority the sup- 

 pression of the rebellion and the condign pun- 

 ishment of the traitors. The powers of the 

 Government for these purposes are ample and 

 plenary. But they are war powers, and not 

 powers of legislation. The inexpediency of this 

 bill is as manifest as its unconstitutionality. 

 Let it pass, and its provisions be heralded in 

 advance of the army as it marches south, and 

 what other effect can it have than to consoli- 

 date the entire people for one last despairing 

 struggle against those whom they might then 

 justly regard as enemies and oppressors instead 

 of friends and benefactors ? What possible in- 

 ducement could they have to prefer submission 

 to death ? For one, I do not wish to waste the 

 fortunes and devastate the homes of all. Leave 

 something to make the guardianship of Gov- 

 ernment and the protection of law desirable. 

 Surely it is most desirable, if we can, to win 

 back our erring brethren to their allegiance to 

 and love for the good old Government of our 

 fathers; and if we cannot do this, the success 

 of our effort to put down the rebellion will be 

 almost as disastrous as failure." 



Mr. Carlile, of Virginia, followed in opposi- 

 tion to the bill. He said : " The bill denies to 

 the citizen the constitutional right of testing 



