208 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



American people, and passed by the necessary 

 vote of two-thirds of the members of that body. 

 It was then sent to this House for concurrence, 

 and after considerable discussion, was defeated 

 by a vote of 95 in the affirmative and 66 in the 

 negative (twenty-one members not voting), being 

 twelve votes less than necessary to make the two- 

 thirds vote required by the Constitution. The 

 question now before us arises npon a motion to 

 reconsider such vote, action upon which was 

 continued from the last to the present session 

 of Congress. 



"Congress cannot amend the Constitution, 

 and hence, if this bill should pass, the question 

 will then simply be referred to the people of the 

 several States for their action. In other words, 

 we, by our action here, simply authorize the 

 people to determine for themselves whether 

 they will ratify or reject the proposed amend- 

 ment. To me it seems that on such a proposi- 

 tion there should not be a dissenting voice. 

 "Whatever questions may otherwise divide us, 

 we all assent to the proposition that our people 

 are capable of self-government, and have the 

 right to alter their laws, fundamental as well as 

 statutory." 



Mr. Scofield, of Pennsylvania, in snpport of 

 the measure, said : 



"If the war should end now without a division 

 of the Union, what would be the status of sla- 

 very? It has been abolished in Maryland by 

 the new constitution ; but it is said that the 

 soldiers had no right to vote, and without their 

 votes the constitution was not adopted. West 

 Virginia has provided for gradual emancipation, 

 but that State, it is alleged, has no legal exist- 

 ence, and therefore its action is null and void. 

 In the State of Virginia a new constitution pro- 

 hibiting slavery has been adopted by the loyal 

 people within the Union lines ; but the consti- 

 tutionality of this action has been mnch ques- 

 tioned, even by anti-slavery men. Missouri has 

 partially abolished slavery, and the convention, 

 soon to assemble there, it is supposed, will dis- 

 pose of what is left. In Tennessee, Arkansas, 

 and Louisiana, slavery has been prohibited by 

 conventions representing the Union people of 

 those States; but it is said that these conven- 

 tions were irregularly called, and their action 

 is therefore void. In Kentucky, such slaves as 

 enter the United States Army are freed by act 

 of Congress; but it is alleged that the act is 

 unconstitutional. Congress has abolished sla- 

 very in the District of Columbia, and prohibited 

 it in all the Territories; but it is said the first 

 act is void, without the assent of Maryland and 

 Virginia, and the latter is in conflict with the 

 dictum of the Supreme Court in the case of 

 Dred Scott. In all the remainder of the States 

 the slaves were liberated by the President's 

 proclamation; but that instrument, it is said, is 

 too just to be legal. Under these several enact- 

 ments, however, the slaves, without waiting to 

 test their validity, are leaving their old masters, 

 forming new associations, seeking education, 

 earning new homes, learning self-reliance, and 



thus erecting barriers to the revival of slavery 

 stronger than legislation itself. 



"It is apparent from this statement that if 

 the confederacy should suddenly collapse, liber- 

 ating our Union fellow-citizens that are believed 

 to exist in large numbers within its picket lines, 

 we would still leave the slavery question, out of 

 which the whole trouble grew, to be settled and 

 disposed of. It ought to be equally apparent to 

 all observing persons that there is but one way 

 to end the strife. Slavery in the end must die. 

 It has cost the country too much suffering and 

 too much patriotic blood, and is in theory an 

 institution too monstrous, to be permitted to 

 live. The only question is, shall it die now, by 

 a constitutional amendment a single stroke of 

 the axe or shall it linger in party warfare 

 through a quarter or half a century of acrimoni- 

 ous debate, patchwork legislation, and conflict- 

 ing adjudication ? The people were consulted 

 upon this question last fall, and they have re- 

 sponded in favor of emancipation. I respect 

 their opinion, not because I am a politician, but 

 because experience has taught me to rely upon 

 the judgment of the unambitious classes. I am 

 reminded that there was a large minority. True, 

 but the suffering consequent upon this terrible 

 war, and not love of slavery, made the minority 

 so large. The people suffered from the draft, 

 from taxation, and from a depreciated currency, 

 and untruthful men told them that their own 

 Government imposed these hardships, not from 

 the necessities created by the rebellion, but 

 from mere love of despotic crnelty. Consult 

 your Democratic constituency and you will find 

 they are not so much infatuated with 'slavery as 

 many suppose. I think I would not misrepre- 

 sent the largest portion of the Democrats in my 

 own district if I say that however much they 

 may have condemned anti-slavery agitation prior 

 to the rebellion, they would now be glad to have 

 the institution buried out of their sight forever. 

 Two classes alone would object : those who are 

 so poorly endowed as to be jealous of negro 

 competition ; and those Avho, being more happily 

 born, apprehend that their pride and import- 

 ance might in some way be compromised if the 

 distance between themselves and any portion 

 of the laboring classes were lessened. 



" The President, in obedience to the advice 

 of the people and the dictates of his own kind 

 heart, and unimpassioned judgment, has recom- 

 mended that we should submit this amendment 

 to the action of the States. Why should it not 

 be done?" 



Mr. Bliss, of Ohio, followed in opposition to the 

 measure, saying : " Upon what reasoning and 

 recognition of facts does any member of this ( '< in- 

 gress claim tlie^possible power, under the fifth 

 article of the Constitution, to take the initiatory 

 steps to the change proposed ? Are the Stutos 

 whose people, in part, are in rebellion against 

 the General Government, out of the Union in 

 theory and in fact? Are they foreign powers, 

 and their inhabitants foreign people, not subject 

 to the Constitution and law s of the United States ? 



