CONGRESS, U. S. 



283 



one-thousandth part of the States, might choose 

 electors for their whole States. 



' ; The idea that the loyal citizens, though 

 few, are the State, and in State municipalities 

 may overrule and govern the disloyal millions, 

 I have not been able to comprehend. If ten 

 men fit to save Sodom can elect a governor 

 and other ' State officers for and against the 

 eleven hundred thousand Sodomites in Vir- 

 ginia, 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 have no longer a re- 

 public, but the worst form of despotism. The 

 saints are the salt of the earth ; but the ' salt 

 of the earth ' do not carry elections and make 

 governors and presidents. Within the State 

 of South Carolina a rebel's vote weighs just as 

 much as a loyal voter's. We may conquer 

 rebels and hold them in subjection, and legis- 

 late for them as a conquered people ; but it is 

 mere mockery to say that, according to any 

 principle of popular government yet estab- 

 lished, a tithe of the resident inhabitants of 

 an organized State can change its form and 

 carry on government because they are more 

 holy or more loyal than the others. 



" From all this the legitimate conclusion is, 

 that all the people and all the territory within 

 the limits of the organized States which, by a 

 legitimate majority of their citizens, renounced 

 the Constitution, took their States out of the 

 Union, and made war upon the Government, 

 are, so far as they are concerned, subject to the 

 laws of the State ; and, so far as the United 

 States Government is concerned, subject to the 

 laws of war and of nations, both while the war 

 continues and when it shall be ended. 



" If the United States succeed, how may she 

 treat the vanquished belligerent i Must she 

 treat her precisely as if she had always been at 

 peace ? If so, then this war on the part of the 

 United States has been not only a foolish but a 

 very wicked one. But there is no such absurd 

 principle to restrain the hands of the injured 

 victor. 



"By the laws of war the conqueror may 

 seize and convert to his own use every thing 

 that belongs to the enemy. This may be done 

 while the Avar is raging to weaken the enemy, 

 and when it is ended the things seized may be 

 retained to pay the expenses of the war and 

 the damages caused by it. Towns, cities, and 

 provinces may be held as a punishment for an 

 unjust war, and as security against future ag- 

 gressions. The property thus taken is not con- 

 fiscated under the Constitution after conviction 

 for treason, but is held by virtue of the laws 

 of war. Xo individual crime need be proved 

 against the owners. The fact of being a bel- 

 ligerent enemy carries the forfeiture with it. 



" To my mind there can be no doubt as to 

 what we have a right to do if, as I will not 

 permit myself to doubt, we should finally con- 

 quer the Confederate States. What it will be 



policy to do may be more difficult to determine. 

 My mind is fixed. The rebels have waged the 

 most unjust, cruel, and causeless war that was 

 ever prosecuted by ruthless murderers and 

 pirates. They have compelled the Govern- 

 ment in self-defence to expend billions of 

 money. Every inch of the soil of the guilty 

 portion of this usurping power should be held 

 responsible to reimburse all the costs of the 

 war ; to pay all the damages to private proper- 

 ty of loyal men ; and to create an ample fund 

 to pay pensions to wounded soldiers and to the 

 bereaved friends of the slain. Who will object 

 to this ? Who will consent that his constituents 

 and their posterity shall be burdened with an 

 immense load caused by these bloody traitors ? 

 Their lands if sold in fee would produce enough 

 for all these purposes, and leave a large surplus. 

 Such confiscation of course would spare the 

 property of those who took no part in the war, 

 and of the common soldiers, who were com- 

 pelled by the laws of their States to enter the 

 army. 



All this' done, and yet the half would be 

 left undone. Oppressive as would be the debt 

 and grievous the loss of our loyal citizens, yet 

 if an honorable and safe peace were made our 

 free and prosperous people would bear it with- 

 out a murmur. But if a disgraceful peace were 

 made, leaving the cause of this rebellion, and 

 the fruitful cause of future Avars, untouched 

 and living, its authors would be the objects of 

 the deepest execration and of the blackest in- 

 famy. While the Constitution protected the 

 institution of slavery, very few desired to dis- 

 turb it in the States. There were not three 

 thousand abolitionists, properly so called, in 

 the United States. But since those States 

 have voluntarily throAvn off that protection, 

 and placed themselves under the law of nations 

 alone, it is not only our right but our duty to 

 knock off every shackle from every limb." 



Mr. Broomall, of Pennsylvania, expressed 

 his views as follows : " There are two posi- 

 tions taken by very opposite parties upon the 

 status of those engaged hi the rebellion. One 

 is that they are for all purposes public enemies, 

 and to be treated as such ; the other is that for 

 all purposes they are our fellow-citizens, and 

 entitled to the benefits of the Constitution and 

 laAvs of the United States. I think both these 

 positions erroneous. I think the true theory 

 is this : the rebels are in the wrong by their 

 own voluntary act ; they are therefore not en- 

 titled to any of the advantages of their position, 

 but are subject to all the disadvantages of it. 

 Against the Government they cannot claim to 

 be either public enemies or subjects, but the 

 Government at its election may treat them in 

 either capacity, sometimes and for some pur- 

 poses in one, and sometimes and for other pur- 

 poses in the other. When subjects revolt, the 

 sovereign, if they are few, applies the civil laAv, 

 and hangs them or pardons them. In theory 

 he may do so without regard to the nuraber of 

 the revolting subjects. But in practice, hs the 



