286 



CONGRESS, U. S. 



of conquest, no right to seize and confiscate 

 private property upon land in general would 

 be conceded. 



"But, sir, touching this contest carried on 

 within the State, right of conquest and all 

 other sovereignty rights admitted by the laws 

 of nations are limited and definitely bounded 

 by our Constitution. I must recur to the dis- 

 tinction I have endeavored to establish, or 

 which at all events I have stated and I can- 

 not do much more than state my position upon 

 this occasion that we do not look to the law 

 of nations, or the laws of war, for a definition 

 of our rights either in a public or civil war, 

 for that matter. War is the remedy for a vio- 

 lated or obstructed right. We prosecute our 

 right by force; that is, make war. We look 

 to the laws of nations for the rules which are 

 to govern the conduct of the war, but not for 

 the objects for which we may lawfully wage it, 

 or the manner in which we may realize its ac- 

 quisitions, or the extent of our sovereign rights. 

 Where are our rights declared? Whence do 

 they come? Our rights for which we wield 

 the sword where do we get them? From 

 the laws of nations ? If we get them from the 

 laws of nations one of two things follows: 

 either the laws of nations carry over the con- 

 quered country the qualified and limited sov- 

 ereignty of the United States, or it gives them 

 an unlimited sovereignty. 



"I undertake to t;ty that the laws of nations 

 recognize in the conqueror an unlimited sov- 

 ereignty. In a conquered province the laws of 

 nations consent that you may set up a mon- 

 arch, found orders of nobility, erect churches 

 dependent upon the State, pass ex post facto 

 laws, strike out equal State representation in 

 the Federal Senate you may do every thing 

 and any thing you choose to do by your sov- 

 ereign power. The laws of nations favor this. 

 The laws of nations have no objections to 

 kings, emperors, nobles, bishops. The protest 

 against this infringement of the rights of man 

 comes from America. Almost solitary and 

 alone in the family of nations we are found to 

 protest against the State with a king united to 

 a church with a bishop. Yet, if it is there 

 that we get our right of conquest and our sov- 

 ereign right to rule the conquest, if it is there 

 we go for a definition of our sovereign rights 

 against a foreign and a domestic foe, and to in- 

 terpret the manner in which we may enjoy the 

 rights of conquest won either from foreign or 

 domestic foes, to these conclusions must we 

 come at last, or we come to the other, that by 

 the laws of nations the conqueror does not 

 conquer the sovereignty of a hostile Power, 

 but merely substitutes his own sovereignty in 

 place of that which has been expelled. 



When Russia conquers Poland she strikes 

 down elective monarchy and substitutes hered- 

 itary despotism in its place. If Turkey con- 

 quers a Christian province, the crescent is 

 substituted for the cross. England makes a 

 conquest, and by the omnipotence of unlimited 



power Parliament governs It, according to its 

 will. But if the Republic of America acquires 

 territory, the exercise of sovereign right in 

 that territory depends, not upon the laws of 

 Congress, of nations, of war, but upon the 

 will of the sovereign people of America as ex- 

 pressed in the Constitution. 



" I understood the gentleman from Pennsyl- 

 vania (Mr. Stevens) to inquire where is the 

 sovereignty of this country. The sovereignty 

 of Russia is in the emperor. The sovereignty 

 of Great Britain is in Parliament. Both are 

 unlimited. The sovereignty of the United 

 States is in the President and the army. But 

 should it be there? I deny it. It is in the 

 sovereign American mass, in the people. There 

 is no sovereign but the people. The people of 

 America have delegated a portion of their sov- 

 ereignty to the States, and another portion 

 they have delegated to the Federal Govern- 

 ment, our glorious, and I trust, imperishable 

 Union. The rest they have reserved to them- 

 selves. Consult that tenth article of the 

 Amendments, which I believe this House did 

 not quite lay upon the table when I had the 

 honor to move it the other day ; consult that 

 and see ' the powers not delegated to the Uni- 

 ted States by the Constitution, nor prohibited 

 by it to the States, are reserved to the States 

 respectively, or to the people.' That sover.- 

 eignty which in America can do no wrong like 

 the sovereignty of Europe, at least no wrong 

 for which it is criminally responsible, has dele- 

 gated a portion only of that mighty sovereignty 

 to the Federal Government. And in whom 

 does it rest ? In Congress, and not in the Pres- 

 ident and his army. Conquests made by this 

 country, foreign or domestic if you admit 

 such a monstrosity as a domestic conquest 

 are to be appropriated and settled and enjoyed 

 and governed according to the laws of Con- 

 gress, and by Congress admitted to the equal 

 fellowship of States. 



"The war powers, whatever they may be, 

 are vested in Congress, and not in the Execu- 

 tive ; and if the gentleman from Pennsylvania 

 (Mr. Stevens) is as logical in action as in argu- 

 ment, the Executive of the United States must 

 meet with his determined opposition. I un- 

 derstand him, indeed, in the very speech to 

 which I ha've directed my attention, to sneer 

 at the pretence that the Executive of the Uni- 

 ted States is vested with the Federal or State 

 sovereignty at all. He denies the right of ten 

 men to govern a hundred by the aid of the 

 army and navy. I deny it, too, and it is an 

 error which will die in the midst of its wor- 

 shippers sooner or later, unless the central idea 

 of American civilization is a falsehood, and the 

 Declaration of Independence a cheat and delu- 

 sion. 



"If I am correct in the position I have stat- 

 ed, that the sovereignty was in the mass of the 

 American people, and that they delegated a part 

 to the States, and a part to the Federal Gov- 

 ernment, how then, admitting the principle of 



