298 



CONGRESS, U. S. 



tion ; the property of rebellious citizens is lia- 

 ble to confiscation. Belligerents are not amen- 

 able to the local criminal law, nor to the juris- 

 diction of courts which administer it; rebellious 

 citizens are, and the officers are bound to enforce 

 the law, and to exact the penalty of its infrac- 

 tion. The seceded States are either in the 

 Union or out of it. If in the Union, their con- 

 stitutions are untouched, their State govern- 

 ments are maintained; their citizens are en- 

 titled to all political rights, except so far as 

 they may be deprived of them by the criminal 

 law which they have infracted. This seems 

 incomprehensible to the gentleman from Mary- 

 land. In his view the whole State government 

 centres in the men who administer it ; so that 

 when they administer it unwisely, or put it in 

 antagonism to the Federal Government, the 

 State government is dissolved, the State consti- 

 tution is abrogated, and the State is left, in 

 fact and in form, de jure and defacto, in anar- 

 chy, except so far as the Federal Government 

 may rightfully intervene. This seems to be 

 substantially the view of the gentleman from 

 Massachusetts (Mr. Boutwell). He enforces 

 the same position, but he does not use the 

 same language. 



" I submit that these gentlemen do not see 

 with their usual clearness of vision. If by a 

 plague or other visitation of God every officer 

 of a State government should at the same mo- 

 ment die, so that not a single person clothed 

 with official power should remain, would the 

 State government be destroyed ? Not at all. 

 For the moment it would not be administered, 

 but as soon as officers were elected, and as- 

 sumed their respective duties, it would be in- 

 stantly in full force and vigor. 



" If these States are out of the Union their 

 State governments are still in force unless other- 

 wise changed. And their citizens are to the 

 Federal Government as foreigners, and it has 

 in relation to them the same rights, and none 

 other, as it had in relation to British subjects 

 in the war of 1812, or to the Mexicans in 1846. 

 Whatever may be the true relation of the 

 seceded States, the Federal Government de- 

 rives no power in relation to them or their 

 citizens from the provision of the Constitution 

 now under consideration, but in the one case 

 derives all its power from the duty of enforcing 

 the ' supreme law of the land,' and in the 

 other from the power ' to declare war.' 



" The second proposition of the gentleman 

 from Maryland is this. I use his language : 



That clause vests in the Congress of the United 

 States a plenary, supreme, unlimited political juris- 

 diction, paramount over courts, subject only to the 

 judgment of the people of the United States, embrac- 

 ing within its scope every legislative measure neces- 

 sary and proper to make it effectual; and what is 

 necessary and proper the Constitution refers in the 

 first place to our judgment, subject to no revision 

 but that of the people. 



" The gentleman states his case too strongly. 

 The duty imposed on Congress is doubtless im- 

 portant, but Congress has no right to use a 



means of performing it forbidden by the Con- 

 stitution, no matter how necessary or proper it 

 might _ be thought to be. But, sir, this doc- 

 trine is monstrous. It has no foundation in 

 the Constitution. It subjects all the States 

 to the will of Congress ; it places their insti- 

 tutions at the feet of Congress. It creates in 

 Congress an absolute, unqualified despotism. 

 It asserts the power of Congress in changing 

 the State governments to be ' plenary, su- 

 preme, unlimited ' ' subject only to revision 

 by the people of the whole United States.' 

 The rights of the people of the State are noth- 

 ing ; their will is nothing. Congress first de- 

 cides; the people of the whole Union revise. My 

 own State of Ohio is liable at any moment to be 

 called in question for her constitution. She 

 does not permit negroes to vote. If this doc- 

 trine be true, Congress may decide this exclu- 

 sion is anti-republican, and by force of arms 

 abrogate that constitution and set up another, 

 permitting negroes to vote. From that decision 

 of the Congress there is no appeal to the peo- 

 ple of Ohio, but only to the people of Massa- 

 chusetts, and New York, and Wisconsin, at the 

 election of Representatives ; and if a majority 

 cannot be elected to reverse the decision, the 

 people of Ohio must submit. Woe be to the 

 day when that doctrine shall be established, 

 for from its centralized despotism we will ap- 

 peal to the sword ! 



" Sir, the rights of the States were the foun- 

 dation corner of the Confederation. The Con- 

 stitution recognized them, maintained them, 

 provided for their perpetuation. Our fathers 

 thought them the safeguard of our liberties. 

 They have proved so. They have reconciled 

 liberty with empire ; they have reconciled the 

 freedom of the individual with the increase of 

 our magnificent domain. They are the test, 

 the touchstone, the security of our liberties. 

 This bill, the avowed doctrine of its support- 

 ers, sweeps them all instantly away. It sub- 

 stitutes despotism for self-government ; despo- 

 tism the more severe because vested in a nu- 

 merous Congress elected by a people who may 

 not feel the exercise of its po-wer. It subverts 

 the Government, destroys the Confederation, 

 and erects a tyranny on the ruins of republican 

 governments. - It creates unity it destroys 

 liberty it maintains integrity of territory, but 

 destroys the rights of the citizen. 



On the same day the bill was passed in the 

 House by the following vote : 



YEAS Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Anderson, 

 Arnold, Ashley, John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Beaman, 

 Blow, Boutwell, Broomall, Cole,Creswell, Henry Win- 

 ter Davis, Dawes, Deming, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, 

 Eliot, Farnsworth, Fenton, Frank, Higby, Hooper, 

 Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, 

 Hulburd, Julian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Or- 

 lando Kellogg, Littlejohn, Loan, Longyear, Marvin, 

 McBride, McClurg, Mclndoe, Samuel F. Miller, Moor- 

 head, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard 

 Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Orth, Patterson, Per- 

 ham, Pike, Pomeroy, Price, Alexander H. R-ce, John 

 II. Rice, Edward H. Rollins, Scheuck, Scofieid, Shan- 

 non, Sloan, Smithers, Spalding, Thayer, Upson, 



