CONGRESS, U. S. 



301 



will say that is not right ? Of course it is right. 

 80 the'bill goes on to prescribe the form of pro- 

 ceeding; and I do not suppose that any man 

 here will object to all that, and therefore I 

 leave it. 



" The latter part of the bill goes on to define 

 the principles which shall be adopted in the 

 new constitution that they shall frame, and 

 that, I suppose, will be the portion of the bill 

 which will receive more criticism than any 

 other. The bill prescribes that each of these 

 States shall have a republican form of govern- 

 ment ; and now the question is, how can you, 

 with the light of our present experience, set up 

 a republican form of government ? I think that 

 the great Union party of the country are alto- 

 gether convinced that slavery mixed up in a 

 Government is so unsafe, so liable to overthrow, 

 that it cannot be admitted as an element in a 

 State government. The sad experience of this 

 terrible revolution has, as we Union men be- 

 lieve, grown out of the institution of slavery 

 alone, and this war is the legitimate and natural 

 fruit of that state of things. Would we then, 

 in guaranteeing a republican form of govern- 

 ment, suffer it to be mixed up with anomalous 

 elements calculated to immediately destroy 

 what we set up ? In the light of our present 

 experience, that, to say the least of it, would 

 be folly. Therefore this bill has taken special 

 pains to say that the new government shall, in 

 its constitution, proclaim emancipation as a con- 

 dition upon which it shall be permitted to come 

 into the Union. 



" There was a time when a precedent like this 

 would have been deemed unconstitutional. I 

 know it made a great controversy whether, 

 when a State was about to come into the Union, 

 we might prescribe any particular principle for 

 its State constitution. We have done so, how- 

 ever, in every State that we have ever admitted, 

 and yet perhaps it never was entirely settled. 

 But in the light of our present experience I ask 

 any man who is a lover of peace and who in- 

 tends to make a constitution that shall live for- 

 ever, saying nothing of the wrong, saying noth- 

 ing of slavery in any other than a political point 

 of view, would it be safe, would it be wise for 

 us in admitting States back into this Union to 

 permit them to come with the very element 

 that had carried them out, with the very seeds 

 of destruction which had destroyed them al- 

 ready? Xo, sir, we would not do it. The 

 framers of this bill have sedulously shut it out, 

 and made it a condition on which the seceded 

 States shall come back, that it shall be a funda- 

 mental principle of their constitution that sla- 

 very is excluded. If there is a Republican in 

 the Senate who objects to that I am sorry for 

 it. 



" The amendment of the Senator from Mis- 

 souri, as I said before, gives the whole question 

 the go-by. It establishes nothing. It does not 

 enlighten the people of the seceded States upon 

 what principle they are to be admitted into this 

 Union again. It barely postpones the settle- 



ment. It does not answer the question which 

 a? I said has been and will be asked every day 

 and every hour ; and the people will ask, if we 

 adopt it, how it happened that at this long ses- 

 sior when the question was before us we gave 

 it the go-by. Your political enemies will stand 

 by saying it was because you dared not utter 

 the objectionable sentiments that you intend to 

 bind upon the South; that you have dodged the 

 entire question when it was before you, because 

 you dared not show your hand and give them 

 a principle of equity, justice, and right to ro 

 upon. They will have a right to say it. "We 

 have no right to blink the question. It is a 

 great question that is most anxiously looked to 

 in all the seceded States by every loyal mac. 

 He is told by our political enemies, ' They will 

 not let you back on any equitable terms ; they 

 intend to make you hewers of wood and draw- 

 ers of water, to reduce you to servitude.' That 

 is the cry." 



Mr. Carlile, of Virginia, said: " If I supposed 

 that the amendment offered by the Senator from 

 Missouri could be adopted, I should not detain 

 the Senate by a word of remark on this propo- 

 sition ; and now, until after a vote can be had 

 to ascertain the sense of the Senate as to the 

 proposed amendment, I will refrain from enter- 

 ing into any discussion of the bill further than 

 to show, if" I can, that all the bill proposes to 

 do to remedy existing evils will be accomplish- 

 ed by the ad'option of the amendment. 



"Apart of the Senator's argument was as 

 able an argument as any Senator can make on 

 this floor on this bill. He tells us that the Ex- 

 ecutive has no right to prescribe the rules upon 

 which these States may be received back into 

 the Union, and he tells us that we have no 

 power to overthrow the State governments; 

 once a State, with him always a State. I agree 

 with him in that. He says that he does not 

 maintain that the State governments are ob- 

 literated, and that he who does is. contending 

 against the Constitution. I agree fully with 

 the Senator from Ohio in that, and the marvel 

 with me is how the Senator can advocate this 

 bill which does all this. This bill not only 

 maintains that the State governments are over- 

 thrown, but so far as in its power lies, recog- 

 nizes and assumes the right to overthrow the 

 State governments if that work is not already 

 accomplished. If there be a State where the 

 rebel, the traitor to his country and his God, 

 has failed in overthrowing the State govern- 

 ment, this bill accomplishes that work which 

 he, the traitor, began. If the President of the 

 United States has no right to prescribe rules for 

 the return of the rebellious States, will the Sen- 

 ator from Ohio, able as he is, be kind enough 

 to enlighten one humble as myself by pointing 

 out to me the provision of the Constitution 

 authorizing him, as a Senator, to exercise any 

 more power upon this subject than the Presi- 

 dent can exercise ? " 



Mr. "Wade : " Congress." 



Mr. Carlile : " Then as part of Congress o^ 



