COXGKESS, U. S. 



327 



Davis, Doolittle, Foot, Grimes, Hale, Harding, Har- 

 lan, Henderson, Hendricks, Howe, Johnson, Lane 

 of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Nes- 

 mith, Pomeroy, Ramsev, Saulsbury, Sherman, Ten 

 Eyck, Trumbul], and Wright -27. 



'NAYS Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Dixon, Fessenden, 

 Foster, Harris, Howard, Sprague, Sumner, Wilkin- 

 son, and Wilson 11. 



The following words were subsequently 

 added : " and the bounty, pay, or expense of 

 said enlistments shall not be paid out of said 

 commutation fund," and the amendment of 

 Mr. Clark adopted. Other amendments were 

 adopted, and the bill passed the Senate by the 

 following vote : 



YEAS Messrs. Anthonv, Clark, Collamer, Conness, 

 Cowan, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, 

 Foster, Hale, Harding, Harlan, Harris, Howard, 

 Johnson, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Xesmith, 

 Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Evck, 

 Van Winkle, Wade, Willey, and Wilson 30. 



NAYS Messrs. Buckalew, Carlile, Grimes, Hen- 

 dricks, Howe, Lane of Indiana, Powell, Saulsbury, 

 Wilkinson, and Wright 10. 



The bill came before the House, and various 

 amendments were proposed. On the 10th of 

 February Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, moved 

 to strike out the twentieth section, and insert 

 the following : 



All able-bodied male persons of African descent, 

 between the ages of twenty and forty-five years, 

 whether citizens or not, resident in the Ignited States, 

 shall be enrolled according to the provisions of the 

 act to which this is a supplement, and form part of 

 the national forces. And when a slave shall have 

 been drafted and mustered into the service of the 

 United States his master shall have a certificate 

 thereof which shall entitle him to receive 300 from 

 the United States, and the drafted man shall be free. 



He said : " I think that that class of persons 

 ought to form a part of the national forces. I 

 know that they are now taken, as in Maryland, 

 for instance, and I suppose they will be in other 

 places. I do not say that it is contrary to law, 

 but I prefer that it should be done under a 

 known law." 



It was suggested to Mr. Stevens to modify 

 his amendment "so as to pay loyal men only 

 for their slaves." He further said: "I modify 

 my amendment in that respect, by adding the 

 words, ' provided that the slaves of loyal men 

 only shall be paid for.' My amendment will 

 not only make this class of persons bear their 

 part of the fighting burden of the nation, but it 

 will also tend finally to eradicate slavery from 

 all the States ; eradicate it under necessity, and 

 with compensation to the masters. Although 

 we are now doing it I will not say against law, 

 but I do not precisely know under what law 

 I think it right that it should be done according 

 to law. Of course this refers only to the loyal 

 States." 



Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, followed, saying: 

 " You have told us in the border States, when 

 we have appealed to you, that you intended 

 to respect the laws and constitutions of those 

 States. The enemies of the Union, those in 

 those States called secessionists, have charged 

 against the northern people that it was their 



intention to seize upon all of our slaves, with or 

 without law ; that they intended to seize the 

 personal property and finally the real estate of 

 the slaveholding States. These charges have 

 been made in my State against the Government. 

 "We have denied them. We have stated that 

 there was no such intention ; that the northern 

 people proposed to respect our constitutions 

 and laws ; and that we had no fear when the 

 case was presented justice would be done to 

 us." 



Mr. Boutwell, of Massachusetts, replied : ' : I 

 desire to say in reply to the gentleman from 

 Kentucky, that in the laws of Kentucky, so far 

 as I know, slaves were recognized as property 

 but still recognized as persons ; and I think that 

 we have reached that emergency when men in 

 the border States should understand, at least so 

 far as I am concerned, that slaves as inhabitants 

 of the country are to be used as other men are 

 used, to put down this rebellion. No constitu- 

 tion or law of any State shall stand between 

 me and what I believe to be my duty to my 

 country." 



Mr. Morris, of Xew York, said: "Mr. Chair- 

 man, as I understand existing laws, the Govern- 

 ment, when it deems it to be necessary, may 

 seize the property of any citizen and use it for 

 the purpose of prosecuting this war. I see no 

 difference between seizing the property of the 

 northern States and that of the border States. 

 I do not see why the property of the border 

 States should be exempted." 



Mr. Davis, of Maryland, moved to amend the 

 amendment by striking out so much of it as 

 provided for the payment of $300 to the owner 

 of the drafted slave. He said : " I do it on this 

 ground : if the slaves are liable to military duty 

 at all, they are liable to military duty on the 

 same ground as every person is who owes obe- 

 dience to the laws ; on the same ground that 

 the citizen of the country, the subjects of the 

 country, the denizens of the country owing 

 temporary allegiance to the Government are 

 bound to defend it. If they owe military ser- 

 vice, we owe the master nothing for taking 

 what the slaves owe." 



Mr. Mallory, of Kentucky, opposed it, say- 

 ing : " I think, Mr. Chairman, that the question 

 is narrowed down simply to this : if the Govern- 

 ment of the United States have the right to take 

 from me my property in the service and labor 

 of my slave, it is restricted and limited by that 

 provision of the Constitution which says that 

 private property shall not be taken without just 

 compensation. Then, I ask the gentleman from 

 Maryland, how is just compensation ascertain- 

 ed? Is it done by a law of the Government 

 fixing it, or by any ex parte proceedings of that 

 kind ? He knows it is not. He knows that that 

 would be unjust and unconstitutional. If you 

 propose to compensate the owner of a slave, you 

 must ascertain the value of the property as you 

 do the value of any other property that 'the 

 Government chooses to take for its use. You 

 must ascertain the value of that property as you 



