180 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



only inexpedient and impolitic, but that it was 

 unconstitutional. 



"Now, Mr. President, I say the country is 

 beginning to inquire who introduced this cause 

 of dissension ; who started this wedge which is 

 to drive and drive until it separates the great 

 Republican party? I say it is perfectly plain 

 that the man who started the new measure, the 

 man who persists in it, the man who ostracizes 

 and denounces everybody who differs with him 

 about it. I think, Mr. President, that is so 

 plain that he who runs may read. Certainly 

 there can be no doubt about that. 



" Then, in conclusion, I have only to say that 

 if we refuse these moderate counsels, if we 

 refuse to abandon these nova rca, these new 

 things, the only remedy will be to take the con- 

 sequences, and they seldom linger long behind 

 the act." 



Mr. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, said : " Mr. Pres- 

 ident, if we choose to admit or refuse to admit 

 Senators upon this floor, what have the House 

 of Representatives to do about it? Can they 

 send their Sergeant-at-Arms over here and take 

 out our members ? Can they send over their 

 Sergeant-at-Arms and put members into this 

 body? Can the Supreme Court do it? Sup- 

 pose they decide that somebody has a right to 

 come into this body or that he ought to be kept 

 out, can they send their marshal to the Senate 

 with their decree that A B and C D shall take 

 their places in the Senate of the United States, 

 or can they send over their marshal with their 

 decree that A B or D shall be takeu from 

 this body? Not at all. The idea that the Pres- 

 ident of the United States can send down any 

 person here directing that A B or C D shall be 

 admitted into this body, or that A B and C D 

 shall be removed from this body, is equally pre- 

 posterous, absurd, and revolutionary. 



u It is because I, as an individual member of 

 this Senate, insist that, upon this question of 

 judging upon the right of representation in this 

 body from every State, this body is independ- 

 ent of the House of Representatives, independ- 

 ent of the Supreme Court, independent of the 

 Executive, independent of everybody under 

 heaven, that I oppose the resolution that is 

 now pending before the Senate a resolution 

 which on its face purports to be no law and 

 has no binding effect. It binds nobody except 

 as a man may be bound by a caucus resolution. 

 You may say it binds his honor. It pledges 

 him, that is all. This resolution has no effect. 

 It is as void as a blank piece of paper, so far as 

 any legal effect is concerned. But there is 

 contained in this resolution a proposition that 

 we as Senators pledge ourselves that we will 

 not act upon the question of the admission of 

 Senators of this body until the House gives 

 their consent. This is, substantially, a mere 

 caucus arrangement anyhow. It is not legisla- 

 tion. It is merely the expression of the opinion 

 of gentlemen in the House of Representatives 

 and gentlemen sitting here in the Senate that 

 the two Houses of Congress have no authority 



to go into an examination of the right of rep 

 resentatives to seats here until the two Houses 

 by joint resolution or act of Congress agree. 

 That is my objection to this resolution." 



Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, said : " It is 

 sometimes said on the other side of the House 

 that certain doctrines uttered upon this side 

 are repudiated. Sir, I do not know that this 

 side of the House has distinctly announced any 

 opinions through this debate. We have kept 

 very quiet. It seems a division has been got- 

 ten up on the other side of the House between 

 what are called the radicals and the conserva- 

 tives. The Democratic portion of this body 

 have sometimes been referred to as operating 

 with the conservatives and as against the radi- 

 cals. I think that any fair and impartial ob- 

 server of what transpires here will bear testi- 

 mony to the truth of what I now say. We 

 have taken no sides in this quarrel. It is a di- 

 vision among the gentlemen themselves. They 

 exercised what they supposed to be and what 

 was, if they believed the bill to be a constitu- 

 tional bill, the constitutional right of passing 

 what was called the Freedmen's Bureau bill. 

 The President of the United States in returning 

 it with his objections exercised a perfectly con- 

 stitutional right. Because he did so there was 

 a very considerable manifestation of disappro- 

 bation of his action. When his veto message 

 came in, the Democratic portion of this House 

 voted upon that subject precisely as they voted 

 before. But will my radical friends as they 

 seem to glory in the appellation of radicals 

 allow me to make one remark ? In the groat 

 issue which they have made upon the Presi- 

 dent, and not the President upon them, they 

 are pretty much in the situation, in my opinion, 

 of the crazy man who got on the railroad track 

 in the far West, where they had never before 

 seen a car. It being announced that the cars 

 would run on a certain day he went out and 

 placed himself near a station, and as the train 

 came along threw up his hat and his arms. 

 The engineer, supposing that something was on 

 the track, stopped the train and inquired what 

 was the matter. The man replied, ' I want you 

 to know, sir, that I, after having fought the 

 lions of Bashan, am not going to be scared by 

 a certain kind of hen-coop set up on wheels.' 

 Sir, Andrew Johnson has laid the track, the 

 car is in motion, and if our radical friends do 

 not want to get run over they had better get 

 off the track." 



Mr. McDougall, of California, followed, say- 

 ing: U I do not rise in my place now to enter 

 into any lengthy discussion, for I would not 

 trespass on the time of the Senator from Mas- 

 sachusetts who has been kind enough to afford 

 me an opportunity of saying a few words. I 

 choose not to engage in a general discussion of 

 the questions that have been debated here, but 

 to say a few words only as to the pending ques- 

 tion. I have not been able yet to comprehend 

 in the mind of a fair-minded and just man who 

 speaks the truth, or who desires to speak it, the 



