218 



CONGRESS, UNITED STAPES. 



That the victorious belligerent may and should 

 hold the vanquished belligerent in the grasp of war, 

 until he shall have secured all the issues which have 

 been involved in the contest, obtained absolute pro- 

 tection to the allies who have aided him, and such 

 added guarantees as shall forever secure him against 

 the renewal of the contest. 



" Founded upon these principles "which have 

 passed into the axioms of national jurisprudence, 

 the bill is justified by the fact to which I chal- 

 lenge contradiction that thus far not one single 

 issue of the late colossal contest has been set- 

 tled, not a solitary irrepealable guarantee has 

 been obtained, and no protection, other than a 

 mere mockery and insult, secured to those allies 

 to whom, in the depth of your distress, you 

 cried out in agony for assistance and succor." 



Mr. Le Blond, of Ohio, followed, saying: 

 " The bill under consideration proposes to es- 

 tablish nothing more and nothing less than a 

 military despotism. That is not only the ten- 

 dency, but the probable object of much of our 

 legislation. 



" What does the bill provide ? The preamble 

 declares : 



Whereas the pretended State governments of the 

 late so-called Confederate States of Virginia, North 

 Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Ala- 

 bama, Louisiana, Florida, Texas, and Arkansas were 

 set up without the authority of Congress, and with- 

 out the sanction of the people ; and, whereas, said 

 pretended governments afford no adequate protection 

 for life or property, but countenance and encourage 

 lawlessness and crime ; and, whereas, it is necessary 

 that peace and good order should be enforced in said 

 so-called States, until loyal and republican State 

 governments can be legally established : Therefore 



" Sir, that rests, I suppose, upon the theory 

 of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, that the 

 power of this Government rests in the people, 

 and that the Congress of the United States is 

 the people, and therefore the Congress of the 

 United States is all-powerful, and can establish 

 nny form of government that it may deem 

 proper, though the Constitution expressly pro- 

 hibits it. It is upon the theory of the gentle- 

 man from New York (Mr. Raymond), who 

 edified not only this House but the American 

 people a short time ago by the exhibition of a 

 new constitution, a new fundamental law for 

 this Government, a law fixed in the imagina- 

 tion of men alone. This is the law which he 

 claims is higher than the written Constitution 

 of the United States. "Well, sir, this doctrine 

 of a 'higher law' is no new doctrine in this 

 country. This doctrine is the root and foun- 

 dation of all our troubles, and is indirectly the 

 cause of all the .expenditure of treasure and 

 blood to which we have been subjected. 



" The preamble of this bill does not embrace 

 a single truth. Let us look for a moment at the 

 status of these States, their relation to the Fed- 

 eral Government. Sir, their State organiza- 

 tions were not broken up ; their relations to 

 the United States were only suspended. To 

 assert, as the preamble does, that they have no 

 real governments, is to admit that the decla- 

 ration of secession did carry them out of the 



Union, and destroy their State governments. 

 It is an admission of the right of secession, 

 either reserved by the States or expressed in 

 the Constitution. It is an admission but few- 

 believe, and a less number willing to admit. 

 It has been repeatedly affirmed upon this floor, 

 and by all parties, that a State once in the 

 Union always in, except she dissolves her rela- 

 tions by successful war. 



" Then, sir, I maintain that these States are 

 States within the Union ; that they have never 

 been out of the Union ; neither have they 

 overthrown their State governments. When 

 the war ceased, they took their position in the 

 Union which they occupied before they re- 

 belled, with all their rights as States, leaving 

 the citizens subject to the laws, punishing them 

 for violations." 



Mr. Finck, of Ohio, said : " Certainly no 

 member on this floor who understands the 

 Constitution of the United States, and who is 

 a friend of free government, will pretend to 

 urge that we have any constitutional power to 

 pass this bill. I understand the distinguished 

 gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Stevens) 

 does not argue that there is any authority under 

 the Constitution of the United States to sanction 

 this measure ; where, I ask, does he obtain the 

 authority to pass it ? On what principle is this 

 Congress and the people of the United States 

 called upon to adopt it ? 



"If I understand the gentleman correctly, he 

 claims the power to pass this bill under the law 

 of nations, and upon the doctrine of the right 

 of the conquerors to take possession of and 

 control conquered territory and its inhabitants 

 in such a manner as may suit the purposes of 

 the conqueror. This is the ground upon which 

 the measure is defended. Certainly no man 

 will insult the intelligence of the American 

 people, by defending it upon any other princi- 

 ple. It is at war with the Constitution ; it is 

 at war with every principle of free government. 

 And I submit, Mr. Speaker, that it cannot be 

 successfully defended on the ground upon which 

 it is placed by the chairman of the committee. 



" He places it upon the ground that we, as 

 conquerors, have a right to dictate to the peo- 

 ple of these ten States their governments, and 

 by the strong arm of military power hold and 

 treat them as a conquered people; I deny most 

 emphatically both the premises and conclusions 

 of the learned gentleman. 



"I can understand very well how, when two 

 distinct and foreign nations are engaged in war, 

 the result of that war may be a conquest of the 

 territory and of the inhabitants of one of the 

 belligerents. That result has been achieved 

 more than once in the history of the nations 

 of the earth. But, sir, that condition of things 

 could not result from the late war for the sup- 

 pression of the rebellion. What was that war, 

 Mr. Speaker ? It was not a war between dis- 

 tinct and separate nations. It was a war upon 

 the part of the Federal Government, to do 

 what? Not to make a conquest of territory. 



