234 



CONGKESS, UNITED STATES. 



a party nature. That fact is that the majority 

 here, representing the majority of the loyal 

 people of this country, has the control of this 

 government for a period of two years or more. 

 "We have every reason to believe that loyal 

 ascendency in this country will be continued. 



" In any event, in those two years we ought 

 to be able, and I am sure we shall be able, to 

 reconstruct this government upon a loyal basis. 

 But in any event, nothing worse can happen to 

 us, and nothing worse can happen to the coun- 

 try, than the reconstruction of the government 

 on a disloyal basis. If it is to be reconstructed 

 upon a disloyal basis, there are two things 

 which I seek : first, that we who believe our- 

 selves to be loyal to the Government and to the 

 country shall not in any degree be responsible 

 for the reconstruction of this Government in 

 the hands of disloyal men ; and secondly, that 

 if it is to be the fortune of this country that it 

 shall be reconstructed upon a disloyal basis, and 

 by the agency and under the control of disloyal 

 men, then I desire to postpone that calamity 

 to the latest day possible. 



"I say, then, that if during this session, or 

 during the existence of the Fortieth Congress, 

 the majority act according to its means and its 

 opportunities, it cannot fail to secure the recon- 

 struction of these ten States and their restora- 

 tion to the Union through the agency of loyal 

 men and by loyal means. 



"My objection to the proposed substitute of 

 the Senate is fundamental it is conclusive. It 

 provides, if not in terms, at least in fact, by the 

 measures which it proposes, to reconstruct those 

 State governments at once through the agency 

 of disloyal men. And I say that great fact, 

 which if this substitute shall be concurred in 

 will be near to us, ought to restrain us from 

 any action in favor of this measure, though we 

 be compelled on the 4th of March next to part 

 without having done any thing whatever for the 

 restoration of those States." 



Mr. Stevens: "Mr. Speaker, I will occupy 

 but a short time. This House, a few days ago, 

 sent to the Senate a bill to protect loyal men 

 in the Southern States. That bill proposed but 

 a single object, the protection of the loyal men 

 of the South from the anarchy and oppression 

 that exist, and the murders which are every day 

 perpetrated upon loyal men, without distinction 

 of color. It did not attempt the difficult ques- 

 tion of reconstructing these States, by establish- 

 ing civil governments over them. The House 

 thought it wise to leave that question until a 

 Congress which is to come in could have a long 

 time to consider the whole question. The bill 

 which we passed had not in it one single phrase 

 or word which looks to any thing but a police 

 regulation for the benefit of these States. 



"N"ow, what has the Senate done? It has 

 sent back to us an amendment which contains 

 every thing else but protection. It has sent us 

 back a bill which raises the whole question in 

 dispute, as to the best mode of reconstructing 

 these States, by distant and future pledges 



which this Congress has no authority to make, 

 and no power to execute. What power has 

 this Congress to say to a future Congress, when 

 the Southern States have done certain things, 

 you shall admit them, and receive their mem- 

 . hers into this House ? 



"Sir, it is idle to suppose that we are not as- 

 suming what is impudent in us, and what must 

 be fruitless. What are we attempting to do ? 

 The first grand amendment that strikes the eye 

 in this bill is, that we take the management of 

 these States from the General of the Army and 

 put it into the hands of the President of the 

 United States. No man doubts the constitu- 

 tional authority of Congress to detail for particu- 

 lar service, or to authorize others to detail for 

 particular service, particular officers of the army. 

 But our friends who love this bill, love it now 

 because the President is to execute it, as he has 

 executed every law for the last two years, by 

 the murder of Union men, and by despising 

 Congress, and flinging into our teeth all that 

 we seek to have done. That seems to be the 

 sweetening ingredient in this bill for many 

 of our friends around us. I do not of course 

 believe any thing about these nightly meetings. 

 I think the report on that subject is all fabri- 

 cation. But, sir, if there were such things, 

 this substitute that has come from the Senate 

 would be the natural offspring of such an in- 

 cubation. 



" What is the fifth section of this substitute ? 

 Why is it incorporated here? It is that we 

 may pledge this Government in future to all the 

 traitors in rebeldom, so that hereafter there 

 shall be no escape from it, whatever may hap- 

 pen. While they are not before us, while this 

 Congress has nothing to do with them, we are 

 promising them, we are holding out to them a 

 pledge, that if they will do certain things there- 

 in mentioned, they shall come into this House, 

 and act with us as loyal men. I know there is 

 an impatience to bring in these chivalric gentle- 

 men, lest they should not be here in time to 

 vote for the next President of the United 

 States, and, therefore, gentlemen postpone the 

 regular mode of bringing up that question, and 

 put it upon a police bill, in order that it may 

 be carried through, so as to give them an op- 

 portunity to be here at the time they desire. 

 Sir, while I am in favor of allowing them to 

 come in as soon as they are fairly entitled, I do 

 not profess to be very impatient to embrace 

 them. I am not very anxious to see their votes 

 cast along with others, to control the next elec- 

 tion of President and Vice-President; there- 

 fore it is that my impatience is not so great as 

 that of others. 



" Mr. Speaker, there was a time when some 

 people, and among them that good man who is 

 now no more, carried, as I thought, the idea of 

 reconstruction by loyal men rather to the ex- 

 treme. The doctrine was once held, that in 

 these outlawed communities of robbers, trai- 

 tors, and murderers, so far as the real State 

 was concerned, it consisted of the loyal men of 



