I 'I I! LIC DOCUMENTS. 





PIT.I.IC IKKTMKNTS. Menage of Preti- 

 th<- tir,> Ifotuet of Conrjre*, at 



>' t/n- regular to- 

 >ngrest, December 2, 1867. 



^nate and 



<f of Itepretentalittt : 

 Tin- continued diaorgwiisation of the Union, to 



; ,-Milrnt \\-.\- illed tin- attention 



; u -ul.ject of profound and patri- 



i. NVe may, "however, find some relief 



in the reflection that the painful 



political situation, although before untried by our- 



,.,t new in tin- experience of nation*. 



Politic perhaps as highly perfected in our 



ime and count iv as in any other, has ii" 

 dUdo-cd .1:1 v means by which civil wars can be 

 nelv prevented. An enlightened nation, how- 

 ever, witii a wise and beneficent constituti6n of free 

 uncut, may diminish their frequency and 

 mitigate their severity by directing all its procced- 

 in"s in accordance with its fundamental law. 



when a civil war has been brought to a close, it is 

 manitVstlv the first interest and duty of the State to 

 repair the injuries which the war has inflicted, and to 

 secure the benefit of the lessons it teaches as fully 

 dilv as possible. This duty was, upon the 

 termination of the rebellion, promptly accepted, not 

 v the Executive Department, but by the insur- 

 themselves, and restoration, in the 

 Moment of peace, was believed to be as easy 

 and certain as it was indispensable. The expecta- 

 tions, however, then so reasonably and confidently 

 lined, were disappointed by legislation from 

 constrained, by my obligations to the 

 Constitution, to withhold my assent. 



It is, therefore, a source of profound regret, that 

 in complying with the obligation imposed upon the 

 President by the Constitution to give to Congress from 

 time to time information of the state of the Union, 

 I am unable to communicate any definite adjustment, 

 to the American people, of the questions 

 which, since the close of the rebellion, have agitated 

 the public mind. On the contrary, candor compels 

 me to declare that at this time there is no Union as 

 our fathers understood the term, and as they meant 

 it to be understood by us. The Union which they 

 establish <! can exist 'only where all the States are 

 represented in both Houses of Congress where one 

 State is as free as another to regulate its internal 

 concerns according to its own will, and where the 

 laws of the central Government, strictly confined to 

 matters of national jurisdiction, apply with equal 

 to all the people of every section. That such is 

 not the present " state of the Union" is a melancholy 

 fact, and we all must acknowledge that the restora- 

 tion of the States to their proper legal relations with 

 the Federal Government and with one another, ac- 

 cording to the terms of the original compact, would 

 be the greatest temporal blessing which God, in His 

 kindest providence, could bestow upon this nation. 

 It becomes our imperative duty to consider whether 

 or not it is impossible to effect this most desirable 

 (Mnsiitmnation. 



The Union and the Constitution are inseparable. 

 As long as one is obeyed by all parties, the other 

 will be pres M ved ; and if one is destroyed, both must 

 perish together. The destruction of the Constitution 

 will be I illowed by other and still greater calamities. 

 It was ordained not only to foim a more perfect 

 union between the States, but to " establish justice, 

 insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common 

 defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the 

 liiein^s of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." 

 Nothing hut implicit obedience to its requirements 

 in all parts of the country will accomplish the-e 

 . Without that obedience, we can look 

 forward only to continual outrages upon individual 

 rights, incessant breaches of the public peace, na- 



tional weakness, financial dishonor, the total lou of 

 mir prosperity, the general corruption of moral*, and 

 the final extinction of popular lie, Mom. To nave our 

 cr 'iinti -v trom evils so appalling as these, wo BUould 

 renew our efforts again and again. 



To me the process of n seems perfectly 



plain and simple. It consists n.erely in a faithful 

 application of the Constitution and laws. Tl. 

 ctition of the laWS i8 not HOW obstnietcil or o; 

 by ph 'fhcr, i- no military or other ne- 



; or pretended, which can prevent obcdi 

 . the Constitution, either North or South. All 

 the rights and all the obligai tes and in- 



dividuals can be protected^ and enforced by means 

 perfectly consistent with the fundamental law. The 

 courts may be everywhere open, and, if open, their 

 process would be unimpeded, ('rimes against the 

 United States can be prevented or punished by_ the 

 proper judicial authorities in a manner entirely 

 practicable and legal. There is, ther '.ore, no rea- 

 son why the Constitution should not be obeyed, un- 

 less those who exercise its powers have determined 

 that it shall be disregarded and violated. The mere 

 naked will of this Government, or of some one or 

 more of its branches, is the only obstacle that can 

 exi-t to a perfect union of all the States. 



On this momentous question, and some of the 

 measures growing out of it, I have had the misfor- 

 tune to differ from Congress, and have expressed 

 my convictions without reserve, though with be- 

 coming deference to the opinion of the Legislative 

 Department. Those convictions are not only un- 

 changed, but strengthened by subsequent events 

 and further reflection. The transcendent importance 

 of the subject will be a sufficient excuse for calling 

 your attention to some of the reasons which have so 

 strongly influenced my own judgment. The hope 

 that we may all finally concur in a mode of settlement, 

 consistent at once with our true interests and with 

 our sworn duties to the Constitution, is too natural 

 and too just to be easily relinquished. 



It is clear to my apprehension that the States lately 

 in rebellion are still members of the national Union. 

 When did they cease to be so ? The " ordinances of 

 secession," adopted by a portion (in most of them a 

 very small portion) of their citizens were mere nulli- 

 ties. If we admit now that they were valid and 

 effectual for the purpose intended by their authors, 

 we sweep from under our feet the whole ground 

 upon which we justified the war. Were those States 

 afterward expelled from the Union by the war? 

 The direct contrary was averred by this Government 

 to be its purpose, and was so understood by all 

 those who gave their blood and treasure to aid in its 

 prosecution. It cannot be that a successful war, 

 waged for the preservation of the Union, had the 

 legal effect of dissolving it. The victory of the na- 

 tion's arms was not the disgrace of her policy; the 

 defeat of secession on the battle- field -was not the 

 triumph of its lawless principle. Nor could Congress, 

 with or without the consent of the Executive, do 

 any thing which would have the effect, directly or in- 

 directly, of separating the States from each other. 

 To dissolve the Union is to repeal the Constitution 

 which holds it together, and that is a power which 

 does not belong to any department of this Govern- 

 ment, or to all of them united. 



This is so plain that it has been acknowledged by 

 all branches of the Federal Government. The Ex- 

 ecutive imy predecessor! as well as myself) and the 

 heads of nil the Departments have uniformly acted 

 upon the principle that the Union is not only undis- 

 solved, but indissoluble. Congress submitted on 

 amendment of the Constitution to be ratified by the 

 Southern States, and accepted their acts of ratifi- 

 cation as a necessary and lawful exercise of their 

 highest function. If they were not States, or were 

 States out of the Union, their consent to a change 

 in tho fundamental law of the Union would have 

 been nugatory; and Congress, in asking it, com- 



