The American Annual Cyclopaedia and Register of Important Events of the Year, 1861-1865, vols. 1-5. New York: Appleton & Co., 1868.

Congress of the United States, 1861 - Part 3

The proposition to organize new Territories was brought forward in the House by a motion of Mr. Thayer, of Massachusetts, to constitute the Dakota Land District, and to provide for the admission to the House of Representatives of a delegate therefrom.

Mr. Cox, of Ohio, wished to inquire of the chairman whether the committee, of which he is chairman, proposed any legislation with respect to this or the other territories? And if so, whether they proposed to change the bills they reported last session, so as to obliterate those obnoxious provisions which caused them to be defeated?

Mr. Grow, of Pennsylvania, replied that the Committee on Territories propose, when they have an opportunity, to submit to this House bills for organizing territories for the people in the region around Pike's Peak; for the people in the region of the Washoe silver mines, called Nevada; for the people of what is called Arizona; and for the people of this very Dakota Territory, and for the territory above it, which will cover all the territory of the nation; and thus arranging the whole matter, they will get rid of this whole territorial legislation. And they propose to report the bills in the usual form.

Mr. Cox further asked: "And do they propose the same proviso in respect to slavery that was contained in the former bills? That is the point."

Mr. Grow replied: "We shall, I take it, report the same proviso as before, with the privilege of any member to move to strike it out; and if a majority is against ns upon that question, we propose to vote for those bills. If a majority shall strike the clause out, then you have not a word in the bills about slavery—no reference to it whatever. We propose to leave it to be settled by a majority of the House, whether they will retain that proviso or not; and if a majority say no, it will be out of the bills."

On a subsequent day, bills were introduced by Mr. Grow to provide temporary governments for all the territories above mentioned. These bills were passed after the proviso had been struck out.

Apprehensions began to exist in the minds of many Southern members of the House that the army and navy were to be used for the purpose of coercion against a portion of the States which had endeavored to place themselves out of the Confederacy. These apprehensions were expressed in the House, and an opportunity for discussion was demanded on the naval bill. It was refused on this bill, but when the army appropriation bill was taken up the field for general debate was thrown open.

Mr. McClernand, of Illinois, was the first to address the House. He argued that no State had any lawful or constitutional right to withdraw from the contract of the national Union: first, because that contract was made by the people, and not the States; and second, because, if made by the States, still, as artificial persons, they were bound by it, and have no independent, constitutional right to withdraw from or rescind it. And again, because, in such case, the contract of Union subordinates the States to a paramount sovereignty ordained by their own act and consent. And again, because that sovereignty acts directly upon the people of the "United States;" and by its own independent force must act upon them, despite of whatever the States, as such, may do. Being sovereign, its first duty was to preserve itself; and being sovereign, where is there a power more than sovereign to control it, disintegrate it, or dissolve it? When the States show their right to do so, the paradox will have been established, that the minor is the greater proportion; that the inferior has the right to substitute himself for the superior; that inferiority is sovereignty, and that sovereignty is subordination!

Mr. Cox, of Ohio, followed: "Mr. Chairman,

I speak from and for the capital of the greatest of the States of the great West. That potential section is beginning to be appalled at the colossal strides of revolution. It has immense interests at stake in this Union, as well from its position as its power and patriotism. We have had infidelity to the Union before, but never in such a fearful shape. "We had it in the East during the late war with England. Even so late as the admission of Texas, Massachusetts resolved herself out of the Union. That resolution has never been repealed; and one would infer, from much of her conduct, that she did not regard herself as bound by our covenant. Since 1856, in the North, we have had infidelity to the Union, more by insidious infractions of the Constitution than by open rebellion. Now, sir, as a consequence, in part, of these very infractions, we have rebellion itself, open and daring, in terrific proportions, with dangers so formidable as to seem almost remediless. And I must warn the people of Ohio that it is the well-grounded fear, almost the foregone conclusion of the patriotic statesmen here, that the work of breaking up will go on, until the entire South shall be arrayed against the entire North."

He then submitted these propositions for consideration:

That secession is not a right in any possible relation in which it can be viewed; to tolerate it in theory or practice is moral treason to patriotism and good government. That, while it may not involve such direful consequences as other revolutions, still it is revolution. That every effort of conciliation should he exhausted to check it, before force is applied. That, if the North does not do her part fully in recession from aggression, it will be impossible to unite the Northern people, or any portion of the Southern people, in repressing secession. That, if the South will make a patient endeavor, equal to the great occasion, to secure her rights in the Union, he believed that she would succeed ; and if she was then repulsed, it would be impossible for her to receive any detriment from the North, but she will depart in peace. If she go inconsiderately, as some States are going, the country may incur the fearful hazard of war. If the South press the one hard overmastering question upon the North, and follow it up with seizure of forts and revenue, cannonading of our vessels, and other aggressive acts, without giving an opportunity for conciliation, there will be no power in the conservatism of the North to restrain the people. No sacrifice will be considered too great to make in the protection and defence of the Union. That, in the present state of facts, so long as the revenues can be collected on land or sea, and the forts and harbors can be commanded by the Federal Government, that Government must be, as to these matters, the Government de facto, as well as de jure; and that, so long as this status can be maintained by the Executive, it should be done by all the legal forces of the Government. Only when revolution becomes so formidable as to be irresistible, would it be proper to inquire whether coercion would not be both suicidal to the Union and criminal to mankind.

Mr. Reagan, of Texas, replied to both the preceding speakers. He endeavored to correct some of the errors upon which the arguments advanced against the South seemed to be predicated: "We do rightly estimate the value of the Union. We do rightly estimate the value of the blessings of this Government. We have loved and cherished the Union. Nobody has a better right than I have, although I say so myself, to make that declaration. I have loved the Union with an almost extravagant devotion. I have fought its battles whenever they were  to be fought in my section of the country. I have met every sectional issue, at home in my section, and in my State particularly, which was attempted to be forced upon the public mind, and which I thought would mar the harmony of the Democratic party. I have fought the battles of the Union without looking forward to the consequences. I have fought them in times when the result for the Union seemed hopeless. If I could believe we could have security of our rights within the Union, I would go home and fight the battles of the Union in the future with the same earnestness and energy that I have done in times past."

The debate was further continued by Mr. Adrain, of New Jersey, Mr. Anderson, of Missouri,

Mr. Garnett, of Virginia, and Mr. Gurley, of Ohio. Mr. Garnett argued that pence might end in reconstruction, but war was inevitable, eternal separation. Supposing war might follow, he submitted what he regarded as the true policy of the seceded States, both in respect to a blockade and an invasion:

"I will suppose you have the naval force necessary, and the revenues, without resorting to loans or direct taxes to maintain it. I will suppose the Southern people quietly submit to it even for a year; and imagine not that their hearts would grow weary, or fail them, once embarked in the great cause. They are the sons of men who endured and suffered under the entire military power of England for ten years, and by endurance came out conquerors. During that period of blockade they would have abundant provisions; for every man who has studied the statistics of the country knows that the South produces more food, in proportion to her population, than the North. For her, it would be the loss of income only; and while her cotton was thus held up for a single year, what would be the consequences to New England, whose whole supply is drawn from the South; to France, where Southern cotton furnishes employment directly to some two hundred and seventy thousand persons, and indirectly to more than a million? Above all, what would be the effect of this withdrawal from Great Britain of three-fourths of the cotton she uses, upon which, as the London Times Page 210 lately estimated, four million of her people depend for daily bread? Rely upon it, sir, that, bitter and unreasonable as her prejudices may be, the same causes which have reconciled England to the use of slave-grown sugar and cotton, would never suffer either France or herself to acquiesce in this blockade. The South need only wait patiently and silently, with absolute assurance that those great Powers would be forced to an active interference. And then, sir, how would you conduct the war?

"No course would be open to you but actual invasion, which, indeed, passion and resistance would probably bring about at a much earlier period. Invasion, sir! invasion of what? and under what conditions? Of an agricultural country eight hundred and fifty-one thousand square miles in extent—larger than all the empires and kingdoms of central Europe, yet with only about fourteen inhabitants to the square mile, and consequently without large cities or means to sustain an invading host; but, sir, not without brave men, trained to the use of arms, and ready to destroy the invading army, which would melt away like snows of winter every mile as they advanced into the Southern clime, far from their resources. Napoleon, in his disastrous Russian invasion, was not so far from his supplies, and in a country twice as densely peopled, twice as able to sustain him. Your population may outnumber ours by millions; but you would be hundreds of miles from your true base of operations, while we would be at home. You are doubtless as brave as we are, though not more so; but your soldiers would be led on by the unhallowed lust to bring brothers beneath their yoke, while ours would strike for their homes and their altars. I know that fanatics daily depreciate to the Northern people the exertions of the South in the Revolution, and teach that, as slaveholding is the sum of all human villanies, so is it the source of incurable weakness and impotence. But before they believe such teachers, let them read history.

"But, sir, no sane man believes that we could be conquered. If we have no ships of war, you have vessels in abundance who would accept our letters of marque and reprisal; and the same Northern capital that now engages in the slave-trade could be transferred to privateering on your commerce. If we did not invade you, we could at least repel your invasion, and cut off your attacking forces. Patience alone, on our side, would insure a victory. But I will not contemplate such scenes."

Mr. Thomas, of Maryland, followed, saying: "You complain that the seceding States have seized the forts and other public property. These forts were permitted to be erected in these States for their defence, and the arms that have been taken were placed there for the same purpose. The Federal Government has no right to use this property for any other purpose. And whenever the people who had granted the sites of the forts for their defence discovered that they were to be used for the opposite purpose—of an attack upon them—it was not only just, but wise, for them to see that they were used for their defence, the legitimate purpose for which they were erected."

Mr. Ferry, of Connecticut, said he would have the President collect the revenues in every Southern port, and every other port in the Union, peaceably if he can, forcibly if he must. More than this, he would have him maintain the national flag at every hazard, over every fortification, arsenal, dock-yard, and navy-yard in the Union. If, in the discharge of this duty, he is met by force, then he would place at his command the army and navy and purse of the nation. This Union must and shall be preserved. The experiment of self-government was not yet exhausted. It would be a shame, an everlasting reproach to the American name, to allow it to be destroyed by the hand of domestic violence.

Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, in reply to the assertion that the army should not be used to coerce a State, submitted that if, by this, it was meant that the army should not be used to conquer a State, to compel her to be represented, to maintain the courts or post-offices within her limits, to burn her cities or desolate her fields, it was entirely correct. He did not believe that any Administration will pursue such a policy. But we have a Government, a great Government, to maintain. It was supreme within the powers delegated to it; and it was provided with ample authority to protect itself against foreign or domestic enemies. It had the exclusive right to collect duties on imports. It was the exclusive owner of forts, arsenals, navy-yards, vessels, and munitions of war. It had a flag, the symbol of its nationality, the emblem of its power and determination to protect all these who may of right gather under its folds. It was our duty, as the representatives of this Government, to maintain and defend it in the exercise of its just powers. Had it trespassed upon the rights of a single individual? Did any citizen of South Carolina complain that this Government had done him wrong? No man can say that. The Government for years had been in the hands of the Democratic party, controlled chiefly by Southern citizens. They controlled its power and patronage; and now, when the Republican party was about to assume the reins, they seek to subvert it. They organized revolution under the name of secession.

He continued: "My argument is, that South Carolina is not coerced, but that she is coercing this great Government; that she is coercing all the border slave States; that she is leading them, by wild fanaticism and by the community of interests, to take a step which I do not believe Virginia, or North Carolina, or Maryland, or any of the border States would take, in the light of calm and cool reason.

"Mr. Chairman, I appeal in all candor to the Representatives of the border States to arrest the tide that, but for you, will in a few days Page 211 place us in hostile array with each other. I know that the movements in the cotton States have gone so far that we cannot arrest them. I appeal to the Representatives of the border States to arrest the progress of this storm, for a little time at least. Let us see whether there is any hope for peace and conciliation. If there is not, then, if we cannot agree, let us fight; but if we can agree, let us do it like men, and not be hurried off by wild and insane feelings of rage and disappointment by the weakest State in this Confederacy."

The object for which the army was to be used he frankly declared to be, in his opinion, for the purpose of protecting the acknowledged property of the United States, in recovering that which has been unlawfully taken, and in maintaining the Union.

On the subject of compromise, his opinion was expressed in these words: "I say again, Mr. Chairman, that I do not believe any terms which our people could yield and preserve their own self-respect would satisfy South Carolina, Florida, or some of the other Southern States, because they are bent upon disunion."

The proposition made in the Senate by Mr. Crittenden was objected to by Mr. Sherman, because, to use his language, "it protects the institution of slavery in the Territory of New Mexico; it takes away from Congress all power over the subject; it takes away from the people of the territory all power over the subject; it makes this Government establish, protect, and uphold slavery in that territory. I believe that slavery is a local institution, municipal in its character, protected by State laws, having rights exclusively within those States, and having no rights beyond those States except the right to recapture fugitives who escape from service. Believing, as I do, that that is the correct construction of the Constitution, I never will, whatever may be the consequences, vote for a proposition to establish, protect, and uphold slavery anywhere on God's earth."

Mr. Crawford, of Georgia, found himself under the necessity of replying upon the spur of the moment, or the debate would be closed. He commenced by saying that it was with feelings of great distrust that he undertook the vindication of South Carolina and the other seceding States, from the charges made by the gentleman from Ohio; but its very necessity left him no other alternative. His speech, without correction, would have the effect of producing upon the public mind of the North the impression that South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana had commenced an aggressive war upon the Government of the United States. "It is not just either to ourselves or to them, that they should believe, for one moment, that we had, or intended to commence, an aggressive war upon this Government or the people of the North. All that they ever intended was to protect and defend themselves against encroachments upon their rights and liberties, come from what quarter they might."

On the movement of Major Anderson to Fort Sumter, his view was thus declared: "This was an act of war. But to make it beyond question, and show that he considered it war, he did that which no sane man would do in peace, which was to destroy as far as possible Fort Moultrie, and render it unfit for use or service as a fortification; add to this the burning of the gun carriages and the spiking of the cannon, and then tell me, either that your Government has kept its faith, or that South Carolina was guilty of the first act of hostility. Up to that moment, nothing had been done by South Carolina inconsistent with the good faith pledged for her by her Representatives; yet when they saw these things done, and were chafing under the mala fides of your Government, and losing all hope of any other result than war, they seized such defences as were within their reach, and have held them since for purposes of protection and safety."

Again he said: "And I assert upon Southern honor, that no fort would have been taken, no arsenals seized, and no hostile attitude assumed by a single State, had it not been for the action of Major Anderson at Charleston; and upon him rests whatsoever of blame may attach to the subsequent conduct of South Carolina, Georgia, and the other States."

The fundamental view of the Government formed under the Constitution, entertained by all the Southern members, is thus repeated: "I say that, in view of these things, believing that this creature of ours had no right to use these fortifications, erected for our defence, for our destruction, we seized them under the universally-recognized principle of law, that the rights of the agent are always subordinate to the rights of the principal; and your rights within the limits of our State must be subordinate to ours whenever you violate the compact between us. That is the principle upon which we have acted, and, as I have said before, which we intend to maintain to the very utmost of our men and means."

Mr. Hill, of Georgia, in reply to the assertion of Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, that the South would hearken to no proposition of conciliation, believed that this was said without authority, so far as it related to all the Southern States.

His views were so strongly in contrast with the heated and fiery language so much used by the Southern members, and, withal, so hopeful and conciliatory, that they fell upon the wearied and perplexed assembly like a gentle dream. As his time expired and he was forced to close, cries of "Go on !" "Go on!" rose from all parts of the House.—He proceeded:

"Despite the attitude of South Carolina herself, I believe to-day she is approachable with reason and words of kindness, and that she will listen to the voice of conciliation if it come in so gentle a form as could be tendered by Page 212 gentleman upon the other side of this House, beg, I invoke it for her, as my mother, who cherished me in the early part of my life, and upon whose bosom sleep my honored parents, and where dwell to-day my near kindred; and I ask you to present to her, far gone as you may consider her, the olive branch. Tender it gracefully; you can afford to do it, as guardians of this great and powerful Government. South Carolina maybe, and in my judgment she is, extreme in her precipitancy. I have regretted it; I have remonstrated against it, and I have implored the people of my own State, notwithstanding her example, to delay their action, and never to follow her example until assured that it would meet a hearty and undivided response from the people of Georgia. "Will you, under these circumstances, urged and entreated as you are by men who are as much and as faithfully attached to the Union of these States as you yourselves are, refuse to make this last effort in behalf of conciliation between these distracted sections of our common country? I hope not. I hope the door to conciliation is not yet closed. There are good men yet from the North in this House. There are good men yet in the other wing of the Capitol; and I mistake if they do not yet send forth words of love and kindness to soothe an exasperated people, and thus give quiet to an afflicted nation. I regret not to find a greater degree of it in my honorable friend from Ohio. Surely the time has not yet arrived to determine, as positively as he does, that if there can be no reconciliation there must be a resort to the stern arbitrament of war. Surely he does not mean what he says: that there must be an accommodation or a fight. Not yet—not yet, sir, I would hope. Let him, let every man who feels that there is an inevitable result, wait for the accumulated voice of American patriots to come up and determine this question. I abide that result with confidence and hope. I trust that the convention of my own State—which is sitting to-day, and in which is assembled a large amount of the best intelligence and the best patriotism of that State— will give time to the people of the United States to confess their conservatism, their attachment to the Union, and their devotion to the interests of the several States. I believe it will do it; and I trust, if my State shall resolve to secede in this the hour of her extremity, as she believes, that she will make her secession prospective, so as to afford ample time to intervene, and still save the great structure under which we live, and which has blessed us so long."

Mr. Burnett, of Kentucky, offered the following amendment to the clause making an appropriation:

Provided, That no part of the appropriations made in this bill shall be used by the Federal Government m making war, or in any attempt to subject any State which has or may hereafter secede from the United States.

He said: "I want that the country shall understand, and that we on this side of the House shall understand, distinctly from gentlemen on the other side whether it is their purpose to wage war or not.

"Under the terms of 'enforcing the law,' and 'the execution of the law,' gentlemen cover up their purposes to make war. [Cries of ' Oh, no!' from the Republican side of the House.] It must result in war, gentlemen. You may blockade the port of Charleston to-morrow; send down your floating custom-house, and undertake to collect the revenue, and the first gun that is fired results in civil war.

"It must do that. We all so understand it. I do not want gentlemen, under the term of 'enforcing the law,' to shrink from the announcement of their purpose, which is to make war. It is nothing else. The mere blockading of the port of Charleston is, in my judgment, an act of war. I believe, whether gentlemen so regard it or not, that the President has no power to use the army and navy of this country, except as subservient to the civil authority. South Carolina, as has been before remarked on this floor, has no Federal officers. She has no Federal judiciary there. None of the powers in that State recognize the authority of the Federal Government, or can enforce obedience to any of the laws of Congress. And yet you propose to send an army down there, under the name of enforcing laws, to make war upon South Carolina. It is nothing else; and there is not a sensible man on that side of the chamber who does not so understand it. If that be your purpose, come up like men and say so. Do not shrink from it. Do not undertake to carry on war under a specious pretext of enforcing law."

Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, replied: "Mr. Chairman, I do not apprehend that anybody on this side of the House contemplates making war on any State of this Confederacy, unless war is first made by that State on the Federal Government. There is no war contemplated by this Government, or by any gentleman on this side of the House, except a defensive war, for the protection of its executive officers, and of the men engaged in the discharge of executive and ministerial duties."

Mr. Burnett: "May I ask the gentleman from Ohio one question?"

Mr. Stanton: "Yes, sir."

Mr. Burnett: "If you do not intend to make war, why do you object to my amendment?"

Mr. Stanton: "Mr. Chairman, I will tell the gentleman why. If, in the execution of those laws, the officer of the law is resisted by a military power, by State authority; and if it become necessary for his protection, and for the discharge of his duties, that the United States shall defend itself, protect itself, protect its property, its arsenals, its forts, its executive and ministerial officers; if it becomes necessary to make defensive war, then I suppose the money appropriated by this act will Page 213 be used in that war. That is what I understand."

The amendment was not voted upon, and the bill was subsequently passed without further debate.

The withdrawal of the members of the House from Georgia was made known by their joint letter to the Speaker, namely:

Washington City, January 23,1861.

Sir: We have received official information that the people of the State of Georgia, in convention assembled, on the 19th day of January, 1861, adopted and passed an ordinance of secession.

The sovereign State of Georgia, of which we are Representatives in this House, having thereby dissolved the political connection between that State and the Government of the United States, and having thereby repealed the ordinance of 1788, by which the Constitution of the United States was ratified, and having resumed all the powers delegated to the Federal Government, we hereby announce to you that we are no longer members of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress.

PETER C. LOVE,

MARTIN J. CRAWFORD,

THOMAS HARDEMAN, Jit.,

LUCIUS J. GARTRELL,

JOHN W. H. UNDERWOOD,

JAMES JACKSON,

JOHN J. JONES.

Hon. William Pennington,

    Speaker House of Representatives of the United States.

                    WASHINGTON CITY,

                             January 28, 1861.

SIR: Satisfied, as I am, that a majority of the convention of the people of Georgia, now sitting, desire that the State should no longer be represented upon this floor, I, in obedience to this wish of the people's representatives, hereby resign the seat I hold as a member of this House.

I am, respectfully, your obedient servant. JOSHUA HILL.

Hon. William Pennington,

    Speaker House of Representatives of the United States.

It was now the middle of February—Congress had prepared the usual appropriation bills, arranged the measures for procuring the funds necessary to meet the expenses of the Government. A highly protective tariff bill had passed one House and was certain to pass the other, but on the great subject which absorbed the attention of the whole country nothing had been accomplished. The Senate had discussed the point whether there could be a compromise or not, without arriving at any conclusion. Much less had they been able to determine what should be the plan of compromise. The crisis of the country was the great topic of discussion in the House, but the committee had not yet made any formal or final report. It was evident that Congress, with its conflicting and determined elements, could do nothing. Those who looked for a satisfactory adjustment from that quarter now gave up all hopes. In this they were confirmed by the continued unsuccessful action of the Peace Convention, a body which had assembled at Washington, as recommended by the Legislature of Virginia.

The views of Congress relative to the future difficulties of the country manifest at this time a change. Six States had withdrawn from the Union, no immediate prospect of an adjustment existed, and the question had become one of peace or war. Its solution seemed to be in the hands of the new Administration. An effort was therefore made to discover the purposes of the President elect, either through his own expressions or from those of his friends in Congress. After the delivery of the inaugural, the chief theme of the discussions in the Senate, during its brief session, was whether the meaning of that document was peace or war. The views of the Republican portion of the Congress, with few exceptions, at this time, are to be found in such declarations as were made in the House. They were opposed to compromise, and demanded the enforcement of the laws.

Mr. Beale, of New York, said: "Sir, I am opposed to any and all compromises—

"1. Because they are to be extorted from us by threats of dissolution of the Union in case we refuse. I desire to see the strength of this Government tested, and to know whether the Union is a Federal rope of sand, to be washed away by every wave of passion, or an 'indissoluble Government.'

"2. Because they will fail to accomplish the reintegration of the Union.

"Six States have already seceded, and will not be parties to the transaction or bound by it; and one, if not more, has avowed her determination never to come back, even upon the principle of reconstruction; and several of them are represented in a convention to form a Southern Confederacy, and have formed such a confederacy.

"3. Because the Republican party is not now in power, and should not submit to any terms as a condition-precedent to obtaining it. "Our candidate has been constitutionally elected; entertains no principles hostile to the interests of any one of the States. We are resolved to inaugurate him in the same constitutional manner. In the words of the distinguished Senator elect from Ohio, ‘inauguration first, adjustment afterward.'

"4. Because the sentiment of nine-tenths of the Republicans of the free States is opposed to compromise of principle. I speak not of the commercial circles, where the opinion of Mr. Webster prevails, that' Governments were instituted to protect property,' no matter of what kind; but of the intelligent masses of the free country, where, upon the mountain sides, in the valleys, and along the rivers of the North, no shackle rings—no unpaid labor degrades, but where to work is to be ennobled, and where the god of Freedom baptizes the foreheads of his sons with the dew of toil. These men want no compromises with slave labor—no unfair competition between their adventurous toil and the investments of Southern capital. These men believe that 'to secure the inalienable rights of life and liberty, governments were instituted among men.'"

After stating the measures to which he was Page 214 opposed, he thus declared those of which he was in favor: "Mr. Speaker, having stated thus frankly what I will not support, it may be asked mo ' what affirmative action do you propose shall be taken V This is a most important inquiry. But, sir, aware of all the responsibilities which devolve upon me as a Representative, of all the perils which environ my country, asking for that wisdom of duty which cometh down freely from above, and hoping for that fortitude which renders man 'equal to either fortune,' I have no difficulty in answering the inquiry. I propose that the Constitution of the Republic shall remain forever intact, the same invulnerable, immortal aegis of human rights, forged upon the stithies of our revolutionary demi-gods. I propose that the Union of the States ordained by our fathers, and upon which their and our common Father has smiled glory and prosperity, shall, at all hazard and by every power of the Government, be maintained. I propose that the just laws of my country shall be enforced everywhere throughout her borders, and by every constitutional means; and that such additional legislation shall be immediately had as will enable such object to be accomplished. I propose that the property of the Republic which has been unlawfully seized shall be repossessed; that the civil and military officers of the Government, who for the discharge of their duties have been imprisoned or beleaguered, shall immediately be succored; and that the honor of our flag, which has been tarnished, shall be vindicated before the world. I propose that the will of the people of the Union, mighty, majestic, and constitutionally expressed at the national election, shall be respected and obeyed. And above all, sir, do I propose that liberty shall not again be beaten down upon the threshold and beside the altars of this her temple. That the free principles which underlie the whole structure of the Republic, for which constitutions were ordained, laws enacted, and the will of the people expressed, shall not again be compelled to pass under the yoke of slavery."

Mr. Duell, of New York, also said: "In my judgment, the present is no time for compromise. Until the strength of the Government be tested, it is not right, or legal, or politic to consider concessions. It is only when traitors have been reduced to obedience, or the Government has proved impotent, that we should be constructing articles of agreement. A compromise at this time would be the humiliation of one section, loyal to the Union and obedient to the laws made under the Constitution, to another section in array against the Government of the Union, and defying law, order, justice, and right. My remedy, then, will be found in executing the Constitution as it is, and enforcing the laws of the General Government. I have no sympathy with any man who repudiates the Constitution of our common country, whether he resides North or South. By that Constitution I abide, both in its letter and in its spirit. Standing firmly upon the principles of freedom and the Constitution we shall have no cause for self-reproach, even if civil war should follow."

Mr. Reynolds, of New York, said: "We are asked to make new laws. I answer, there are too many already. Let the present laws be enforced. Amend the Constitution? Let the people do it in the regular way, whenever they think it desirable. I shall not object. No, sir; obey the Constitution, and administer the laws as they are, and all will be well. Stand by the Union of our fathers. Rally under the glorious folds of the Stars and Stripes, and our country will be saved. And for the rest, let us “trust in God, and keep our powder dry.'" In the House the Committee on Military Affairs reported a supplementary bill which proposed to amend the act of 1798, that provides for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, to suppress insurrection and repel invasion.

Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, thus explained the supplementary bill: "In my judgment, that law covers the ease of an insurrection against the authority of the United States, and authorizes the calling out of the militia for the purpose of putting down an insurrection against the authority of the United States. But I find that the late Attorney-General, Mr. Black, has expressed a different opinion to the President of the United States of this section of the law, and holds that it only authorizes the President to call out the militia to aid the officer of the court—the marshal—in the execution of process directed to him, and to overcome combinations against the execution of some particular law, and does not authorize the calling out of the militia for the purpose of putting down a general insurrection against the authority of the United States. In my judgment, the law was intended to go that far; but in order to remove doubt and ambiguity, and to avoid any obscurity, the Committee on Military Affairs deemed it their duty to report this bill."

Mr. Sickles, of New York, inquired: "Do I understand that it is ono of the premises upon which this bill is founded that there is a general insurrection against the authority of the United States?"

Mr. Stanton: "Yes, sir."

Mr. Sickles: "Then the gentleman differs broadly with the President elect, who says that there is no danger, no trouble, and treats the idea of apprehension with ridicule. There is a great discrepancy here.

"I will state what I understand to be the present condition of things, and what I understand to be the necessity that exists for the passage of such a measure as this. The incoming Administration does not desire to be under the necessity of running counter to the opinion of the Attorney-General under the present Administration, and of subjecting itself to the charge of usurpation, by exercising powers the Page 215 existence of which is denied by that officer. It therefore desires, by remedial legislation, to cure that defect and omission. We have before ns six seceding States organized into a separate hostile confederacy. It is said that it is about to have, in thirty days, an army of fifty regiments, backed up by a fund of $14,000,000."

Mr. Craige, of North Carolina, said: "I desire to correct the gentleman. The Southern Confederacy is not hostile. Its Government desires to be friendly."'

Mr. Stanton: "So I understand. It regards the right of secession as a constitutional right, and on that idea claims to be friendly; but, not recognizing that theory, we cannot so regard it.

"Mr. Speaker, we have the important ports of Charleston, Savannah, and New Orleans, in which the authorities of the United States are superseded, where its laws cannot be executed, and where no duties can be collected, unless some mode be adopted, aside from the ordinary mode of collection. One of two things has to be done: either this right of secession has to be recognized, the execution of the laws of the United States in these ports to be abandoned, or they must be treated as free ports, and all the foreign commerce of the country diverted from the port's of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore; or else the duties on imported goods must be collected at those ports, or they may be suspended as ports of entry, and their commerce made illegitimate. "One of these two things must be done. Now, I take it there are very few gentlemen that are prepared to say that the authority of the United States over those ports shall be surrendered and abandoned; that the whole foreign commerce of the country shall change its course and go to those ports for the purpose of escaping duties. That, I take it, there are very few gentlemen prepared to recognize as a state of things which is to be allowed to continue.

"Now, Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt that it is the expectation of the incoming Administration either to collect duties at those ports by vessels of war stationed off their harbors, or, by some measure to be authorized at this session of Congress, to close their ports, and not regard them any longer as ports of entry. One of these things has to be, and inevitably must be done. Now, if the Southern Confederacy should treat that as a hostile act, an act of war, and should organize an armed force to make an aggressive war upon the United States, this Government must be placed in a position to protect and defend itself. I do not myself suppose that even the possession of the forts in the Southern States will be regarded as a matter of sufficient practical importance to imperil the peace of the country by attempting their recapture, until all hopes of a peaceable adjustment are abandoned. But if there should be a hostile attack made on vessels of the United States stationed off Southern ports, if that mode of executing the laws should be resisted by marching Southern armies into Northern States, or by seeking the capture of the capital of the Republic, then the Administration must be placed in a position to protect and defend itself against aggression."

Mr. Howard, of Michigan, who supported the bill, said: "I suppose the idea of those gentlemen who attack the bill so violently is that, in some way, secession is a peaceful or constitutional remedy; or, in other words, that it has a legal existence. Could any thing be more absurd? Or, if they themselves admit that this is revolution, how can they resist the suppression of revolution? Mr. Speaker, we need ut a moment to show that it has no legal foundation whatever; for an ordinance of secession can by no possibility rise higher, in a legal point of view, than the State constitution. If a secession convention be legal, or if it be regular, if it observe all formality, if it receive the unanimous indorsement of the people of the seceding States, then it rises just as high, and no higher, than any other organic act of the State. It is just as high as a State constitution, and no higher. And yet the Constitution makes the Constitution itself, and the laws of the Union, and the treaties made by the authorities of the United States the supreme law of the land, any thing in any State constitution, or, if you please, any thing in your ordinances of secession, to the contrary notwithstanding. It is absurd. It needs only to be stated, to show that it can have no legal foundation whatever. It is, therefore, a revolution—no more and no less."

Mr. Pryor, of Virginia, replied: "In a word, sir, it is a measure of coercion—a measure under the authority of which the President may carry on a campaign of vigorous hostilities against a State—a measure, in truth, of civil and fraternal war.

"Such, sir, are the object and effect of this bill; but it is distinguished by details of a still more monstrous character. It submits to the fallible and capricious judgment of a single individual—the President of the United States— to determine when occasion shall require the employment of force against a State, and so invests him with the arbitrary power of initiating civil war. To carry out the suggestion of his understanding, (it may be the impulse of his resentment or the dictate of his ambition,) the bill authorizes the President to grasp all the naval and military resources of the country —the militia as well as the regular service— millions of men—and to hurl them in fatal attack upon a member of this Confederacy."

Mr. Curtis, of Iowa, continued the debate, and in reply to the previous speaker said: "To say that we have not the constitutional power to protect ourselves is an absurdity; and to say that we are going to revolutionize ourselves, is to say that we are going to commit suicide, and conclude our career as a felo de »e. Can it be possible, does anybody suppose, that the Federal Government designs to create revolution; that it designs to promote civil war; that it designs Page 216 to destroy itself? Does anybody really suppose a nation would be guilty of the folly of raising soldiers for the purpose of desolating and destroying its own fair proportions? Is there any President, any prince, any potentate, that would, with purpose and power, seek to destroy his own power? And will our Government, our republican Government, disregard this fundamental principle of self-preservation?"

On the motion to postpone the further consideration of the bill to a future day, Mr. Bouligny, of Louisiana, when the vote was taken, said: "With all due respect to the gentleman who introduced this bill, I must say—and it is my duty to say—that it is the most infamous and outrageous bill that has ever been presented to Congress; and I say, shame on the head of the-man who did it. I vote 'aye.'"

The following resolution, censuring the Secretary of the Navy, was reported to the House by Mr. Dawes:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy, in accepting without delay or inquiry the resignations of officers of the navy who were in arms against the Government when tendering the same, and of those who sought to resign that they might be relieved from the restraint imposed upon them by their commissions on engaging in hostility to the constituted authorities of the nation, has committed a grave error, highly prejudicial to the discipline of the service and injurious to the honor and efficiency of the navy; for which he deserves the censure of this House.

On taking the question, it was adopted. Ayes, 95; noes, 62.

Subsequently, the report of the Committee of Thirty-three was taken up for final action. The vote was first taken on the following proposition of Mr. Burch, of California:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it be, and is hereby, recommended to the several States of the Union, that they, through their respective Legislatures, request the Congress of the United States to call a convention of all the States; in accordance with article fifth of the Constitution, for the purpose of amending said Constitution, in such manner and with regard to such subjects as will more adequately respond to the wants, and afford more sufficient guarantees to the diversified and growing interests of the Government, and of the people composing the same.

This proposition was rejected by a vote of 74 to 108.

A motion was then made to lay the whole subject on the table, which was lost. Ayes, 14; noes, 179.

A vote was next taken on the following proposition of Mr. Kellogg, of Illinois: Strike out all after the word "that," and insert: The following articles be, and are hereby, proposed and submitted as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of said Constitution, when ratified by Conventions of three-fourths of the several States.

 Art. 13. That in all the territory now held by the United States situate north of latitude 8H° 80' involuntary servitude, except in the punishment for crime, is prohibited while such territory shall remain under a territorial government; that in all the territory now held south of said line, neither Congress nor any Territorial Legislature shall hinder or prevent the emigration to said territory of persons held to service from any State of this Union, when that relation exists by virtue of any law or usage of such State, while it shall remain in a territorial condition; and when any territory north or south of said line, within such boundaries as Congress may prescribe, shall contain the population requisite fur a member of Congress, according to the then Federal ratio of representation of the people of the United States, it may, if its form of government be republican, be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, with or without the relation, of persons held to service and labor, as the constitution of such new State may provide.

Art. 14. That nothing in the Constitution of the United States, or any amendment thereto, shall be so construed as to authorize any department of the Government to in any manner interfere with the relation of persons held to service in any State where that relation exists, nor in any manner to establish or sustain that relation in any State where it is prohibited by the laws or constitution of such State. And that this article shall not be altered or amended without the consent of every State in the Union.

Art. 15. The third paragraph of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution shall be taken and construed to authorize and empower Congress to pass laws necessary to secure the return of persona held to service or labor under the laws of any State, who may have escaped therefrom, to the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

Art. 16. The migration or importation of persons held to service or involuntary servitude, into any State, territory, or place within the United States, from any place or country beyond the limits of the United States or territories thereof, is forever prohibited.

Art. 17. No territory beyond the present limits of the United States and the territories thereof, shall be annexed to or be acquired by the United States, unless by treaty, which treaty shall be ratified by a vote of two-thirds of the Senate.

This proposition was rejected. Ayes, 33; noes, 158.

The vote of the house was next taken on the following proposition, submitted by Mr. Clemens, of Virginia:

Joint Resolution.

Whereas the Union is in danger; and owing to the unhappy divisions existing in Congress, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for that body to concur, in both its branches, by the requisite majority, so as to enable it either to adopt such measures of legislation, or to recommend to the States such amendments to the Constitution, as are deemed necessary and proper to avert that danger; and whereas, in so great an emergency, the opinion and judgment of the people ought to be heard, and would be the best and surest guide to their Representatives: Therefore,

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That provision ought to be made by law, without delay, for taking the sense of the people, and submitting to their vote the following resolutions as the basis for the final and permanent settlement of those disputes that now disturb the peace of the country and threaten the existence of the Union.

Joint Resolutions proposing certain amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

Whereas serious and alarming dissensions have arisen between the Northern and Southern States, concerning the rights and security of the rights of the slaveholding States, and especially their right in the common territory of the United States; and whereas it is eminently desirable and proper that those dissensions, which now threaten the very existence of this Page 217 Union, should be permanently quieted and settled by constitutional provisions which shall do equal justice to all sections, and thereby restore to the people' that peace and good will which ought to prevail between all the citizens of the United States: Therefore,

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both Houses concurring,) That the following articles be, and are hereby, proposed and submitted as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of said Constitution, when ratified by conventions of three-fourths of the several States.

Art. 1. In all the territory of the United States now held or hereafter acquired, situate north of the southern boundary of Kansas and the northern boundary of New Mexico, slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, is prohibited, while such territory shall remain under territorial government. Id all the territory south of said line now held or hereafter acquired, slavery of the African race is hereby recognized as existing, and shall not be interfered with by Congress; but shall be protected as property by all the departments of the territorial government during its continuance; and when any territory, north or south of said line, within such boundaries as Congress may prescribe, shall contain the population requisite for a member of Congress, according to the then Federal ratio of representation of the people of the United States, it shall, if its form of government be republican, be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, with or without slavery, as the constitution of such new State may provide.

Art. 2. Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery in places under its exclusive jurisdiction, and situate within the limits of States that permit the holding of slaves.

Art. 3. Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery within the District of Columbia so long as it exists in the adjoining States of Virginia and Maryland, or cither, nor without the consent of the inhabitants, nor without just compensation first made to such owners of slaves as do not consent to such abolishment. Nor shall Congress at any time prohibit officers of the Federal Government, or members of Congress, whose duties require them to be in said district, from bringing with them their slaves, and holding them as Buch, during the time their duties may require them to remain there, and afterwards taking them from the district.

Art. 4. Congress shall have no power to prohibit, or hinder the transportation of slaves from one State to another, or to a territory in which slaves are by law permitted to be held, whether that transportation be by land, navigable rivers, or by the sea.

Art. 5. That, in addition to the provisions of the third paragraph of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States, Congress shall have power to provide bv law, and it shall be its duty so to provide, that the United States shall pay to the owner who shall apply for it, the full value of his fugitive slave, in all cases, when the marshal, or other officer, whose duty it was to arrest said fugitive, was prevented from so doing by violence or intimidation, or when, after arrest, said fugitive was rescued by force, and the owner thereby prevented and obstructed in the pursuit of his remedy for the recovery of his fugitive slave, under the said clause of the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof. And in all cases, when the United States shall pay for such fugitive, they shall have the power to reimburse themselves by imposing and collecting a tax on the county or city in which said violence, intimidation, or rescue was committed, equal in amount to the sum paid by them, with the addition of interest and the costs of collection; and the said county or city, after it has paid said amount to the United States, may, for its indemnity, sue and recover from the wrong-doers w rescuers, by whom the owner was prevented from the recovery of his fugitive slave, in like manner as the owner himself might have sued and recovered.

Art. 6. No future amendment of the Constitution shall affect the five preceding articles, nor the third paragraph of the second section of the first article of the Constitution, nor the third paragraph of the second section of the fourth article of said Constitution; and no amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress any power to abolish or interfere with slavery in any of the States by whose laws it is or may be allowed or permitted.

Art. 7. Sec. 1. The elective franchise and the right to hold office, whether Federal, State, territorial, or municipal, shall not be exercised by persons who are, in whole or in part, of the African race.

Sec. 2. The United States shall have power to acquire, from time to time, districts of country in Africa and South America, for the colonization, at the expense of the Federal Treasury, of such free negroes and mulattos as the several States may wish to have removed from their limits, and from the District of Columbia, and such other places as may be under the jurisdiction of Congress.

And whereas also, besides those causes of dissension embraced in the foregoing amendments proposed to the Constitution of the United States, there are others which come within the jurisdiction of Congress, and may be remedied bv its legislative power; and whereas it is the desire of Congress, as far as its power will extend, to remove all just cause for the popular discontent and agitation which now disturb the peace of the country and threaten the stability of its institutions: Therefore,

1. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the laws now in force for the recovery of fugitive slaves are in strict pursuance to the plan and mandatory provisions of the Constitution, and have been sanctioned as valid and constitutional by the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States; that the slaveholding States are entitled to the faithful observance and execution of those laws, and that they ought not to be repealed, or so modified or changed as to impair their efficiency; and that laws ought to be made for the punishment of those who attempt, by rescue of the slave, or other illegal means, to hinder or defeat the due execution of said laws.

2. That all State laws which conflict with the fugitive slave acts, or any other constitutional acts of Congress, or which, in their operation, impede, hinder, or delay the free course and due execution of any of said acts, are null and void by the plain provisions of the Constitution of the United States. Yet those State laws, void as they are, have given color to practices, and led to consequences which have obstructed the due administration and execution of acts of Congress, and especially the acts for the delivery of fugitive slaves, and have thereby contributed much to the discord and commotion now prevailing. Congress, therefore, in the present perilous juncture, does not deem it improper, respectfully and earnestly, to recommend the repeal of those laws to the several States which have enacted them, or such legislative corrections or explanations of them as may prevent their being used or perverted to such mischievous purposes.

3. That the act of the 18th of September, 1850, commonly called the Fugitive Slave Law, ought to be so amended as to make the fee of the commissioner, mentioned in the eighth section of the act, equal in amount, in the cases decided by him, whether his decision be in favor of, or against the claimant. And to avoid misconstruction, the last clause of the fifth section of said act, which authorizes the person holding a warrant for the arrest or detention of a fugitive slave, to summon to his aid the posse comitatus, and which declares it to be the duty of all good citizens to assist him in its execution, ought to be so amended as to expressly limit the authority and duty to cases in which there shall be resistance, or danger of resistance or rescue.

4. That the laws for the suppression of the African slave trade, and especially those prohibiting the importation of slaves into the United States, ought to be made effectual, and ought to be thoroughly executed, and all further enactments necessary to those ends ought to be promptly made.

This proposition was rejected. Ayes, 80; noes, 113.

The first series of resolutions reported by the Committee of Thirty-three were next put to vote. They were as follows:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all attempts on the parts of the Legislatures of any of the States to obstruct or hinder the recovery and surrender of fugitives from service or labor, are in derogation of the Constitution of the United States, inconsistent with the comity and good neighborhood that should prevail among the several States, and dangerous to the peace of the Union.

Resolved, That the several States be respectfully requested to cause their statutes to be revised, with a view to ascertain if any of them are in conflict with or tend to embarrass or hinder the execution of the laws of the United States, made in pursuance of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States for the delivering up of persons he'd to labor by the laws of any State and escaping therefrom; and the Senate and House of Representatives earnestly request that all enactments having such tendency be forthwith repealed, as required by a just sense of constitutional obligations, and by a due regard for the peace of the Republic; and the President of the United States is requested to communicate these resolutions to the Governors of the several States, with a request that they will lay the same before the Legislatures thereof respectively.

Resolved, That we recognize slavery as now existing in fifteen of the United Slates by the usages and laws of those States; and we recognize no authority, legally or otherwise, outside of a State where it so exists, to interfere with slaves or slavery in such States, in disregard of the rights of their owners or the peace of society.

Resolved, That we recognize the justice and propriety of a faithful execution of the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, on the subject of fugitive slaves, or fugitives from service or labor, and discountenance all mobs or hindrances to the execution of such laws, and that citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.

Resolved, That we recognize no such conflicting elements in its composition, or sufficient cause from any source, for a dissolution of this Government; that we were not sent here to destroy, but to sustain and harmonize the institutions of the country, and to see that equal justice is done to all parts of the same; and finally, to perpetuate its existence on terms of equality and justice to all the States.

Resolved, That a faithful observance, on the part of all the States, of all their constitutional obligations to each other and to the Federal Government, is essential to the peace of the country.

Resolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government to enforce the Federal laws, protect the Federal property, and preserve the Union of these States.

Resolved, That each State be requested to revise its statutes, and, if necessary, so to amend the same as to secure, without legislation by Congress, to citizens of other States travelling therein, the same protection as citizens of such State enjoy; and also to protect the citizens of other States travelling or sojourning therein against popular violence or illegal summary punishment, without trial in due forum of law, for imputed crimes.

Resolved, That each State be also respectfully requested to enact such laws as will prevent and punish any attempt whatever in such State to recognize or sei on foot the lawless invasion of any other State or territory.

Resolved, That the President be requested to transmit copies of the foregoing resolutions to the Governors of the several States, with a request that they be communicated to their respective Legislatures.

These resolutions were passed. Ayes, 136; noes, 53.

The next proposition was the report of the committee for an amendment of the Constitution, as follows:

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both Houses concurring,) That the following article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of said Legislatures, shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as a part of the said Constitution, namely:

Art. 12. No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

This proposition failed to receive a two-thirds vote, and was therefore rejected. Ayes, 123; noes, 71.

The vote was subsequently reconsidered, and the resolution was then passed by the constitutional majority. Ayes, 138; noes, 65.

The bill granting to fugitives from labor a trial by jury in certain cases, was then passed.

The next proposition of the committee relative to fugitives from justice was rejected.

______

In the Senate a bill was introduced which provided that whenever, in the opinion of the Postmaster-General, the postal service cannot be safely continued, or the post-office revenues collected, or the postal laws maintained, or the contents of the mails preserved inviolate till delivered to the proper address, or any post route, by reason of any insurrection or resistance to the laws of the United States, he may discontinue the postal service on such route, or any part thereof, and any post-offices thereon, till the same can be safely restored, and he shall report his action to Congress.

Mr. Douglas, of Illinois, said: "It strikes mo it is rather a peace measure than otherwise."

Mr. Wade, of Ohio, said: "I hope that this simple bill, that has been said to be a peaceful measure, which contemplates nothing but peace, will be suffered to pass without involving any of the controverted subjects that undoubtedly will come up better on some other occasion. I am anxious to get it through without any unnecessary delay. We have no time to debate."

Mr. Green, of Missouri, replied: "I am not certain but that the substitute proposed by the Senator from Texas will accomplish all that I desire. It is useless for us to try to deceive each other, and blink a question which underlies the whole proceeding. There is no insurrection in this Union; there is no obstruction to the passage of the mails within this Union; Page 219 but this is an indirect attempt to strike at States which claim to have seceded from the Union. That is the sole purpose of it; and why, therefore, shall we undertake to employ terms to deceive the public and mislead honorable citizens, with reference to the real purposes that we have in view?"

Mr. Mason, of Virginia, opposed the bill, saying: "Mr. President, if the bill passes the Senate in this form, it will be as the deliberate sense of Congress that there is no independent government consisting of States that formerly belonged to this Government; that there is no such thing as a new empire under the title which they have recently assumed; that there is no part of that which once constituted the United States that is no longer a part of the United States. It assumes that the Federal Government is just as potential within the limits of those States as it was twelve months ago. It assumes that the whole machinery of this Government is in operation within the limits of those States now, and competent to execute and to enforce the laws. It assumes, in other words, as facts upon which legislation is to rest, those which have no existence but in the chimerical brain of the visionary. Sir, there are no Federal laws—I mean laws of the United States—now in operation in one of those States. There are no Federal officers there—not one. The Post-office Department, as I understand, occupies a very equivocal relation, adopted for the convenience of those States that have abandoned the Union; and so far, without any act disaffirming it on the part of those States—a mere temporary arrangement until some other is made; but there is no Federal law under the sanction of any power here now existing in one of those States. Yet, this bill assumes, as the existing relation between the two separate countries, that the people of one are in a state of insurrection or rebellion." Again, he said: "When it is determined as the fixed purpose of this Government to treat these States as in insurrection and rebellion, with all the consequences that must enter, let it be done as a deliberate act, and not as a mere recital in a post-office bill; and then, God defend the right !"

Mr. Fessenden, of Maine, alluding to the opposition to the bill, replied, generally: "Sir, what is the secret of all this? The secret is found in the proposition of the Senator from Texas, [Mr. Hemphill.] Gentlemen want us to acknowledge, and to force us to an acknowledgment, on this side of the chamber, that secession is lawful and has been carried into effect. They are perfectly willing to agree to this proposition if we will acknowledge that; and gentlemen here, acting as Senators of the United States, wish to compel the Congress of the United States to make that acknowledgment before they will even pass a measure of peace, before they will even allow the President to suspend the operation and the enforcement of the laws. It seems, from their action, they would rather force the President into the use of force than pass a measure of this sort without compelling this side of the chamber and Congress to consent and assent to the idea that secession is of itself proper and constitutional, and has been carried into effect, and that we have no right to interfere. They will not let us have a measure of peace, unless we shall give up our opinions on this subject. That is simply the truth about it; and the question is, whether it is to be carried out."

Mr. Douglas later in the day thus expressed his opinion: "Sir, I must say, in all frankness, that I regard no man as friendly to this Union who is unwilling to enter upon such a system of pacification and compromise as will preserve it. In my opinion, there is a deliberate plot to break up this Union, under pretence of preserving it. In my opinion, there are as many disunionists this floor and on the floor of the other branch of Congress, from the North as from the South, men who have reasoned themselves into the belief that it is wiser and better to drive the sections into collision, to force disunion, and to get up a war, to have bloodshed, and render reunion impossible, and then make a treaty of peace. I hope I am mistaken in this. I have too much respect for the intelligence of the Senators to believe for one moment that they hope to preserve this Union by military force. They know that the use of military force, producing collision and bloodshed, must result in a civil war between fifteen States on one side, and the remainder of the States of the Union on the other. How can you avoid that result? You must do one of two things. Either settle the difficulty amicably, or by the sword. An amicable settlement is a perpetuation of the Union. The use of the sword is war, disunion, and separation, now and forever."

Mr. Hemphill, of Texas, in opposing the bill said: "I intended to say there was but one issue in this case; and that is, whether the laws of the United States are in force in those States that have seceded, or not. There is no other issue whatever. It is impossible to evade or dodge the issue in any way. The only objection I had to the amendment of the Senator from Delaware was, that it contained the words 'till the same can be safely restored.' If that clause was stricken out, I should have no objection to the amendment; but any words or sentence, or any provision whatsoever which in any way whatever intimated that the laws of the United States were still in force in those States, I object to. They are not in force. They have no power whatever there. That is the only and sole issue in this case, as stated by the Senator from Maine [Mr. Fessenden] the other day."

Mr. Nicholson, of Tennessee, took the same view. "I concur with the Senator from Texas, that there is really but one question here; and that is, whether the laws of the United States are in force or not in the States that have seceded? I do not propose to discuss the question; Page 220 but simply to state the reason why I cannot vote for his amendment. According to my view of the relations now subsisting between this Government and the seceding States, the laws of the United States are suspended there by act of revolution, not by act of peaceful secession; and therefore, being in a state of suspension, I think any law on the subject wholly unnecessary."

The last hours of the Thirty-sixth Congress were rapidly approaching, and the remainder of the session was chiefly devoted to making that decision which had already been anticipated. The adjournment of Congress without any action relative to the crisis of the country, had been steadily foretold. The various propositions now came up in each House for the last time.

In the Senate a communication was received from the President of the Peace Conference, (tee Peace Conference,) containing the final action of that body. This was referred to a committee consisting of Messrs. Crittenden, Bigler, Thomson, Seward, and Trumbull. At the next meeting of the Senate the committee reported the propositions as they came from the Peace Conference. After the report was made, Mr. Seward, of New York, rose and said:

"The honorable Senator from Illinois (Mr. Trumbull) and myself constituted a minority of the committee. "We dissent from the report, and we proposed in committee to submit a substitute. The majority held that, for some reason sufficient in their estimation, we were not entitled to submit a minority report. I therefore ask leave of the Senate to introduce a joint resolution in my own name, and in which the honorable Senator from Illinois authorized me to say that he concurs with me, and which I ask unanimous consent to have read and printed; and it will be the subject of consideration at such time, hereafter, as the Senate shall choose to hear it, either in connection with the other or not."

The proposition of Mr. Seward was read, as follows:

A joint resolution concerning; a national convention to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

Whereas the Legislatures of the States of Kentucky, New Jersey, and Illinois, have applied to Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States: Therefore,

Be it resolved, &e., That the Legislatures of the other States be invited to take the subject into consideration, and to express their will on that subject to Congress, in pursuance of the fifth article of the Constitution.

Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, moved to amend the first section of the report by substituting the first section of the Crittenden proposition. A discussion followed on the propriety of amending the recommendation of the Peace Conference, when Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, rose and said:

"I want to make an appeal to the friends of some proposition of peace. This is the last day of the session but one, and we have not made the progress of one line. We have gone into an eternal discussion about questions of order, and that, too, in defiance of the rule of the Senate. I insist that the question shall be decided without further debate."

Mr. Hunter, of Virginia, replied:

"After as careful an examination as I have been able to give this proposition from the Peace Conference since it was printed, that is I to say, within the last day or two, I have come I to the conclusion that it would not only make' a great many more difficulties than it would remove, if it should be adopted as an amendment to the Constitution, but that it would place the South—the slaveholding States—in a far worse position than they now occupy under the present Constitution, with the Dred Scott decision as its exposition."

Mr. Crittenden followed, urging the Senate to approve of the Peace Conference proposition, and justifying his support of it in preference to his own propositions for the following reasons: "I do not stop to inquire whether I like these resolutions better than I do those proposed by myself, or the amendments now offered by the Senator from Virginia. We are near the close of our session. I have looked upon the proceedings of this great and eminent body of men as the best evidence of public opinion outside of this body, and of the wish and will of the States they represent. I am for peace. I am for compromise. I have not an opinion on the subject of what would be best that I would not be perfectly willing to sacrifice to obtain any reasonable measure of pacification that would satisfy the majority. I want to save the country and adjust our present difficulties." [Applause.]

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Bright in the chair) called to order.

Mr. Crittenden: "That is what I want to do. That is the object I am aiming at. I attach no particular importance—I feel, at least, no selfish attachment—to any opinions I may have proclaimed on the subject heretofore. I proclaimed those opinions because I thought them right; but I am ready to sacrifice them, any and every one of them, to any more satisfactory proposition that can be offered. I look upon the resolutions proposed by this convention as furnishing us, if not the* last, the best hope of an adjustment; the best hope for the safety of the people and the preservation Of the Government. I will not stop to cavil about the construction of these words; but I see none of the difficulties that suggest themselves to the mind of my friend from Virginia. Look at that third section, which has been the subject of his particular criticism. Every part and portion of it is a negation of power to Congress, and nothing else; and yet he has argued as if it gave Congress power; as if it conferred more power upon Congress. It leaves to the States all the rights they now have; all the remedies Page 221 which they now have; and consists merely in a negation of power to Congress. How can that take away the rights of the people? How can that make our condition worse? I cannot possibly see. It is nothing but a negative from beginning to end; and therefore it cannot take away any thing from the people. It may take from Congress, but cannot take away from the States, or the people, any thing. It is negative in its form and in its language, from beginning to end, that Congress shall have no power to do this, that, or the other. If they have that power under the present Constitution, it is taken away. That is all. It takes away no power from the States. It takes away no rights from individuals. Its simple office is the negation of power to Congress. That is all there is in it; and how, under that, can the gentleman find constructions which are to increase our difficulties and diminish our rights? He says the language will need construction. So does all language need construction. I do not see that this is particularly so.

"Now, sir, the Senator offers my own proposition as an amendment to this.

I shall vote against my own proposition here; I shall vote for this. "I shall vote for the amendments proposed by the convention, and there 1 shall stand. That is the weapon offered now, and placed in my hand, by which, as I suppose, the Union of these States may be preserved; and I will not, out of any selfish preference for my own original opinions on this subject, sacrifice one idea or one particle of that hope. I go for the country; not for this resolution or that resolution, but any resolution, any proposition, that will pacify the country. Therefore, I vote against my own to give place to a proposition which comes from an authority much higher than mine—from one hundred and thirty of the most eminent men of this country, out of which number a Senate might be selected that might well compare in point of talent and intellect and ability even with this honorable body." In conclusion he said:

"Mr. President, I have gone perhaps a little farther than I ought to have done. It is not now necessary that I should enter into a vindication of every provision of these amendments offered by the convention. It i3 sufficient to speak to the amendment which the gentleman has offered. Excluding territory hereafter to be acquired, I think in substance we ought to be satisfied with that; I believe that will make peace; I believe that will give substantial security to our rights, and to the rights which the Southern States claim. With that I am satisfied. It is enough for the dreadful occasion. It is the dreadful occasion that I want to get rid of. Rid me of this, rid the nation of this, and I am willing to take my chance for the future, and meet the perils of every day that may come. Now is the appointed time upon which our destiny depends. Now is the emergency and exigency upon us. Let us provide for them. Save ourselves now, and trust to posterity and that Providence which has so long and so benignly guided this nation, to keep us from the further difficulties which in our national career may be in our way."

Mr. Mason, of Virginia, followed with a careful examination of the proposition of the Peace Conference, and thus expressed his opinion:

"I should have been certainly gratified, if my honored State of Virginia had been successful in the mediation which she invited of all the States, with a view to agree upon an adjustment which would guarantee the rights of the South. I deeply deplore, and I doubt not my State will deplore, that that mediation has not been effected. So far from impugning any motives or purpose of that honorable and distinguished body, I doubt not that, in the short time that was allowed to them, they got together the best mode of adjustment which would satisfy their judgment, but which, I am sure, will not satisfy the judgment of the Southern States, but would place them in still greater peril, if they were to admit that to become a part of the Constitution. I did not intend to do more than state my objections to it as briefly as I could. I have done so temperately and without heat. I regret that I cannot, as one Senator, propose this as an amendment to the Constitution."

In the debate which still further ensued, Mr. Baker of Oregon avowed his purpose to support the proposition, and in justification of his views said:

"Mr. President, let us be just to these propositions. As a Republican, I give up something when I vote for them; but remember, sir, I am not voting for them now; I am only voting to submit them to my people; and I shall go before them, when the time comes, being governed in my opinion and advice as to whether they shall vote for them or not, as I see what Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Missouri, by their people, desire. To be frank, sir, if this proposition will suit the border States, if there will be peace and union, and loyalty and brotherhood, with this, I will vote for it at the polls with all my heart, and with all my soul; but if I see that the counsels of the Senators from Virginia shall prevail; if my noble friend from Tennessee [Mr. Johnson] shall be overwhelmed; if secession shall still grow in the public mind there; if they are determined, upon artificial causes of complaint, as I believe, still to unite their fate, their destiny, and their hope, with the extremest South, then, perceiving them to be of no avail, I shall refuse them. Therefore, at the polls at last, I shall be governed as an individual citizen by my conviction at the moment of what the ultimate result of these propositions will be; but I nm not voting for that to-day. I am saying, 'People of the United States, I submit it to you; twenty States demand it; the peace of the country requires it; there is dissolution in the very atmosphere; States have gone off; Page 222 others threaten; the Queen of England upon her throne declares to the whole world her sympathy with our unfortunate condition; foreign Governments denote that there is danger to-day that the greatest Confederation the world has ever seen is to be parted in pieces, never to be reunited.' Now, not what I wish, not what I want, not what I would have, but all that I can get, is before me. I know that I do no harm. If the people of Oregon do not like it, they can easily reject it. If the people of Pennsylvania will not have it, they can easily throw it aside. If they do not believe there is danger of dissolution, if they prefer dissolution, if they think they can compel fifteen States to remain in or come back, or if they believe they will not go out, let them reject it. I repeat again, it is their business, it is not mine.

"But, sir, whether I vote for it at the polls or not, in voting for it here it may be said that I give up some of my principles. Mr. President, we sometimes mistake our opinions for our principles. I am appealed to often; it is said to me: 'you believed in the Chicago platform.' Suppose I did. 'Well, this varies from the Chicago platform.' Suppose it does. I stand to-day, as I believe, in the presence of greater events than those which attend the making of a President. I stand, as I believe, at least, in the presence of peace and war; and if it were true that I did violate the Chicago platform, the Chicago platform is not a Constitution of the United States to me. If events, if circumstances change, I will violate it, appealing to my conscience, to my country, and to my God, to justify me according to the motive."

Mr. Green, of Missouri, emphatically opposed the Peace Conference proposition, saying:

Now, Mr. President, I want all these propositions voted down, and I hope my friend from Kentucky will revive his propositions and bring them up again. There is 6ome vitality in them; there is some point in them; but as for these wishy-washy resolutions, that amount to nothing, it is impossible that any Senator here will, for a moment, entertain the idea of supporting them. The Peace Conference! And the smallest peace that ever I have heard of. Let the Senator adhere to his original propositions; let the Senator bring them up and press them upon the attention of the Senate. That is as far backing down as I will go. It is a little more than I want; but still, as a last effort to save the Union, I would go that far. Talk about these measures! These measures, that have no vitality—these measures that amount to a total surrender of every principle—I never will vote for; and let the consequences of the future be what they may, I stake my faith and reputation upon the vote I intend to cast."

On the following day the debate was resumed, and Mr. Lane, of Oregon, expressed his opposition to the propositions of the Peace Conference, and gave these reasons:

I will say only a word, now, as to the amendments proposed to the Constitution. We should never compromise principles nor sacrifice the eternal philosophy of justice. Whenever the Democratic party compromised principle, it laid the foundation of future troubles for itself and for the country. When we do, then, amend the Constitution, it ought to be in the spirit of right and justice to all men, and to all sections. I voted for the Senator's propositions, and I will do so again, if we can get a vote, because there was something in them; something that I could stand by; but there is nothing in the amendments proposed by the Peace Conference. He proposed to establish the line of 86° 30', and to prohibit slavery north of it, and protect it south of it, in all the present territory, or of the territory to be hereafter acquired. In that proposition there was something like justice and right; but-there is nothing in the amendments proposed by the Peace Conference that any man, north or south, ought to take. They are a cheat; they are a deception; they are a fraud; they hold out a false idea; and I think, with all due respect to the Senator—for I have the highest regard for him personally—that he is too anxious to heal the trouble that exists in the country. He had better place himself upon the right and stand by it. Let him contend, with me, for the inalienable and constitutional rights of every American citizen. Let him beware of 'compromising' away the vital rights, privileges, and immunities of one portion of the country to appease the graceless, unrelenting, and hostile fanaticism of another portion. Let him labor, with me, to influence every State to mind its own affairs, and to keep the territories entirely free to the enterprise of all, with equal security and protection—without invidious distinctions—to the property of every citizen. Thus, and only thus, can we have peace, happiness, and eternal Union." Further debate on these propositions was then suspended to take up, on the motion of Mr. Douglas, the joint resolution of the House for the amendment of the Constitution, as follows:

Resolved, &c, That the following article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States; which, when ratified by three-fourths of said Legislatures, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:

Art. 13. No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish, or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, moved to amend by striking out the words "authorize or"; a lengthy debate followed in opposition to all amendments as sure to cause the defeat of the resolution in consequence of the adjournment of the House on the 4th of March. The amendment was finally rejected.

A motion was then made by the same Senator to amend by striking out all after the caption " Article Thirteen " and inserting the Crittenden Page 223 proposition. Another lengthy debate followed, when the Senate adjourned at a late hour on Saturday night, to meet on the next evening at seven o'clock.

It was Sunday evening, at seven o'clock, on the third of March, when the Senate next assembled. The final hours of the existence of the Thirty-sixth Congress had come. The curtain was about to fall upon a national career of rising greatness and prosperity unequalled. The future was uncertain, alarming, hidden. At this unusual hour on the close of a peaceful day, the Senate came together once more to adopt or to reject those propositions which the most venerable member of their body had brought forward with the hope of allaying the irritations, of soothing the angry passions, and of satisfying the imperious demands of the conflicting sections of a great nation.

Long before the Senate met, the galleries were densely filled with spectators, and all the available space on the floor of the chamber was occupied by strangers. After this breach of decorum had been corrected by clearing the floor, and order had been restored, a prelude was offered to the business of the night by the Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Sumner, rising and saying:

"I offer a memorial of five thousand citizens of Massachusetts, in which they call upon Congress to stand by the Constitution as it is, and the Government of the country, and to make no compromise whatever. I understand that there are memorials, signed by thirty-seven thousand persons, similar to this, but they have not yet come to hand. This is simply the forerunner of the others. I offer this now, and ask that it lie on the table."

It was so ordered.

The regular order of business was then called up, and the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Crittenden, took the floor, saying: "I have not risen with any vain ambition or purpose to play the orator. I have no set speech to make."

[Great disturbance was now occasioned by persons endeavoring to get into the already over-crowded galleries.]

The Presiding Officer: "The Sergeant-at-Arms will be required to prevent other persons from entering the gallery doors, and see that order is maintained. It is impossible to proceed with the business in the present condition of things." Mr. Crittenden: "The subject, Mr. President, upon which I wish to address the Senate is altogether too solemn and too interesting to the country to be made the occasion for declamation or eloquence. I do not aim at it. I am a plain man, and I wish to speak plainly what I think and what I believe on this great subject; and my wish is to do it with as much brevity as possible." Mr. Clark: "I do not think it possible at all for the Senator to be heard."

The Presiding Officer: "It is impossible to do business with the prevailing noise."

Mr. Bragg: "I think we shall have to order the galleries to be cleared. I move that the galleries be cleared." S

Some brief remarks followed, when the motion was withdrawn, and Mr. Crittenden continued—to be soon interrupted by the tumult in the galleries, and the discussions which followed relative to clearing them. Order being finally restored, he proceeded to examine all the grounds upon which a compromise was urged, with much eloquence and force. In regard to the sentiment of the people upon the proposition for a compromise, he said:

"What is the number of petitions forwarded? I suppose, if I should say we have received petitions from not less than a quarter of a million, I should be within bounds. In addition to that, societies everywhere have been petitioning in the name of their whole body. State Legislatures have memorialized, and, in fact, petitioned Congress in the name of the people of their States. I do not know how many. The chief agents of the great railroad companies, owning railroads in value to the amount of more than three hundred million dollars, traversing the country from North to South in every direction, have petitioned in favor of the adoption of these propositions of peace, and they, gentlemen of the highest standing and the highest respectability, have declared that, as far as all their travels extended along all these mighty railroads, they have found the people, with great unanimity, of the same opinion, and in favor of the adoption of these propositions."

His view were thus embraced in a few words: "My principle, and the doctrine I teach, is, take care of the Union; compromise it; do any thing for it; it is the palladium—so General Washington called it—of your rights; take care of it, and it will take care of you. Yes, sir, let us take care of the Union, and it will certainly take care of us. That is the proposition which I teach."

Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, followed, and describing the present condition of affairs and examining the measures proposed for adjustment, he thus expressed his views: "Sir, if my friend from Kentucky would employ some of that eloquence of his which he uses in appealing to Republicans, and talking about compromise—in defence of the Constitution as it is, and in favor of maintaining the laws and the Government—we should see a very different state of things in the country. If, instead of coming forward with compromises, instead of asking guarantees, he had put the fault where it belongs; if he called upon the Government to do its duty; if, instead of blaming the North for not making concessions where there is nothing to concede, and not making compromises where there was nothing to compromise about, he had appealed to the South, which was in rebellion against the Government, and painted before them, as only he could do it, the hideousness of the crimes they were committing, and called upon them to return to their allegiance, Page 224 and upon  the Government to enforce its authority, we would have a very different state of things in this country to-day from what now exists.

"This, in my judgment, is the way to preserve the Union; and I do not expect civil war to follow from it. You have only to put the Government in a position to make itself respected, and it will command respect."

The debate was continued by Mr. Wade, of Ohio, Mr. Baker, of Oregon, Mr. Mason, of Virginia, Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, who made an interesting declaration in his remarks, thus: "The Crittenden proposition has been indorsed by the almost unanimous vote of the Legislature of Kentucky. It has been indorsed by the Legislature of the noble old Commonwealth of Virginia. It has been petitioned for by a larger number of electors of the United States than any proposition that was ever before Congress. I believe in my heart, to-day, that it would carry an overwhelming majority of the people of my State; ay, sir, and of nearly every other State in the Union. Before the Senators from the State of Mississippi left this chamber, I heard one of them who now assumes, at least, to be president of the Southern Confederacy, propose to accept it and to maintain the Union if that proposition could receive the vote it ought to receive from the other side of this chamber. Therefore, of all your propositions, of all your amendments, knowing as I do, and knowing that the historian will write it down, at any time before the 1st of January, a two thirds vote for the Crittenden resolutions in this chamber would have saved every State in the Union but South Carolina. Georgia would be here by her representatives, and Louisiana also—those two great States, which, at least, would have broken the whole column of secession. Yet, sir, it has been staved off—staved off for your futile railroad bill; and where is it to-night? Staved off by your tariff bill; staved off by your pension bill."

Mr. Douglas, of Illinois, observed in relation to this statement of Mr. Pugh, that it was true. He thus expressed himself: "The Senator has said that if the Crittenden proposition could have been passed early in the session, it would have saved all the States, except South Carolina. I firmly believe it would. While the Crittenden proposition was not in accordance with my cherished views, I avowed my readiness and eagerness to accept it, in order to save the Union, if we could unite upon it. No man has labored harder than I have to get it passed. I can confirm the Senator's declaration, that Senator Davis himself, when on the Committee of Thirteen, was ready, at all times, to compromise on the Crittenden proposition. I will go further, and say that Mr. Toombs was also."

The motion to substitute the Crittenden resolutions in the House joint resolution was rejected. Ayes, 14; noes, 25.

The next amendment was offered by Mr. Bingham, of Michigan, as follows:

Resolved, That the provisions of the Constitution are ample for the preservation of the Union, and the protection of all the material interests of the country; that it needs to be obeyed rather than amended; and that an extrication from our present danger is to be looked for in strenuous efforts to preserve the peace, protect the public property, and enforce the laws, rather than in new guarantees for particular interests, compromises for particular difficulties, or concessions to unreasonable demands.

Resolved, That all attempts to dissolve the present Union, or overthrow or abandon the present Constitution, with the hope or expectation of constructing a new one, are dangerous, illusory, and destructive; that in the opinion of the Senate of the United States no such reconstruction is practicable; and therefore, to the maintenance of the existing Union and Constitution should be directed all the energies of all the departments of the Government, and the efforts of all good citizens.

This was also rejected. Ayes, 13; noes, 25.

Mr. Grimes, of Iowa, now moved the report of the minority of the Senate Committee, which was embraced in the following resolution:

Whereas the Legislatures of the States of Kentucky, New Jersey, and Illinois have applied to Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States: Therefore,

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Legislatures of the other States be invited to take the subject of such a convention into consideration, and to express their will on that subject to Congress, in pursuance of the fifth article of the Constitution.

This-was rejected. Ayes, 14; noes, 25.

The propositions submitted by the Peace Conference were then offered as an amendment by Mr. Johnson, of Arkansas, and rejected. Ayes, 3; noes, 34.

The question was then taken on the resolution from the House—ayes 24, noes 12—which the presiding officer decided to be a two-thirds vote.

After a vote on several motions for amendment, the question was finally taken on the joint resolutions of Mr. Crittenden, which were rejected. Ayes, 19; noes, 20.

At a very late hour the Senate took a recess until 10 o'clock a. m., March 4th.

The regular session of Congress was closed at the usual hour by the adjournment of both Houses. Of all the acts and resolutions passed during the session, only two very brief ones appear to have arisen out of, or to refer to, the existing or threatening difficulties of the country. One provides for the suspension of the postal service, and is in these words:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever, in the opinion of the Postmaster-General, the postal service cannot be safely continued, or the Post-office revenues collected, or the postal laws maintained, on any post route, by reason of any cause whatsoever, the Postmaster-General is hereby authorized to discontinue the postal service on such route, or any part thereof, and any post-offices thereon, till the same can be safely restored, and shall report his action to Congress.

Approved, February 23, 1861.

The other was a joint resolution for an amendment of the Constitution. (See pp. 222.)

A more conclusive proof of a determination somewhere to prevent every settlement of difficulties by any concession on the part of the North could not be furnished.

The inauguration of Mr. Lincoln took place at 12 o'clock on the 4th of March. Previous to the delivery of his address (see PUBLIC DOCUMENTS) a new Senate, composed of members for the Thirty-seventh Congress, were convened and organized for a session of some days.

On the motion to print the usual number of the Inaugural, a debate commenced on the topic whether it was in favor of peace or war.

Mr. Clingman, of North Carolina, commenced the debate by saying: "I have no objection to printing the Inaugural, as a matter of course; but I must say, that I do not wish to be understood, for one Senator, in assenting to the printing of it, as indorsing its positions at all. If I understand it aright, all that is direct in it, I mean at least, that purpose which seems to stand out clearly and directly, is one which I think must lead to war—war against the confederate or seceding States; and, as I think that policy will be very unwise for the United States, I must say frankly to gentlemen on the other side that I do not see, if we adopt the principles of the Inaugural, how that is to be avoided."

Mr. Douglas, of Illinois, replied: "I understand it to contain a distinct pledge that the policy of the Administration shall be conducted with exclusive reference to a peaceful solution of our national difficulties."

An extended debate followed entirely on the part of Senators in opposition to the Administration. It was suspended to consider the following resolution offered by Mr. Foster, of Connecticut:

Whereas Hon. L. T. Wigfall, now a Senator of the United States from the State of Texas, has declared in debate that he is a foreigner; that he owes no allegiance to this Government; but that he belongs to, and owes allegiance to, another and foreign State and Government: Therefore,

Resolved, That the said L. T. Wigfall be, and he hereby is, expelled from this body.

An amendment was moved by Mr. Clingman, of North Carolina, in these words:

It is understood that the State of Texas has seceded from the Union, and is no longer one of the United States: Therefore,

Resolved, That she is not entitled to be represented in this body.

A brief debate ensued, which was suspended on the introduction of other topics, and afterwards continued, fruitless in results, until nearly the close of the month, when the Senate finally adjourned.

The general character of the legislation of this session of Congress may be stated in a few words. No act was passed increasing or strengthening the military power of the Government. The bills having that object in view, designated "force bills," failed. The appropriations were only of such an amount as were necessary for the successful administration of the Government for the year. The loans authorized were small, one of twenty-five millions and another of ten millions, and designed only to obviate temporary emergencies. Whatever increase was authorized in the navy was no more than might be regarded as necessary to maintain its reputation and efficiency. The troubles of the country, which were  referred to this Congress by President Buchanan, received no solution at their hands. They were left as they were found. The olive branch was not offered, nor was the sword loosed from the sheath. A revenue law affording uncommon protection to manufactures was enacted. This was proposed not for the purpose of husbanding the resources of the country in anticipation of approaching strife, but chiefly as a party measure, and to secure an increase of prosperity to this great national interest. It has proved to be the wisest measure adopted during the session. It immediately checked the importation of foreign manufactures, secured the reduction of the debt of the country to other nations, caused a large importation of specie in payment of exports, and thereby enabled the citizens to advance loans to the Government in its most pressing hour.

__________

EXTRA SESSION.

On the 4th of July, 1861, the first or extra session of the Thirty-seventh Congress* convened at Washington, in compliance with a proclamation of President Lincoln issued on April 15th. (See UNITED STATES.)

____________________________________

* The following is a list of the members of both Houses:

SENATE.

California.—Milton P. Latham and Jos. A. MacDougall

Connecticut.—James Dixon and Lafayette. S. Foster.

Delaware.—James A. Bayard and Willard Salisbury.

Illinois.—Orville H. Browning and Lyman Trumbull.

Indiana.—Jesse D. Bright and Henry S. Lane.

Iowa.—James W. Grimes and James Harlan.

Kansas.—James H. Lane and Samuel C. Pomeroy.

Kentucky.—Lazarus W. Powell and Garret Davis.

Maine.—Lot M. Morrill and William Pitt Fessenden.

Massachusetts.—Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson.

Maryland.— Anthony Kennedy and James A. Pearce.

Michigan.—Zachariah Chandler and Jacob M. Howard.

Minnesota.—Henry M. Rice and Morton  Wilkinson.

Missouri.—Trusten Polk and W. P. Johnson.

New Hampshire.—John P. Hole and Daniel Clark.

New York.—Preston King and Ira Harris.

New Jersey.—John R. Thomson and John C. Ten Eyck.

Ohio.—Benjamin F. Wade and John Sherman.

Oregon.—E. D. Baker and George W. Nesmith.

Pennsylvania.—David Wilmot and Edgar Cowan

Rhode Island.—Jas. F. Simmons and Henry B. Anthony.

Tennessee.—Andrew Johnson. Vermont.—Solomon Foote and Jacob Collamer.

Virginia.—Waitman T. Willey and James 9. Carlisle.

Wisconsin.—James E. Doolittle and Timothy O. Howe.

HOUSE

California — Aaron A. Sargent, T. G. Phelps.

Connecticut—Dwight Loomis, James E. English, Alfred A. Burnham, George C. Woodruff.

Delaware.—George P. Fisher.

Illinois.—Elihu B. Washburne, Isaac N. Arnold, Owen Lovejoy, William Kellogg, William A. Richardson, James C. Robinson, Philip B. Fouke, John A. Logan.

Indiana.— John Law, James A. Cravens, William McKeo Dunn, William S. Holman, George W. Julian. Albert G. Porter, Daniel W. Voorhees, Albert S. White, Schuyler Colfax, William Mitchell, John P. C. Shanks.

Page 226 The Vice-President, Hannibal Hamlin, called the Senate to order.

In the House of Representatives Galusha A. Grow was elected Speaker. He received 99 votes of 159, the whole number cast.

The political complexion of the Senate when all the non-seceding States were represented, was—Republicans, 31; Democrats, 11; Unionists, 5; vacancy, 1. That of the House was— Republicans, 106; Democrats, 42; Unionists, 28; vacancies, 2.

When the oath was administered to the members of the House, Mr. Burnett, of Kentucky, moved the following resolution:

Resolved, That the question of the right of Charles H. Upton, William G. Brown, It. V. Whaley, John S.

Iowa.—James F. Wilson, William Vandever.

Kansas.—Martin F. Conway.

Kentucky.—James 8. Jackson, Henry Grider, Aaron Harding, Charles A. Wicklitfe, George W. Dunlap, Robert Mallory, John J. Crittenden, William II. Wadsworth, John W. Menzies.

Maine.—John N. Goodwin. Charles W. Walton, Samuel C. Fessenden, Anson 1'. Morrill, John II. Rice, Frederick A. Tike.

Maryland.—John W. Chrisfeld, Edwin II. Webster, Cornelius L. L. Leary, Henry May, Francis Thomas, Charles B. Calvert.

Massachusetts.—Thomas D. Eliot, James Bumpton, Benjamin F. Thomas, Alexander H. Rice, Samuel Hooper, John B. Alley. Daniel W. Gooch, Charles It. Train, Goldsmith F. Bailey. Charles Delano, Henry L. Dawes.

Michigan.—Bradley F. Granger, Fernando C. Beaman, Francis W. Kellogg, Rowland E. Trowbridge.

Minnesota.—Cyrus Aldrich, William Windom.

Missouri.—Francis P. Blair, jr., .lames 3. Rollins, William A Hall. Elijah F. Norton, Thomas L. Price, John 3. Phelps, John W. Noell.

New Hampshire.—Gillman Marston, Edward II. Rollins, Thomas M. Edwards.

New Jersey.—John T. Nixon, John L. N. Stratton, William G. Steele, George T. Cobb, Nehemiah Perry.

New York.—Edward H. Smith. Moses F. Odell, Benjamin Wood, James E. Kerrigan, William Wall. Frederick A. Oonkltnz, Elijah Ward, Isaac C. Delaplaine, Edward Haight, Charles H. Van Wyck, John B. Steele, Stephen Baker, Abraham B. Olio, Erastus Corning, James B. McKean, William A. Wheeler, Socrates N. Sherman. Chauncy Vibbard. Richard Franchot, Roscoe Conkling, K. Holland Duell, William E. Lansing, Ambrose W. Clark, Charles B. Sedgwick. Theodore M. Pomeroy. Jacob P. Chamberlin, Alexanders. Diven, Robert B. Van Volkenburg, Alfred Ely. Augustus Frank, Burt Van Dorn, Elbridge G. Spaulding, Reuben E. Fenton.

Ohio.—George H. Pendleton, John A. Gurley, Clement L. Vallandigham, William Allen, James M. Ashley, Chilton A. While. Richard A. Harrison, Samuel Shellabarger, Warren P. Noble, Carey A. Trimble, Valentine B. Horton. Samuel S. Cox Samuel T. Worcester, Harrison G. Blake, Robert H. Nugen. William P. Cutler, James R. Morris, Sidney Edgerton, Albert G. Riddle, John Hutching, John A. Bingham.

Oregon.—George K. Shiel.

Pennsylvania.—William E. Lehman, Charles J. Biddle, John P. Verree, William D. Kelley, William Morris Davis, John Hickman, Thomas B. Cooper, Sydenham E. Ancona, Thaddeus Stevens, John W. Killinger, James II. Campbell, Hendrick B. Wright, Philip Johnson, Galusha A. Grow, James T. Hale, Joseph Bailey, Edward McPherson, Samuel 8. Blair, John Covode, Jesse Lazear, James K. Moorehead, Robert McKnight, John W. Wallace, John Patton, Elijah Babbitt. Rhode Island.—George H. Browne, William  Sheffield.

Tennessee.—Horace Maynard. Vermont.—Ezekiel V. 'Walton, Justin S. Morrill, Portus Baxter.

Virginia— Charles n. Tipton, Edmund Pendleton, Wm. G. Brown, Jacob B. Blair. Kellian V. Whaley. Wisconsin.— John F. Potter, Luther Hanchett, A. Scott Sloan.

Colorado.—Hiram P. Bennett Dakota.—John B. S. Todd. Nebraska.—Samuel G. Daily. Nevada.—John C. Cradlebaugh.

New Mexico.—John S. Watts.

Utah.—John M. Bernhisel.

Washington,—James H. Wallace. Carlisle, and E. H. Pendleton, to seats upon this floor, be referred to the Committee of Elections, when formed, and that they report to this House thereon.

On making this motion he said it was not his purpose to offer any factious opposition to the action of the House, but the State Convention repealed the law ordering an election of members of Congress on the 23d of May. That was the day upon which these persons claimed to be elected. "If Virginia still be in the Union, as is contended by many, then, sir, Virginia is sovereign, and she has the right to prescribe the mode, manner, and time of holding her election for members upon this floor. If the reverse of that proposition be true, then she has no right to be represented here."

Mr. Carlile, of Western Virginia, in reply, said, "that he was elected by nearly a unanimous vote, and the only question that could be raised in his case was: had the convention of Virginia—itself convened by a law enacted by the Legislature, and restricted in its action by that law—had that powerless body the right to annul a solemn act of the Legislature of the State? For, the law convening the convention expressly declared upon its face that no act of that body changing the federal relations of the State, or affecting the organic law of the State, should have any validity until such act of the convention had been referred to the people and ratified by them at the polls."

He further said: "I maintain, and those I represent upon this floor maintain, that we have as much right and as high an interest in the government of the Union as we have in that of our own State. I contend that both proceed from the same sovereign power of the people, and that while the State can change its own organic law, it cannot change its relations to the Federal Union without the consent of those who with the people of that State form the Union."

The whole subject was laid on the table, and the members whose seats were not contested were sworn in.

The Message was communicated to both Houses on the 5th. (See PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.)

On the same day, in the Senate, Mr. Chandler, of Michigan, gave notice of his intention to offer a bill to confiscate the property of all Governors of States, members of Legislatures, judges of courts, and all military officers above the rank of lieutenant, who shall take up arms against the Government of the United States, or aid or abet treason against the Government of the United States, and that the said individuals shall be forever disqualified from holding any office of honor, emolument, or trust, under this Government; the property thus confiscated to be used in restoring to the Union men of the rebel States any losses which may have resulted to them in consequence of the present rebellion.


Source: The American Annual Cyclopaedia and Register of Important Events of the Year, 1861-1865, vols. 1-5. New York: Appleton & Co., 1868.