Mr. STROUSE. Mr. Speaker, in discussing the important question of the reconstruction of the States latcly in rebellion, a subject which not only ngitates Congress but the whole people of our country, I am aware that I find little counteimnce or sympathy from the majority of this House. But this will not deter me, as the Representative of one of the largest and most conservative districts in Pennsylvania, from giving my views n on a subject fraught with consequences involving the stability or downfall of our democratic system of government. The writings and speeches of public men received but little attention during the progress of the war. The public mind was excited; the public pulse was tcvered; a vigorous prosecution of the war was demanded, and the almost unanimous prayer forvictory to he Union arms and a restoration of peace was card through out the middle and western States. Victory at last perched on our banners. The rebels laid down their arms, acknowledged their defeat and complete failure of their attempted severance of our grand Confederation of States. For 4 long years we continued a struggle so fierce, so desperate, and so bloody, that the civilized world was appalled, and the states men of Europe stood aghast at a spectacle unaralleled in the history of civilization and war hre. Brother was arrayed against brother! There stood the father pitted in deadly combat against the sonl One million brave men consigned to untimely gravesl The fields of the South whitened with the bones of the slain l Sadness and mourning brought to 1,000s of firesides! The public finances deranged; an enormous national debt created, with its bur den of taxation entailed upon enerntions unborn. In addition to all t is, the peoplehave patiently borne grievames innumerable. The patriotic citizens, who sincerely loved their country and who opposed every effort at dismemberment of the Union, bore up submissively under all the impositions of power and violations of law organic, statute, and local for the sole and only purpose of preserving the Republic as it was established and founded by the heroes and sages of 1776. In the month of April, 1865, through the bravery and heroism of our Army and Navy, the terrible contest was brought to a clOse. The rebels surrendered and disbanded their armies.” Grimringed war has smoothed his wrinkled front.” “The war is over, ” was upon every tongue. The people assembled in town meetings, and gave vent to their feelings by the rining of bells; bonfires were made, and other cmon strations of joy at the return of gwcct, smiling, blessed peace. The religious community of all denominations assembled in their houses of worship and rayed and thanked most devoutly to Almighty get for the restoration of peace to our unhappy country, and that “ Every man shall cat in safety Under his own vine whlili. lic plants. arid sing The merry songsof peaceto all his neighbors. ". President Lincoln, only aday who before his most diabolical assassination, announced to the rejoicing multitude in this city and to the country that peace had dawned upon us, and the glorious banner of the Union would again wave over our whole country. The rejoicing at the cessation of hostilities and the return of peace was not confined to the North, but even in the States lately in revolt, many “good men and true ” even of those who from compulsion and loca pride had taken up arms against the Federal Government and the entiret of the Union, were glad that the unnaturaly andbloody strife was at an end. What were the expectations of the people at that time? What did our constituents emaud of us, and what do they demand now of us, their RepresentotTVes, who have solemnly sworn to reserve and protect the constitution? Do they want us or ask us to treat the 11 southern States as conquered Territories, and the ten million white people living therein as a conquered nation, a foreign country held by the iron grasp of conquest, and the people as subjects or vas sals? No such demand is made by the people, the honest yeomanry of the great middle, western, and border States. Whatever the ideas of fanatics may be in other localities, whose motto has ever been, ” Rule or ruin, ” certain it is that the great mass of American citizens, native and adopted, desire no arbitra or tyrannical measures or acts on the part of cir servants against the fallen and povertystricken people of the South. We can afford to be may nanimous. We have been victorious, and should not, and cannot, constitution ally or legally, act the part of oppressors acoinst a brave but now submissive people. 131. Speaker, let me not be misunderstood. I am not, and never have been, the defender of secession, or of any movement or act having a tendency to affect the Union of the States. On the Contrary, I have from the beginning opposed secession and disunion in every form. As a Representative of thelpeople in the congress of the U.S. denounced secession asia crime most wicked and monstrous. While I deny the right of any State to secede from the Federal nion under any circumstances, I decidedly combat the idea that the southern States or any of them ever were out of the Union, or had lost their places in the Confederation of States. The Union was formed by the States, hence the title, the U.S. Each one of the old colonial 13 Slates ratified the constitution of their own Union in their capacity of sovereign States, and by this act of ratification became the constituent arts of the Union. It requires no argument to SEOWthat the acts or ordinances of scoression of Virginia, SCarolina, or any of the southern States, were utterly void and invalid, and that neithorthe State nor the maple thereof were affected thereby. Notwithstanding the fact that the powers of the General and State Governments were suspended for a time on account of the usurpation by those in revolt in those States, yet do ure the States never ceased to be a part of the Union, and the people subject to the constitution and the lows of the U.S. President Johnson, in his excellent and patriotic message to this Congress very truly says: “States. with properlimitations of pover, are as sentinl to the existenocof the constitution oflhcU.S. At the very commencement, when we assumeda place ameng the Powers of the earth, the DeclarIndep was adoptedby States; so also were the Articles of Confederation; and when the people of the U.S. ordained and establisiied the constitution, it was the assent of the States. one by one. which gave it vitality. In the event. too, of any amendment to the constitution, the Eropositiop of Congress needs the confirmation of states. Vi 1thout States Jme great branch of the legislntive government would be antinr and if we look be ond the letter of the constitution to the character o our country, its capacity for comprehending within its jurisdiction a vast continental empireisduo to the systcin of Stutes. The bust sccurily for the perpelual existence of the States is the fsu reme authority of the constitution of the U.S. The perpetuitv of the constitution brings with it the perpetuity of the States; their mutual relation makes us what we are and in our political system their connecton is indissoluble. the w olccam ot exisl without the parts, nor the parts without the whole. rv long as the constitution of thoU.S.nndures. the Stateswill endure; the destruction of the one is the destruction of the other: the preservation of the one is the preservation of the other.” For the enunciation of the sound truths contained in his message the President is attacked and aspersed by the radical, leaders and their small followers, because he is determined to stand firmly by the landmarks of the Constitution, and refuses to becOme a traitor by aiding in the obliteration of 11 States and degrad in the white inhabitants by making them the go itical inferior of the negroes. President Johnson has been most consistent in his course on the momentous questions that have agitated this country for the last 5 years. After his nomination for VEEP, in a speech made at Nashville on the 10th of June, 1864, he held the followmg language: “So far as the head of the ticket is concerned the Baltimore convention had said, not only tot e U.S., but to all nations of the earth, that we are determinedto maintain and car out the principles of free government. [Applause.] That convention announced and confirme a principle not to be disregarded. It was that the right of secession and the powerof a State to place itself out of the Union are not recognized. The convention had declared this principle by its action. Tennessee had been in rebellion againstthe Government and we eda treasonablewar ainst its authority, just asot or southern States ha done. She had secededjust as much asother Stateshad and left the Union as far as she had the power to do so. Nevertheless the national convention had declaredthat a State cannot put it selffrom under the national authority. It said. by its 1st nomination, that the presentPresident take him altogether. wastheman to steerthe ship of state for thenext 4 years. [Loud applause.) “Next it saidif I may be permitted to speak of myself, not in the wayo. vanity, but to illustrate a principleWo will o into one of the rebellious States and choosea candidatefor the vico Presidency. Thus the Union party declared its belief that the rebollious Statesare still in the Union and that their loyal citizens are still citizens of the U.S. ” If Tennessee in 1864, with 1,000s of armed rebels within her borders defyin the Federal Government and denying its authority, was a good enough State to take a loyal VEEP from, I would ask whether the same tennessee after the war has ceased, her courts of justice open, and the constitution and laws fully recognized, is not (I fortion a better State and quite good enough to be represented by a Patterson, a Cooper, is Maynard, and other tried and true Union men? Mr. Speaker, is this Congress, in its exclusion of gentlemen elected in pursuance of law, and who are eligible under the constitution, and under our own enactments, acting in a spirit of justice and in accordance with law; or is not the ruling majority of this House in its course revolutionary? Taxation without representation was a primary cause of the revolution by the colonies against GreatBritain and here I beg to note an extract from the speech of Senator DOLITTLE on this subject, which states the case briefly but to the point: “Is it of no practical importance whether 11 States, with their ten million people shall be taxed an"d governed without representation7 ith lessthan 1/3rd of that number of neo glq, o urforefathers, because the Parliament of Great ntain. in which the had no representationmaesed laws to tanthem. doc ared the independenceof those States. ISIZOfDOXrMUCElllDDOIHLDOB whetherthese 11 States an ten million. peoplo shall govern themselves sunder a republican on; of State government. sub;eatonly to the constitution of the U.S., or whether they shall be held assubjectvas sals, to be governed for an indefinite period by the unlimited will of Congress or by the sword? Is it of no practical. in: ortance whether the flag of our country. for which 11la1million havelaid downtheir lives, and which bears 36 stars as an emblem of aUnion of 36 States, speaksa nationstruth or“is amonstrousfalsehood? This is a question which neither men nor parties can avoid or putaside. It demands and Will havean answer. It is a question. Too upon which there is and there can be no compromise and no neutrality. They areStatesin the union under the constitution, or they are not. We must affirm the one or the other. We must stand upon one si e support in the Lincoln and Johnson policy. main aining the nion of those States under the constitution to ho unbroken or we must take our stand with the Senfrom iassachusetts upon the other and maintain that the Union is broken, that secessionis a success and not a failure, so far at least to Withdraw 11 States from the gilzloll3r reduce 11 Statesto the territorial conion. It will be remembered that the Baltimore conJvocnntiiuop, which nominated Lincoln and John ISGM repudiated the idea of the right of secession or that any State was out of the Union. The best evidence of this is the fact that AndrewJohnson, of Tennessee, a State then in rebellion) was nominated for VEEP. If the doctrine promulgated here by the leaders of this House and of the Senate, that the States latel in rebellion are only conquered territory an cannot be rerded as States, and that the pee is are a foreign nation, then the POTUS is ineligible to the high office he holds and must be regarded as a usurperl To sustain the extreme and radical propositions advanced here, copious extracts and quotations have been made from those great lights of the judicial firmament, Grotius, uffendorf, and Vattel, in reference to the jus gentium, the rights of belligerents, civilWar, die. Now, while I regard these high authorities with the most profound respect, I take the liberty to say that the opinions of these eminent writers on the law o nations and the law of nature are not in all cases applicable to this age and to the peeuliar question presented here on the condition of the southern States in their relation to the other States of the Union. Gro tius wrote in Holland 2 centuries ago; Puf fendorf was counselor of state for the Kings of Prussiaand Sweden; Vattel wrote in France. Their writin s on international law were well adapted to the time, to the interpretation of the kings of the continent of Europe, and are doubtless now in man cases safe precedents. Our case, the late reellion, is sui generic, which cannot be classed under any ordinary description of war, civil or foreign. The law of nations, as construed by these old and emi nent authors in monarchical Governments in a past age, ought not and cannot be fairly aplied at this do in our dealing with aportion o our own people, inhabiting a part an parcel of our own territory. A war with a foreign Power, or with a sovereignation, would place the legal question involved in a very different light. V e quelled the rebellion among our own citizens and in our own country. e conquered nothing. We have not more territory, people, or dproperty than we had before. This, in my judgment, is the rational and natural deducion from the premises, in law and in fact. But, Mr. Speaker, we have now been in session near] 3 months, and have done little else than legislate for the benfit of the negro. constitutional amendments by the score for the benefit of the negro; universal suffrage for the benefit of the negro; Freedmens Bureau for the benefit of the negro; and so on, adnauseam. important and most necessary legislation in view of our critical financial and commercial condition is delayed for the party purpose of engineering measures like the Freedmens Bureau, which, in other words, means a gigantic negro alms house, with extraordinary powers and unlimited ramifications, and a horde of local salaried agents, whose duty it shall beto take care of refu gees and freedmen; that is, to feed and clothe runaway, lazy, and vagabond negroes at the expense and cost of the industrious and hard working white people. I have been under the impression that the war was over, the rebellion quelled, and that peace reigns throughout the land. If this he soand there can be no doubt about itI would inquire what we, this congress, or any branch of our Government, have to do with refugees, either black or white? Is the whole country to be turned into one vast almshouse? What is the operation of this measure? The SecyWar is empowered to issue previsions, clothing, fuel, and other supplies, including medical stores and transportation to the emancipated negroes and prac tically establish a poorhouse on the largest scale for the benefit of a people who desire no greater inducement to idleness and indolence than just such an institution. The negro will not be slow to take advantage of this extravagant public charity. No good can possibly result from this had low. lghenegro becomes demoralized and is encouraged inhabits of laziness. on ve shelter and maintenance Lto the black, which you have never done, and probably never will. to the most meritorious and deserving white man, North or South. The country is saddled with an arm of officials, and with an additional blessing oi some 20 million dollars a car expenses to sustain this extensive negro ospital, with its swarm of stewards, from little brigadiers to very small lieutenants. The people want no such an establishment; it is unnecessa and useless. The States, North and Son, under their local laws provide for the poor, aged, and decrepit. Let the ablebodied work! We have no power topass such a law, and if we had, under any of the articles of the constitution, why not begin with the indigent white peole, or at least let them share in its benefits? here are 1,000s of white men disabled in the late war, unfit for work, and subsisting in many cases upon private charity. Why not extend to them a little of the miinificence about to be bestowed upon a horde of negro drones? We have many rave men bearing honorable woundsa number in my own home, Pottsville, the town that sent the very 1st company of patriot volunteers to this city to defend the capital in April, 1861; many widows and orphans of white soldiers; and why ignore them and only legislate for an inferior and lazy race? It might not be out of place in this connection to bestow a passing thought on the car, but honest and industrious emigrant who lands on our shores a stranger in a strange land. We might extend a little Government charity and aid and comfort to this truly valuable element of our population. Nol BefOre this Congress the white man, however deserving, has no status. No “ bureau is established for the poor white soldier, or the poor German, Irishman, or other emigrant; he may get along as best he can. He is a white man! To justify this parental care of the pet lambs of our modern reformers we are informed by speeches here, and by reports of paid agents, humanitarian exgenerals and other women, some in petticoats and otherwise, who are now adventuring in the South on all sorts of spec and peculation, that the poor freedmen are most horribly treated; that their former masters are oppressing them, and committing all sorts of outrages on the “intelligent, docile, and gentle colored brethren and sisters. That this sort of stuff is manufactured for the purpose of inflamin the northern mind, and to affect legislation ere for the benefit of the Republican party, or whatever you choose to colthis mongrel combination, requires no elab oration at my hands; it is wel understood. The condition of affuirs in the South, the accommodation of the people to the change of circumstances, is well known and fully attested by the reports of President Johnson and GenlGrant. But in order to show to this House, and to the people of the country, the shady side of the radical negro loving picture, I copy an article from the Charleston Courier of eburuary 2, giving an account of the treatment received by white men, Pennsylvanians, at the hands of the amiable colored “citizens” of SCarolina. I can say that the gentlemen alluded to are from my own county, Schuylkill, my own neigh bors and friends men of character and means, who went to the South provided with letters here from GenlHoward and others, for the purpose of purchasing lands and engaging in agricultural pursuits. The Clerk Will please read the statement.