Mr. JOHNSON. Why did he not? I have told the honorable member what I suppose to have been the reason, for it is the only reason I have seen assigned, that there was no place in which he supposed the party could be safely kept; and the President has said, and said properly, “he may be kept where he is until you are ready to try him;” but I say, without reference to whoever may be the cause of the detention, it is a reproach to American justice that he should be suffered to remain in prison untried upon a charge of that description. Sir, in the moment of a struggle which threatened to involve the English empire in ruins, when what were called revolutionary societies were filling London and filling the kingdom, the insignificant men, such as Hardy and others, were taken up, imprisoned, in dicted, and tried without delay. The whole power of the Crown was exerted for the purpose of producing a conviction, but exerted in vain. The jury upon pronouncing a verdict of not guilty received the acclamations of the 1000s who surrounded the tribunal, and the unsurpassed and eloquent man by whom they were defended was carried, through the enthusiastic patriotism of his fellow subjects, into his own home in the form of an ovation. And the English Crown submitted. I am not tShteateasp. oloIgfisIt haodf btheeenPPreressidideenntt ooff the UUnniitteedd States I would have paroled that prisoner long since or have bailed him. said to the world and said to my countrymen and I have no doubt as to what would have been the judgment of every civilized and enlightened man within our country's limits “I will not keep in prison a man who may die under my hands unless I can bring him to trial.” If–an event very likely to have hap pened the prisoner had died, or if he were to die now, the responsibility which would rest upon the Executive, or upon the nation if the nation is responsible, would not be less than that responsibility which was visited upon the head of Napoleon when he had executed in the dungeon the Duc d'Enghien. But willing as I am to refer all these mistakes if mistakes they be, as I think they are to an honest intention, what I maintain is that looking to the present condition of the country and a few words on that subject and I shall have done if the section which you propose to repeal does give the President a power which he is otherwise without and cannot possess without the authority of Congress, this is not a time to take it from him. Mr. President, the apparent purpose and the one to which the country and the world will attribute the pending measure is, that in the future hard, inexorable justice is to be meted out to our southern brethren; that generosity, forgiveness, mercy, pardon are no longer to be our policy. These, the greatest virtues which adorn humanity, it will be said, a nation claiming to be magnanimous and known to be all powerful is resolved hereafter to disregard in respect to subdued enemies notoriously in no condition to resist its authority, and uni versally disavowing any such design, present or prospective. That this latter is true, an in cident of a recent date strikingly illustrates. At a dinner in a neighboring southern city, at which Colonel Lee, a son of the commander in chief of the late confederate forces, was present, some one proposed to toast “the fallen flag.” Promptly placing his hand upon the glass he rose and is stated to have said: “Gentlemen, this will never do; we are paroled pris oners; we now have but one flag, and that is the flag of our whole country, the glorious old Stars and Stripes. I can recognize no other, fight for no other, and will drink to no other.” These patriotic words touched the hearts of all who were present, even the one who had proposed the sentiment; and with the universal approval the toast went unpledged. Are not such men to be trusted? If not, who are? If not, may we not well even distrust ourselves? They are enemies no longer, but soliciting to be received as friends, not in a debasing, cringing spirit which would dishonor our common descent, but as brave and honorable men men whose gallantry is attested by 100s of hard fought battles and whose ability and willingness to serve the country were exhibited in times past on the land and the sea, greatly contributing to our military and naval renown, winning for themselves the gratitude of the whole country, and challenging for themselves and their equally brave and skillful northern brethren the admiration of the world. Toward such citizens is the mere power of a conqueror to be used? Are their past services to be wholly forgotten, their willing obedience to be contumeliously overlooked, all political rights to be denied them, and as long as their conquerors please are they to be the mere serfs and slaves of brethren whose equals they are by descent, manhood, and intelligence? If peace and prosperity be of value (and who can doubt it?) this is not the mode to attain them. If it is, all history will be reversed. If it is, men now are not what they have been from the 1st of their political associations. The dullness brought about by despotism its authors have at times fancied to be peace; but in the end I would have they discovered the fatal mistake. Man chained is a man still. The moment the opportunity offers (and Providence sooner or later is sure to offer it) he will cast off his fetters and assert the rights which nature gives him and be free. And such a policy is at variance with our own history. In the civil commotions which have heretofore occurred the opposite policy has been pursued, and with the happiest results. In the unprovoked rebellion in Massachusetts in 1786, after its actual suppression by force, clemency toward the offenders was shown, and all soon became peace, and the Government because of its clemency was placed upon a firmer foundation than it had before. At the termination of our Revolutionary war, while the land was filled with many dissatisfied spirits and State laws of a stringent character had been passed by most of the States, laws of confiscation, &c., Congress in January, 1784, passed a resolve “earnestly recommending to the several States to reconsider and revise all their acts and laws” so as to render them “perfectly consistent not only with justice and equality, but with that spirit of conciliation which on the return of the blessings of peace should universally prevail.” The same policy was pursued by Washington in the instance of the whisky insurrection with the like happy consequence. Not an offender was executed: a few only were tried and none seriously punished. The history of the European world furnishes even still more striking examples of the impolicy of mere force or power and of the policy of kindness and conciliation. The Netherlands in the 16th century were lost to Philip H by the ferocious conduct of Alva; and in that land, under him, the histo rian tells us that “the ax, the stake, the rack, the dungeon knew no rest.” His boast was that he had executed 18,600 persons. But these executions, his council of blood, his devastation of the land ended as in the judgment of God such conduct has ever ended, in defeat. The invader was driven off and the country lost to the inhuman Philip. Poland, because of a policy nearly as inhuman, is now but an expense to Russia. She dreads insurrections; she has vainly endeav ored to prevent or guard against them by force. Kindness, conciliation, mercy would long since have achieved there what they have never failed to achieve everywhere. Austria, because of a like stern policy, has lost her German possessions, and is soon, unless her treatment of Hungary is changed, to lose that country, which might be made the source of wealth and power. All these examples should lead us to a policy of kindness, to a proclamation of peace and amnesty, to a cheerful reception into our political homestead of the brethren who having strayed from it are anxious to return. This done and the sooner it is done the better the desolations the war has caused will be removed, the power of the country be greatly enhanced, its prosperity enlarged, and its ability to meet the expenses the war has entailed upon us placed beyond all doubt, its credit consequently be o put as high if not a higher footing than that of any other nation in the world, and we be again what God I trust designs us to be, brethren forever, having but one flag, “the glorious old Stars and Stripes, ” to fight for.