Mr. COWAN. Well, I will come back to Nebraska directly. Now, Mr. President, one word in regard to the law on this subject. It is certainly within the reach of any Hora?i. Senator here to ascertain exactly what that is. There cannot be a doubt about it, because it is not only the law, but it is the common reason of man without which (unless we belong to such a perfect class of beings as my honorable friendfrom Wisconsin and those whom he apostrophizes, who would die in their tracks rather than fal ter) it would be impossible to get on. Until we come to that stage, I can say to the honorable Senator that the law is that where a man does owe direct, immediate allegiance, and where he acknowledges that he owes it, he has a right, a corresponding and reciprocal right, to demand from his Government to whom he owes it that it shall protect him, and that it shall not leave him to be overridden by any organization whatever; that it shall not leave him to be overridden by a State organization, by a county organization, by an organization of Knights of the Golden Circle, by an organization of precipitators, by an organization of minute men, or any other kind of men, but that that Government is bound and it is the main object of its creation to be there ready to protect him if he refuses to obey that usurped power which attempts to command him. Why not? What is the object of the creation of Government? What is it for? For what is it that I along with the rest of us agreed to establish a central Government, to pay taxes, and to clothe men with authority over us? It is that they may stand sentinel over our rights; that there is a fixed, permanent organization to which the citizens are pledged and agreed; and that the moment any other and adverse orga nization, no matter where it comes from, no matter by whom originated, makes its appearance, the Government which we have instituted for our protection, knowing that we as single men cannot contend against organizations, is bound to i.it down and to protect us. But who ever heard of a man who was compelled to obey a usurping organization, compelled because that organization might have hanged him had he resisted its decree, being subjected to punishment for that enforced obedience when the legitimate power came into possession of the scepter? To assert such a thing in a court of justice is to assert an absurdity and to make a man ridiculous, not only in the eye of the law, but in the eye of the jury. Then, in answer to the question who committed treason in the late war, I say they committed treason who, when they were not commanded by a State and when they were in a position where a State could not compel them to obey, made war upon the U.S. at a time when the U.S. could afford them protection. They were the persons who committed treason, and not those who acted in other circumstances; that is according to my theory, according to the northern theory, according to the Websterian theory as against the Calhoun theory, according to the theory of the sovereignty of the Union, not according to the State sovereignty theory. If you adopt the State sovereignty theory, as I think my Radical friends have adopted it everywhere, then no inhabitant of a State can commit treason after the State herself determines to dissolve the connection between herself and the General Government. I have contended on this floor uniformly that the tie of allegiance was direct between the General Government and the citizen, and that while the citizen owed allegiance to the general Government the General Government owed him protection; that if the citizen was charged. a crime he was entitled to protection. What is that protection? The protection of the citizen is that when he is charged with a crime he has a right to be tried by due process of law. I have been taught from infancy I never heard it, disputed that in that consisted American liberty. What is it that makes GreatBritain today proud, resplendent, and free above all the nations of the earth? It is the same thing which gave to the Roman citizen in the time of Paul the right of what? protection in return for his allegiance. Who dares scourge an Englishman? Who dares or ought to dare today touch an American citizen except in pursuance of the judgment of the law? I say to Senators that when ever they admit away and give wp this great fundamental principle of their Government, they are recreant to their country, recreant to the sires that gave them being, recreant to their history, recreant to their traditions, and recreant to everything that ought to ennoble and give us a place among the nations. Then, I say that wherever direct allegiance is owing, the person owing it is directly responsible. If the allegiance between citizens of the rebellious States and this General Government was direct and immediate, you have no right, you can have no right, to impose any penalties upon them except in pursuance of law; and all your talk about States committing suicide or forfeiting their rights is Calhounism, is nullificationism, is secessionism, is State sovereign tyism in its very worst ismatic form. It cannot be. if I owe direct allegiance to a Government and I am charged with a crime, the very 1st question is am I guilty; and whether I am guilty or not, if I owe allegiance to the government, the Government is bound to protect me in the trial of that issue. Now, I ask my honorable friendfrom Wisconsin whether that is not good law; whether that is not part of the protection which is the reciprocal quid proquofor the allegiance? Have } not a right to come up to my Government face to face and say, “You allege that I have committed a crime; now I demand of you if I owe you allegiance that you shall give me protection.” What protection? Protection until the issue of fact is tried. If it is not that, what is it? If it does not mean that, what does it mean? If it does not mean that, where is liberty, where is security? If any Senator on this floor is charged with an offense by the U.S. Government, has he not a right because of his allegiance to say to that Government, “I cannot be put upon trial until I am 1st indicted by a grand jury, and no penalty can be imposed upon me until a petit jury under the instruction of a judge fo in the law finds me guilty; and even then no penalty can be imposed beyond that which you yourself affixed to this offense before the offense was committed.”.