Mr. SPALDING. Mr. Chairman: Our republican Government, after being exposed for 3/4ths of a centur to the derisive doubts of carping crities abroa, and to the more in sidious and cruel assaults of ambitious men at home, has. at length, “by wa er of battle, ” vindicated its claim to be ranked as 1st among the nations in all the elements of stability power. This proud standpoint has not been reached without unparalleled sacrifices of blood and treasure on the part of our loyal fellow citizens, but as the recuperative energies of the Americau people are known to be adequate to any probable exigencies it is not so important that we dwell upon the have c and cost of the war, from which we have so recently mm: d, as that we try to aroiit by the injunction of lemon patriotism, anil “take care that the Republic receive no detriment” therefrom. To the end that we may approach the dischar of this duty with a just appreciation of the c aracter of that Government which origi, noted in the wisdom of our fathers, and is now sanctified by the blood of their sons, 1 propose to exannue, in a somewhat cursory manner, that dogma of Mr. Calhoun which has been the prolific source of much of our intestine. troubles“that the Government of the U.S. is the Government of a community of States, and not the Government of a nation. ". Upon this political heresy hangs the whole claim of the nulliiier” and the “secessionist, ” which has plagued our country more than 30 1866. 131 years, and finally resulted in the most devastating war known to the history of mankind. am not wantin in respect for the tran scendent abilities of the “great Caroliiiian, ” but it is painful to notice how. “Wild ambition loves to slide not stand, and Fortunes ice prefers toyVirtuesland.” I propose to bring this notion of a copartner ship of States to the touchstone of the constitution itself, as well as its contemporaneous history, and then leave to impartial minds the Just conclusion. As early as the 8th of April, 1787, James Madison, then a member of the conss of the Confederation, sitting in NewYork, wrote to Governor Randolph, of Virginia, and thus succinctly gave his news in regard to the properaction to be taken by the Convention about to assemble in Philadephia to revise the Articles of Confederation: “I hold it for a fundamental point that an individual independence of the States is utterly irreconcilable with the idea of an aggregate sovereignty. I think, at the sametime. that acousolidation oftho States into one simple republic is not less unattain able than it would a inexpedient. “Let it he tried then, whether any middle ground can betaken which will at once support aduo suprem imy of the national authority an leave in force the locgl Iauthorities, so far as they can be subordinutely use u.” This letter of Mr. Madison very trul depicts the constitutional Government which e afterward assisted to frame, and which he administered for 8 years as the immediate such 00880?of Thomas Jelferson in the presidential chair. The constitutional Convention was organized at Philadelphia on Friday, the 25th day of May, 1787. On Wednesday, May 30, the convention, while in ComWhole on the state of the Union, adopted the following Significant resolution with but one State (Con necticut) voting in the negative: "Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee thnt a national Governmentought to he established consisting of a supreme legislative, judiciary. an executive.” This was the 1st resolution adopted by the Convention, and its author was Edmund Randolph, the gentleman to whom Mr. Madison be. written the letter of the 8th of April to which allusion has been made. It forms the 1st of a series of resolutions which were subsequentl placed on file in the dept of State by resident Washington. The distiguished lawyer, Luther Martin, of Maryland, who was a member of the Convention, and who was strongly opposed to the adoption of the constitution byuthe ople, thus speaks of this resolution in s ads to the Legislature of his own State: “Na, so far were the friends of the systemfiom retening that they meant it or considered it as a federal system, that on the questionbein proposed that a union of the tates. merely Fedora, ought to be the sole object of the exerciseof the powersvested in the Convention. it was negatived by a majority of the members and it was resolved, that anational Government ought to be formed.” Chief Justice Yates, of NewYork, in his notes of the secret debates of the Federal convention, says, under date of Tuesday, May 29, 1787: “Ilis Excellency. Governor Randolph, a member from Virginia got up and in a long and elaborate speech showed the defectsin the system of the present federalGovernmentas totally inadequate to the peace safety, and securit of the Confederation, and the absolute necesxty o a more energetic Government“nt. 110closedtheseremarks with a set of resolutions, 15 in number. whgeh he proposed to the convention for their adoption mr as lendin principles whereon to form a new Government. I o candidly confessed that they were not intended for a Frderal Government. Ile meant a strong. Consolidated Union. gnfaph the idea of States should be nearly annihi a On the following day, and when said resolution in respect to a national Government was under consideration, in ComW“ hole “it was asked, ” says Justice Yates, whether it was intended to annihilate State overuments 7” It was answered, ” only so r as the powers intended to be rented to the new Government should clash With the States, when the latter were to yield.” t Hon. Elbridge Gerry, in a letterto the Legislature of Massachusetts, assigning reasons for withholding his signature from the Constitution, says: “It has few. if an. Federal features. but is rather asystcm of nationa Government.”. Hon. John Jay, in an address to the people of the State of NewYork, urging the adoption of the constitution, uses this remarkable language: "The Convention concurred in opinion with the people. that a national Government. competent to every national object. was indispensably necessary.” I could multiply the declarations of eminent men who were upon the stage of action at the time the constitution was framed and adopted, all to the same purport, but I feel the necessity of appropriating someportion of the hour allotted to me to the cousi erotica of the evidence furnished by that instrument itself. It purports, on its face, to be a transfer of governmental power directly from the people to certain constituted authorities, involving the exercise of the higher, attributes of sovereignty. It gives “Congress” power “to make war and to make peace; to raise and support armies and navies; to coin money and regulate the value thereof 5 to regulate commerce with for cign nations and amen the several States; to lay and collect taxes, uties, imposts, and excises.” On the other hand, it effectually interdicts the exercise of powers, by the States respectively, that shall in anywise interfere with these and other high prerogatives of Congress. For that purpose, it provides that " No State shall enter into any treaty. alliance or confederation; grant letters of marque and rerisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts: pass priy bill of attainder. er poet[:50 law or law impairing the ObliilfltlOllof contracts.” Moreover, it provides that "No State shall without the copsent of the congress. lay any impostsor duties on importsor exports except what may be absolutely necessaryfor oxe cuting its inspection laws. Also, that “No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage. kccp troops, or shipsof war in time of peace. enter into an agreementor compact with another State or with a foreign Pewer, or engage in war. Unless actually invaded or in such im minent danger as will not admit of delay.” and, as if to make “assurance doubly sure " the 2nd clause of the 6th article of the constitution speaks this language perpetually: “This constitution and the lawsof the U.S. which s l a made in pursuance thereof and all treatiesmade or which shall be made under the authority of the U.S., shall he thosupreme law of the land; on c udqcsin every Sta toshall be bound thereby. anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” Here I pause, and hail with respectful grati tude the enunciation made by the President in his annual message: “The sovereigntyof the States is the language of spigirifederacmand not the language of the Constitution Thus far I have attempted to show that the framers of the constitution contemplated the creation, “b the people of the U.S., ” of a nationa Government, and not a Confederacy of States. This national Gove rnment was approved and ratified by the people, assembled for the express purpose of cousi ermg it, in their respective State conventions. I have next attempted to show that the national Government is invested with the exercise of many of the high powers incident to severeignty, while the exercise of similar powers is expressl denied to the States. this doubtless true that both governments exercise important functions, and, in their respective sp eres of action, each is independent of the other. But both are limited. an neither is “sovereign.” If I be asked, “Where, then, may sovereignty, in our country, be found to reside?” I answer, unhesitatingly, IN run peoPLE. Look where you will, throughout all the ramifications of Government, State and National and you will find it happily, so ordered that all power, executive, legislative, and judicial, returns, periodically, to its only true sourcerns PEOPLE. The POTUS, whose official position is infinitely more dignified than that of any otcutate in Europe, is only an agent of the people for a term of years and so of the Sens&Reps in Congress; while thel Justiccs of the Supreme Court are all the time “ on their good behatfior.” I am made strong in this position by calling to my support the highest authority. Chief Justice J:13 says in the address to which I have once allu ed, as an argument for the adoption of the constitution: “The proposedGpvernment is to be the goyernmelt of the people; all its oficers are to be their officers, and to exercise no rights but such as the peoplecommit to them. The constitution only serves to lat out that part of the peoples business which they proper, by it. to refer to the management of the persons thercin designated. Those persons are to receive that businessto manage, not for themselves and as their own but as agents and Overseersfor the people. towhomt cyare constantly responsible and by whom only they are to be appointed. Hon. James Wilson, of Pennsylvania, too, in addressing the convention of his own State, as sembled to deliberate on the propriety of adoptingthat constitution, to the exec lence ofwhich, he had, by his consummate wisdom and virtue, contributed so largely, thus expatiated upon this branch of my subject: “There necessarily exists in every Governmenta power from which there is no appeal; and which. for that reason may be termed supreme. absolute and uncontrollable. Where doesthis power reside? "Perhaps some politician who has not considered with sufficient accuracy our political systems. would answerthat in our governments the supreme power was vested in the constitutions. This opinion ag proachcsnear to the truth. but does not reachit. 1 a truth is that in our governments the suprcmo absolute and uncontrollable powerremainsin the people. our constitutions are superior to our L turcs. so the people are superior to our constitution s. Indeed. the superiority in this last instance is in greater. for the people possessover our constitutions control in notas whas right. In constitution. all authority is derived from the people.” and so the President very justly declares in his message: “Our Government springs from and was made for the people: not the people for the Government. To them it owesallegiance; from them it. mustderive its courage. strength and wisdom.” It has been claimed, however, that notwith stanfliu g the General G government, in all national matters, issu reme in its authority, and the individua States have not the shaadlotwhough o a right to secede peaceably from the Union, yet, if anyone or more States resort to armed force to accomplish that purpose, the strong "arm of the national Executive is. paralyzed and for the reason that “the constitution nowhere dele gates to the General Government the power to declare and make war against a State. I hold this objection to be puerile in the lowest degree. As well may the citizen of a State, when arraigned at the bar of the court of his county for the commission of a crime, demand an exhibition of the war power, on the page of the State constitution, before he can be subjected to punishment for his offense. The nation does not declare war against its depend encies; it, nevertheless, exerts sufficient force to restrain them, when they madly attempt to revolutionize the Government. The true the pry, however, is that the General Government, like the State government, acts upon the individual citizen, and it may always use the degree of force necessary to secure obe dience to law, whether resistance be offered by one citizen, or all the citizens of a State, or the citizens of a dozen States combined. It is often said by the friends of the doctrine of “ secession, ” that the Convention refused to insert in the constitution a clause authorizing the exertion of “the force of theIJnion against any memberof the same, faihngto fulfill its duty under the articles thereof.” It is doubtless true that such a resolution was offered in Convention, and that the same was, for wise reasons, indefinitely postponed, It is equally true that a proviso was o ered, in convention, to the 3rd section of the 3rd article of the Constitution, which defines the crime of treason. It was in these words: "Providnl. That no actor nctsdoneby oneor more of th? States agrailnsil tho Statfiswlliigflslt:36; 10110anyunoo tic nitct. a es under ofonc orine ro eitherid StaMsiiaIl bodoemodtrea , m or punished lunch: butin oase of war boin lloviod by one or moreof the States against the U.S., the conduct of eachpart toward the other and their adherents respectively shall be regulated by the laws of war and of nations.” This provision “was not adopted, ” says Mr. Martin, ” and the consequence is that the State, and every one of its citizens who acts under its authority (in makingwar upon the Government of the nation) are guilty of n direct act of treason.” (Elliots Debates, vol. 1, age 382.) I receive this construction of Mr. artin as a correct exposition of the constitutional provision in respect to treason, with the understanding that the word State is used by him as synonymous with the words “ all the citizens of a State, ” which is really the only true signification of that term when used in connection with moral resonsibility. This nationa Government, which ithasbeen my endeavor to elucidate, was in operation 72 years, bringing “order out of chaos, ” an changin an impotent “ Confederacy” into a great repii ilican cm ire whose banner illus trative of unity“E Ifuribus unum”tloated in every breeze, and ) afforded rotcction to every citizen in eve land. Under its benign influence, the boun s of dominion had been extended to the Pacific ocean, and the country had increased in wealth and population to an extent unparalleled in the annals of nations. Over the heads of its citizens it had shed the blessings of peace and personal securit; and overflowing prosperity was seen everyw ere to abo“uInd. look on this country, with our institutions, ” said gdr. Ste hens, of Georgia, in No vember, 1860, ” as the Eden of the world the Paradise of the universe.” It was to break down and destroy this beneficent Government, to blight this earthly paradise, that the serpent of secession entered into the garden of our national prosperity. On the 20th of December, 1860, an ordinance of secession was adopted by the delegates of the people of SCarolina, declaring that the Union aen subsisting between that and other States, under the name of the U.S.A., was thereby dissolved; and one of the distinguished actors in the treasonable work, had the impudence to exclaim: "We have now pulled it templedown that hasbeen built 3 quarters of n. century. Wcmust clear the rubbish away to reconstruct another.” In quick succession 5 other States followed the example of SCarolina; and in Febru ary, 1861, the muchvaunted southern confederacy was formed at Montgomery, in Alabama. On the morning of the 12th of April, under orders from L. P. Walker, confederate SecyWar, the rebels at Charleston Opened fire upon Fort Sumter, and thus inaugurated a civilWar which, in 4 years, cost the nation half a million lives, and an amount of wealth beyond the measure of reasonable computation. The people of 11 States had formally absolved themselves from all allegiance to the Government of the U.S., and had made use of all their material resources to effect its full and final overthrow. They had marshaled mighty armies in the field. They had sent armed ship s to prey upon the commerce of the country in istant seas. They had sent their emissaries, with torches, to burn the dwellings of loyal citizens, and with the seeds of pestilence to destroy their lives. They had resorted to starvation to thin the ranks of captive soldiers. In fine, they had used every means, practiced by civilized or barbarous nations, to break down and destroy the constitutional Government of the U.S., and were only prevented from accomplishing their work byt a heroic endurance and patriotic valor of our citizen soldiers. They had refused terms of pacification unless accompanied by what the claimed as a sine qua non-the acknowledge independence of the southern confederucy. At length their armies were discomfited in the field and compelled to surrender. Their chief executive was captured and thrown into rison; and their “confederacy” was disai “like the baselessfabric of a vision.” The fragment ary population of 11 revolted States, acknowledging their defeat in the ordeal of battle, but showing no signs of regret for their gigantic treason against the best rights of man, now unblushingly claim an imme iate restoration to a full participation in the councils of the Republic. lheir advocates insist that their ordinances of secession were nullities, and, conse ucntly, “they were never Out of the Union.” once their Sens&Reps are entitled to seats in conss, in an equal deo with those from States whose sons gave their lives to save the nation. Another class of liticians claim that the rebellious communities of the South voluntaril abjured all allegiance to the U.S., an, having set up and fought to maintain another and distinct government, they had ceased to exist as States in the American Union. Perhaps a middle ground may be entered a u, that will reconcile these extreme views without doing especial violence to either. There is obviously in our complex system of government a power that governs and a subo inate war that is the sn ject of government. The States, when in harmony with the constitution and Represented in Congress, may properly be called the governing war of the nation. The Territories and the DistCol are no less in “ the Union" than the States justmentioned, but they form no part of the governing power of the nation; they are governed by the Congress. A community may be in the Union in one sense of the word and not in the Union in another and different sense. A State may be in the Union as the subject of government, when, by reason of its misconduct, it has forfeited its privileges as a part of the governing power. In this last sense it is not in the Union. I know not but the President means the same thing when he says “The States attempting to secede placed themselves in a condition where their vitality was impaired but not extinguished; their functions suspended. but not destroyed.” Indeed, it would be shockin to our sensibil ities, to hear it soberly claime that the rebel States, after abjuring all allegiance to the GOvernment of the nation, and carrying on a furious war for its overthrow, had a constitutional right to appear inits halls of legislation, and ta e part in the enactment of its laws, by simply acknowledging their inability to contend With it in arms. If a State once in the Union is always in the Union, as a branch of the governing power, how would it have operated if, while the 30 8th Congress was striving, in the face of a formidable opposition in its own body, to raise the necessary supplies to enable GenlGrant and his patriotic braves to “ fight it out on the line” from the Rapidan to Richmond, Sens&Reps had appeared from enough of the rebel States to overcome, by their votes, the patriotic majority in Congress? The bare statement of the question shows the utter absurdity of the proposition. I now assume, for the sake of argument, that the President is correct when he takes the ground that “the vitality” of the rebellious States “is impaired, but not extinguished; their functions suspended, but not destroyed.” Where does the constitution of the U.S. lodge the power to prescribe an effective remedy for this impaired vitality, and to restore to healthy action these suspen edfunctions? My learned friendfrom NewYork [Mr. RAYMOND] thinks it is lodged in the hands of the “President as CommanderinChief of the Army and Navy of the U.S. ” I maintain thatitis given to the Congress of the U.S. by force of the last clause in the 8th section of the 1st article of the constitution, which provides that Congress shall have power “To make all laws which shall be necessary and proor for carrying into executiontheforegoingpow ebryst those already granted and all other powersvested is States, constitution in the Government of the U.S or in any dept or officer thereof.” This clausevests the lust ruincnlality by which all “implied powers” are called into action vof his own just prerogatives. expressly in Congress, even such as may be necessary to car into effect those expressly delegated to the resident. In time of war, and when the life of the Republic was in danger, this high officer of the Government was, at times, necessarily in the exercise of dicta torial power. In time of peace, be can right fully exercise no power unless it be expressly vested in him by the constitution, or by not of Congress. Of this there can be no reasonable doubt. The discretiona wers of the Government were intended torhcllgdged in the members of Congress, who are responsible to the people of their respective States and districts, and to them alone, for the manner in which they discharge the solemn trust. It is high time, Mr. Chairman, that the people of the U.S. should insist that the ship of State” be overhauled and put in constitutional trim. She has been exposed to tem pestuous galcs and angry billows; but now having weathered the storm of secession an strife, and being brought, by skillful pilots and a gallant crew, into a peaceful haven, it will be no more than an ordinary precaution to “sound the mmps.” I have great confidence in that selftaught statesman who now, to a great extent, wic ds the destinies of the American Republic; and I here make my humble protestation against the attempts of any man or set of men, in congress or out of Congress, to place the majority of this House, with whom I eel it an honor to act, in an attitude of hostility to the President so long as he confines himself to the exercise, Shall we, for slight causes, distrust him who, not unlike the scraph portrayed by Milton “ Faithful found. Among the faith], faithful only he; Anion innumorable false. unmoved, Unshn en, unseduced. unterrilied, Ilis loyalty he kept, his love, his zeal?" Thus far I do believe he has most conscien tiously followed in the footsteps of his martyred predecessor. Although am decidedly of opinion that it Would have been right and properin calling the 1st legislative bodies into action, in the rebel States, to have used the suffrages of all loyal free men, without respect to color, and to have rejected the votes of all who had participated in the war against the Government, I if?) not see but that a contrary recedent was established by Mr. Lincoln in his amnesty proclamation of December, 1863. So, also, the reconstruction bill passed by congress in 1864, provided for the enrollment of white male citizens” only, as voters. In the matter of appointing provisional governors, and in advising the conventions of del egates, by them assembled, to abjure slavery and the rebel debt, I find no goodcause for complaint. As to the ratification of the amendment to the U.S. constitution, I am disposed to hold that the action of the socalled Legislatures of the rebelStates, did “neither good nor harm.” The amendment was fully ratified by 3/4ths of all the States represented in Congress, and actin in harmony with the Government, at the time the 2/3rds vote was given in that body, and no additional sanctions were wanted, as none in fact could be given by assemblies of men having no share in the governin power of the nation. I regret exccedingly that the President did not wait for the action of Congress, which was bein may tured with all due respect to his high privileges as a coordinate branch of the Government, o fore be dismissed his provisional governors and turned over to men. lately dyed in the blood of our sons, the executive duties of the rebel States. But that is a matter of no vital importance so long as aportion of our Army remains toard the lives of Union men. t remains to be seen whether now, When confessedly the time has arrived when the war power is to be laid aside and the civil power is to resome its functions, the Congress of the U.S. is to be respected as the depositary of “all legislative powers” granted by the peola in the constitution we have sworn to upho d. It is not only the privilege but the constitutional 1866. 133 duty of the President “to have to the Congress information of the state 9 the Union, and to recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient, from time to time.” But the power tto admit new States into this Union;" “to guaranty to every State in this Union a RFG, and to protect each of them against invasion and domestic violence;” “to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property be longing to the U.S.;" “to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over” the DistCol; “to make rules concerning captures on land and waterf. these, and all similar powers, express or implied, belong to the Congress excluswely. It has been stra vely enough so ested that the President wo ul seek to contro the action of Congress in this great matter of restoring the revolted States to their original status in the Union, by withholding executive patronage from such Sens&Reps as could not conscientiously fall in with his favorite policy. respectfully beg pardon Of the President and of the public for stating so scandalous a rumor upon this floor. I ronounce it as false as “se cession” itself, an I find for the scandal no tangible authority except the following article, which I cut from the ewbern (NCarolina) Times of December 16, 1866: “Forum: HornsTho hope is expressed with all dimdence, still there is ground for the hope. that our futureprospects foradinissioninto full fellowship with the heretotoro loyal States are Krowing brighter. The stand taken by President Johnson in referenceto reconstruction is being fully maintained by that patrirotie officer, and not even all the combined forces of radicalism have been able as yet to move him. Like a great rock he haswithstood the shock of the angry waves ofopposition, and he stands proudly erect to meet them again. “There is evidence that the enemiesof the conq uered South are getting a little shaky. A sort of Stephen llopkins tremor is coming over them. for they have counted moreupon their ownstrengththan that of the national Executive. The are beginning to remember once more that the POTUS has the appointing right aswell as the veto power and that the warmest friend of a radical Congressman may lose his little sinecure of an odice whenever the President so wills. Patronage is a big thing a fact fully recognizedby the ultraists but in their reed for the full control of it they have over look someof the little articles which have a great de“al to do with the gran agate. We repeatthereare brighter prospectsaheadthan events of the past had permitted the South to hope for. It is even possible that conservative influences will I0 far prevail as to bring about total reconstruction before the final adjournment of this Congress Thus the southern traitors, not content with ascribing to the President such base motives to action as would bring him beneath the contempt of the loyal masses who elected him, most imndently and orrogantly attempt to appropriate m to their own vile purposes “ Like gypsies. lest the stolen brat be known, Defacing 1st. then claiming for his own.” I know not if the President has an fixed polio in regard to the guarantees which the loyal people of this country may exact before the States in revolt shall be restored to all the functions of governing States in the Union. Sure I am, he can have no desire to throw obstacles in the way of the deliberate and wellmatured action of Congress, which may wellbe presumed to reflect the wishes of a great majority of the people. I have, at this time, no means of determining for myself what course will be taken by Congress, but I will venture to say that the substance of the following propositions, if adopted, will be satisfactory to the bulk of my constituents in Ohio: 1. Extend a qualified right of suffrage to the freedmen in the DistCol. 2. Amend the constitution of the U.S. in respect to the apportionment of Representatives and direct taxes among the several States of the Union, in such manner, that “ people of color” shall not be counted with the pulation making up the ratio, except it be in States where they are permitted to exercise the elective franchise. 8. Insert a provision in the constitution prohibiting “nullification” and “secession.” 4. Insert a provision in the constitution proa0 hibiting the repudiation of the national debt, and also prohibiting the assumption by congreSs of the rebel debt. 5. Provide in the constitution that no person, who has, at any time, taken up arms ainst the U.S., shall ever be admitte to a seat in the Senate or HoRep in Congress. Let these guarantees be given to loyalty, and I will try to forgiveI can never forget the injuries received by my country from TRAXTORS.