Mr. ELDRIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I will 1st express my satisfaction to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srnvsxs] that the sun was allowed to go down on our deliberations upon this most important resolution. I confess that I am one of the gentlemen to whom the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Senss ex] referre as being opposed to the amendment of the Constitution. believe that this is not the time for its amendment, and I believe, further, that there are other States than those represented upon this floor which are entitled to deliberate with us on that question; and to that point I shall mainly address the remarks which I have to make at this time. Mr. Speaker, the war, we have been officially informed), is over. That greatest conflict of modern days that hung the heavens in black and moved the world is ended. The graves of the slain are growing green, and the hearts that were torn with unutterable anguish are beginning to heal. It is time that the fearful and malignant passions which were aroused in the breasts of the o posing parties should be permitted to die; iat time, which assuaes our griefs and mitigates our sorrows, shoal modify our resentments and cool our anger. It is time, indeed, when a calm retrospect of all those bloody and sorrowful days 0t war and sangui uary strife should be taken. The warrior should he succeeded by the statesman. It should be ascertained speedily and accurately where we are, what we have accomplished, whither we have been drifting, and whether the shipof state is now under the control and guided by the chart and compass, the constitution. There is, perhaps, no better we to ascertain the present relations of the revoted States to the non-than by considering the purpose and object of the war. it was a fearful conflict and prosecuted on the most gigantic scale possible on both sides. The insurgents struggled against fearful odds, and almost to complete exhaustion. They sacrificed everything and exhausted every resource. A sublimer will, a more determined purpose never assessed and inspired a great people than that which filled the hearts and minds of the adherents of the Union. With greater resources and greater numbers, as one vast army went down another and another came rushin like the mighty winds to the field of battle. “very soldier that fell inspired a score to fill his place and avenge his death. Every man, every life and every dollar of the Republic were pledged and ready upon call to secure success. to insure victory and fewwere fonndto say it was too much and what was it all forwhat was the purpose, what was the object of all this expend iture of treasureand life I Was there no great and good purpose commensurate with the sacrifices the nation was making and willingto make? Was it a mere feud, some eat hatred of the sections, for which, in bliu frenzy, in furious passion in mere madness they were seeking hers lives and destruction? Wasit this that moved a great and good people to such a mighty conflict with each other? Sir, the purpose and object of the war were name of the Government. so clearly laid dewn, so definitely understood, its necessity so apparent and the result to be obtained so meritorious and patriotic, that dur in the period of its prosecution it was, in the judgment of the majority of this House, disloy alty amounting almost to treason to question or doubt the propriety even of the manner in which it was conducted. Many wrongs, many out rages upon the rights and liberties of the people were, indeed, perpetrated. There were arrests and imprisonments without warrant, trials without jury; freedom of speech and the press was denied, and almost every violation of all the sacred rights of liberty and conscience. All these were submitted to, and even justified, because they were only temporar expedicnts by which to accomplish the sacre purpose in the name of which they were perpetrated. and, sir, what was the purpose, what was the cause for which the cop c, the citizens of the Republic, were calle upon to antfer and forbear so much? Our country was rich, prosperous, great, powerful, and happy. Its commerce whit ened every sea and its proud fi waved honored and respected in every port. The people had not become dissatisfied with republican institutions; they desired not to go back to monarchy or build up empire. Some of the citizensof some of the States had become dissatisfied with their place in the Union and determined upon secession, ” peaceably if they could, and forcibly if 1 they must.” If those States or the people thereof did commence the war, what was it for, what did they seek to obtain? Was it for any other purpose than to break off their constitutional relations with the Union and with the other States, that they might realize secession as a fact? That was the avowed and wellunder stood pn ose of all their warlike measures. The adhering States joined issue with the seccssionists upon that precise and only question. They denied the right, under the Co istitution, for an State or the inhabitants thereof to secede. he held the Union to have been formed in perpetuity; that nothing but successful revolution could ever break or divide it and to save the integrity of the Union, to hold the rebellious States to their constitutional oblitions, to coerce them and the people to perorm their duties and functions according to the constitution in the Union, they acceted the wager of battle. In this connection Ipde sire to call the attention of the House to the message of the late Executive, which has been so often referred to in debate on this subject; not because it was the opinion of Mr. Lincoln, but because it was in the nature of a proclamation to the nations of the world, to the loyal people of the country, and to the rebels in arms, of the terms of war and eace with the insur gent States, which is still inding upon the national authorities: “Lest thereshould be some uneasiness in the minds. of candid menastowhat is to bethe courseof the Government toward the southern States after the rebellion shall have beensuppressed, the Executive deems it proper to say it Will be his purpose then, as ever, to egui"delldeby the constitution nndlaws, ” " desiresto preserve the governmentthat it may be administered for all as it was administered by the men who made it. Loyal citizenseverywhere have a right to claim thisof the Government, and the Government has no right to withhold or neglect it.” This declaration was made at one of the most important epochs of the war. It was put forth to relieve the “minds of candid men” as to the course of the Governmentwhen rebellion should be suppressed. It was uttered to loyal citizens everywhere, in the insurgent States as well as the adhering. It was the platform on which the war on behalf of the Republic was to be carried on, and the basis of peace and reunion when victory should be obtained. It was not alone the declaration of the head of a great party, it was the head of the nation speaking by the authority and in the It was spoken to the loyal and the disloyal. It was intended to weaken the rebel cause and encourage the supporters of the Government. It is a full solution of all our troubles and difficulties. It is as binding now the war is over as it was before. l It is the policy of the present Executive, as I understan it, to carry out and keep the plighted faith of the Government and it is this which brings upon his head the maledictions of the radicals. The Executive is no more committed to this doctrine than congress and the people of the northern States. he late President declared over and over again “that his paramount object was to restore the Union.” In view of all this he was reelected, and in March. 1863, he was indorsed and indemnified for all he had done, by act of Congress. In July, 1861, the HoRep almost unanimously declared the war not to be awnr for “conquest or subjugation, ” but to i “ maintain the supremacy of the constitution, ” to “ reserve the Union with all the dignity, equaity, and rights of the severalStates unim paired.” This was the declaration of war on the part of Congress. These declarations by Congress and the Executive were intended as the war platform of the country. It was the war platform of the miscalled Lnion party; the one upon which it gained its present power and strengththe strength and power by which it is able to resist and prevent the comp ete reunion of all the States, and deprive them of their representation in this Congress. ir, I maintain these declarations are in the nature of promises made to an enemy in the course of war; made for the purpose of drawing 08 his adherents, of weakeningrhis forces. The insurgents had a right to rel upon them till the terms were withdrawn. ll an did rely upon them. There was no time speei edwithin which they should avail themselves of them. They remained open till peace was declared. The insurgents laid down their arms upon those terms as clearly as though they had been in the stijrulation. There was no separate national existence admitted in the insurgents. On the contrary it was claimed and insisted, on the part of the Government, that there was not enough of the enemy to justify or authorize a treaty; no competent authority with which we could treat. They laid down their arms finally on demand and by force of the power of the Government, and submitted themselves to the jurisdiction and authority of the U.S. The arblt rainent of a sword was ended. From that moment, from the moment eace was declared, they were subjects of the U.S. Government, entitled to the protection and liable to answer to the offended majesty of the constitution and laws. Sir, these pledges to the world, to the country, and especially to the loyal men of the in surgent States, made when they were stniggling with and overborne by a force which neither they nor the whole power of the Government could resist, ought to settle at once and forever the whole question of reconstructionoughtto permit the people of these States to resume their proper relations to and duties in the Union without further hinderance or delay. We all remember how you of the majority cried out against the disloyalty of the Democratic Chicago convention during the last presidential cam iii, and also the furious denun ciation in this I House, only the other day, by the honorable Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. BING iuiii] of the members of that convention as “conspirators, ” because they resolved “that. after 4 years the war had failed to restore the Union.” Bitter and terrible as your denunciations were, with how much more force do they aply to you whoinsist that the Union is not to:iy restored! It is not only after more than 4 years of war, but after pence conquered, after full submission of the insur gents. you declare that war has failed to restore the Union. Nay, more, you stand with the sword of party power over the very portals of the Union to resist the resumption by the States of their constitutional duties and functions. You resolve, not only that it has not, but that while you have the power it shall not, be restored. ay more even than that, you insist that the war has killed the States, and of necessity destroyed the Union. When before was there ever exhibited such fuithlessness, such perfidy, such utter disregard of all promises and principles? It would seem that any party of men not absolutely debauched or dea to all sense of honor, in view of the record you have made, the pledges you have given, the hopes you have inspired, the sacrifices you have demanded, the lives that have been offered up, and the vast debt you have incurred, all in the name of the Union, that you would, without further technical higgling over the rights of the conqueror, the doctrines of estoppei and forfeiture, or the result of concedin belligerent rights, hasten to fulfill your plighte faith and the just expectations of avast ina iority of the American people, by realizing at once and forever the promised fruits of victory in a restored and reenerated Union. Nothing short of this is a ultillinent of your pledges, nothing less would justify the war you have prosecuted, nothing else would be justice to the conquered or worthy of the conqueror. On the sole ground of good faith, if there were no other, I demand the constitutional union of all the States., But in the absence of all pledges given by the Government in the course of the war, claiming nothing on the ground of its plighted faith, I insist the insurgent States are not out of the Union, and that they can never get out except by successful revolution, and none but secessionists ever dreamed that they could. it is the greed of illegal gain, the lust of power, the love of dominion, the maddening taste of blood, and the desire of vengeance upon a fallen foe that has mada these new converts to this doctrine. It finds its impulse and its logic in in furiated passion, in malignant hate, and would debase reason and justice to justify the indul gence. The honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srsvsss] whoI believe never made any virtue of love for the Union, and who during the war declared, “This Union never shall, with my consent, be restored under the constitution as it is, ” sets himself to work with his great learning and vast research to find among the musty records of the past some plausible ground to prevent its restoration now the war is over. e gravely tells us there has been a war between the socalled confederate and the U.S. I did not suppose it was denied or doubted that the state of things existing between them was a state of war. There need be no reference to authority to convince the people of this country or any other that we have had war. The absence of some loved one from almost every house and hamlet in all the land who has fallen on the deadly field of battle, the mutilated veterans whom we meet in our daily walk, and the mourners that go aboutthe streets, are too solemn reminders to require argument or authority to satisfy us that there has been a most sickening and heartrending War. But the honorable gentleman insists that this war has had the effect to sever and divide the Union and place the insurgent States in the power of the government as conquered provinces. To sustain his position he cites the following from Vattel: “A civilWar breaks the bands of society and government. orDatleast suspends their force and e ect; it producosin the nation 2 independent parties. who consider each other as enemies and acknowledge no commonjudge. These two artios must therefore be considered as thence for war constituting. at least for a time. Two separate bodies; two distinct societies. They stand. therefore. in precisely the same predicament as 2 nations who engagein a contest and btoe")! Unable to come to an agreement. haverecourse arms.” In. my judgment, Vattel lays down no such doctrine as the gentleman claims. The passage cited proves no such thin. It has reference only to the time during whch the war continues. A ClVll war breaks or at least suspends the force and effect of the bands. The 2 parties must therefore be considered, “at least for a time, as constituting 2 separate bodies.” It must certainly depend upon the result of the war as to whether it breaks or only suspends the 1bands and makes the 2 parties independent l societies when the war is over. If the revolu brcak the union, were to be successful, then it would be permanent. If it fails, if the Government which is prosecuting the war for the purpose of preserving the union, for the purpose of preserving the bands, is successful, then clearly the war has only suspended the bands. The chapter from which this passage is taken, chapter 18, commence sin this language: “It is a question very much debated whether the EOYGIOIKiDs toobserve the common laws of war toward rebellious subjects who have openly taken up arms against him. Flatterer or nerucl ruler immediately saysthat the laws are not made for rebels. for whom no punishment is too severe. Let us proceed more mildly and that we may clearly see how the sovereign is to behave toward rovolted subjects. We should 1st remember that all BOVQHEUrHi!ghts are derived from those of civil society. from the trust reposed in him and the obligation ho is under of watching over the wclfnro of the nation procuring its greatest happiness. of maintaining order, Justice, and peace therein.” Again: “But what conductshall the sovereignobserveto ward theinsurgents? I answer. in general. that whi ch shall at the sametimebemostconscientioustomstice and mostsalutary to the State.” This is the mode of conducting civilWar according to the laws of war. But what should be the conduct of the sovereign when peace has been obtained? Let Vattel answer: "A sovereignhaving conquered the oppositeparty and reduced it to submit and sue for peace. he may except from amnesty the authors of the troubles. the headsof the party; may bring themto legal trial, and on conviction punish them. “When amnestyhas beenpublished and accepted. whatever has passedmust be buried in oblivmn. No one is to be called to account for whiit he has done relative to the disturbances; and in general a prince who makesan conscienceof his word is faithful to keepwhat he as promisedto rebels themselvesI meanto thoseof his subjectswho haverovolted without reasonor necessity. Is there anything in all this to justify the conclusion of those who contend that the Coverament, by the laws of war and of nations, now holds the insurgent States as conquered prov inces; that it is authorized to treat all the people of those States as conquered subjects, as public enemies, or as aliens? If so, no civilWar can ever exist Without dividing the bodypolitic. The very object of pohtical association would be destroyed. Vattel says at page 62: “The reservationof a nation consistsin the duration oft apolitical associationofwhich it isfounded.” “ Tin the act of association. in virtue of which a multitude of men form togethera State or nation. each individual has enteredinto engagementWith all and all haveenteredinto engagementsWith each. to procure the conimon welfare. It is manifestthat thesereciprocal engagementscan n o other vnsebe fulfilled than by maintaining the political BSSOOHNIODT:he entire nation is obligedtomaintain the association.” “If the nation is obligedto preserveitself. it is not lessobliged carefullyto preserveall its members. The nation owes this to itself; since the lossofoyen oneofits members weakensit, and is injurious to its own preservation.” It owes this also to the " Membersin particular. in consequenceof the very act of mssociation;for thosewhocomposeanation are united for their defenseand commonadvantage; and none canjustly be deprived of this union.” This is the natureand object of national political association, according to Vattel. The doctrine that the national authority, in the very act of asserting itself, must, if o posed, destroy the association and change the Ibodypolitic is the most miserable subterfuge, the most contempt ible excuse, for the usurpation of unanted powers that was ever devised. It is the doctrine of the “flatterer or the cruel ruler who says that the laws are not made for rebels, for whom no punishment is too severe.” It is the doctrine of fanatical revolution crying union but working in the interest of empire. CivilWar did exist but so far as the Government of the U.S. is concerned it was not a war against the States or the people. It was a war against the insurrection, against rebels in arms, against those resisting the laws and the constitution, those who by the war sought to subvertand overthrow the Government, who undertook by rebellion to sustain and enforce the nnfounde and illegal claim to secede. In such a war, when peace is obtained, it would be monstrous injustionary party, whose purpose it is to divide and 1 tice to treat all the people of the insurrectionary States alike as enemies. It is the duty of the prince or sovereign authorities to discriminate between the innocent and the guilty, and to restore all those who have remained faithful, or who have been overborne for the time being and forced from their allegiance, to all their former rights. All such persons were entitled to the protection of the Government at all haz ards. It is the very object for which Governments are instituted, to protect the weak against the strong, to enforce the laws and preserve the State. What other justification is there for war of the nation with its 0wii people, its own subjects? What other war is there justified by the constitution 7 There was never any right or constitutional power to make any other war. It was never pretended that it was a war of conuest or dominion, but to assert and maintain the mild and peaceful provisions of the constitution, the Government of the U.S. such a war can never place this Government in the attitude of conqueror, or the people of the State in the attitude of Conquered subjects, or make the State a conquered province. The jurisdiction of the U.S. is only that prescribed by the constitution. Whatever pretense there may be of implied and enlarged war powers, these powers can only be claimed or exercised as incident to the war. By what warrant or provision in the constitution can the supreme Government make conquest of one of its own States, or exercise dominion over its own citizens except in subordination to the constitution? The very idea would be preosterous. Its jurisdiction is the same and on y the same after the insurrection is suppressed that it was before it was begun. Before the war the U.S. had the right to exercise the jurisdiction, sovereignty, and power over the States and the people of the States. prescribed, defined, and limited by the constitution. The war ended. it could do no more than exercise the same jurisdiction ever them as States and people of States forming constituent arts of the nion. It would e monstrous if the U.S., endowed with sovereign powers, prescribed, defined, and limited by a constitution emanating from the people through the States, could exert itselfto destroy one of the constituent elements of its own life, the source ofils own power, and withoutwhich even the Union itselfis dead. The Government has not increased the sphere of its sovereignty nor lost any of its sovereign powers by the war. The crime of the rebels was that they refused to perform their duties and functions in the Union. The Government demanded that they should. It made no other demand during the insurrection. It had no power to make any other demand. It required this by virtue of its supreme authority, derived from the constitution, and in the interest not alone of the people of the insurgent States, but in the right and interest of every loyal citizen of the U.S. The U.S. cannot force a State to abdicate its functions or rights as a State in the Union, nor can it accept the abdication from a State. it has power under the constitution to admit a State to the Union, but no power to permit it to retire or depart from the nion. But gentlemen say the rebel States are out of the Union, and they are estopped from denying it by their ordinances of secession; the rebels have forfeited all their constitutional rights and the right of being States in the Union; that they;] have committed suicide and are absolutely den. Estoppels were never much favored in the law, an were up liedonly in clear cases. But in any case. in over to be binding they must be mutual, both parties must be estop d, and they must be plead or insisted upon ii; those who would have advantage of them. But the claim comes too late with us; we never relied upon it, and always denied the validity of these ordinances. That was always the issue of the war. Butthe Gavernment is estopped in a housand ways from denying that those States are and atoll times have been States in this Union. 1866. 425 In the 1st place, the U.S. Government has no legal or constitutional right or power to do any act or consent to anything being done that could amount to a deprivation or relin uishment, of its control or sovereignty over aiem as States in the Union. Nor has the Government done or consented to anythingof the kind. On the contrary, it has at all times during the continuance of the insurrection by the exercise of the highest sovereignty asserted its continuin relationship under the constitution. It has emanded at the point of a million bayonets, and by all the terrible en iinery of war, that the insurgents should lay own their arms, cease their rebellion, and return to their duties. It has by the most solemn acts of every Dept of the Government continuously recognized them in their relations as States. It has provided by set of Congress for their representation and the number thereof in this body. Based upon that representation, and in pursuance of the provisions of the constitution and laws, it has apportioned to each of the 11 States, by name, its, propershare of 20 millions of direct tax, audienforced its payment by sale of lands. It has proclaimed ieace, and that the insurrection is at down. t. has aided and encouraged by all the powers it possessed the resumption by the people of those States of their abandone duties and obligations in the States. It has invited them. to ta e part in the amendment of the constitution itself, and proclaimed their action upon it, and that it had actually, through theiraid been done. Nay, more; the people of the U.S. themselves, exercising the most solemn and exalted right of free men, have chosen a citizen of one of those States the Chief Executive of this nation, who, if they are not States in the Union, is an alien and usurper. Sir, the people of those States have laid down their weapons of warfare, accepted and acted upon the often proffered terms of peace and reunion, and now lead and insist on the rec ord as an estoppe and is it not full, complete, and effectual? Is it not. mutual and valid? Would it not be a gross fraud to deny them? Are not their representatives entitled to “be admitted? But they are rebels, and rebels have no rights but the right to be hung, ” cries the bloody mouthed Jacobin, who would take advantage of these times to change and revolutionize the republic; they have forfeited by theirrebellion even the Statesin which they happened to reside; they have forfeited all constitutional rights. Have gentlemen considered the result of this doctrine? Forfeiture ofwhat, and to whom? Have they forfeited or can they forfeit their right and duty to obey the constitution and laws? Have they forfeited or can they forfeit their obligation to pay their proportion of the direct taxes that have been or may be aportioned upon them as States in the Union? have they forfeited or can they forfeit their duty to assist in the defeuse of the republic in case of foreign invasion? The big lost interest of the nation is that all the States of the Union and every citizen should peaceably and promptly dischar c all their duties and obligations to and in the nion. The State of Wisconsin has as much interest in SCarolina remainin in the Union as she has in Massachusetts. very citizen, every lover of the Republic, has the same interest in Ereserving to the Union one State as another. very citizen of the U.S. has the right to have the Union preserved intact. The Union of the constitution is the rich heritage which we have received from our fathers; we have no right to destroy or divide it, nor permit it to be destroyed or divided. The rebels can never forfeit your and my rights which, as citizens of the U.S., we have in every State, and in the preservation of every State in the Union. But to whom has the forfeiture been made? It cannot be to the U.S., because the U.S. had all the jurisdiction and sovereignty it could constitution ally exercise over the State before the war. The constitution, as I have before said, limited, defined, and prescribed the extent of dominibn and authority and power of the U.S. with reference to the revolted States. It is the same precisely now the waris ended, and that is to require the States to perform their constitution a obligations, their properduties and functions in the Union as States. When, where, and how did they make the forfeiture? Was it by violating the constitution that they forfeited all rights under it? I deny, sir, that the rebels have no rights under that instrument. Their crime was the consequence of their violation of it; and the measure of their guilt is, now the war is over, to be determined by it. They have in curred the penalty which attaches to the violation of the constitution, and not the vengeance ofinfuriated passion. If brought to trial they are entitled to all of its proviSions; and if we should violate it in their trial or punishment, our guilt would be commensurate with theirs. Those who claim that the rebellious States are out of the Union by forfeiture fall little, if any, short of asserting that the Government is defeated; that it has sacrificed the blood of its citizens in vain; that the rebels have, in the hour and moment of our triumph, snatched the victory from us, accomplishing by their crime what they failed to do by the prowess of arms. But I assert, without fear of contradiction, that no one can forfeit what is not his own. The in surgent States cannot forfeit what belongs to all the States. Nor can rebels forfeit what is the right of eve loval citizen of the U.S., the right to the Union of the constitution, composed of every State ever belonging to it, free, equal, soverei, and independent in their properand legitimate s heres. Let it be remembered that the rebe s are not the only persons having rights and interest in the insurgent States. Aland each of the States of the Union have an interest; all and each of the citizens of the U.S. have an interest in the ervation and perpetuation of the Union preso the constitution; and all of the States, and every citizen of every State, is bound by the highest obligations ofhonor, interest, and constitutional dut to aid in its preservation to the extent of all e has. of life and property. The same courseo reasoning answers fully those who claim that the insurgent. States are dead and that they cannot be States of the Union till the “ Government breathes into them again the breath of life.” It would seem as though it were enough to add in reply that the power that can confer life can preserve life. f the Government can breathelife into the dead car cass of a State it could prevent the dearture of life from it. It could have kept the reath of life in it. I for one have no faith in the resurrection by one who, struggling through long years, had not the power to preserve the original life. I will never consent to the death of one of the States of this Union in the vain hope that the party now in power and controlling the Government may reathe it again to life. Your breath may ill, it will not save it is full of estilence, disease, and death. h u kill the body that you may destroy the soul of the republic. But you ought to understand that the temple rests upon the pillars, and as you wrench them away the beautv, harmony, and proortions are not alone destroyed, but the whole edifice must ultimately fall. But if a State cannot die, than “once a State always a State.” Why not? That is not State rights more than the rights of the Union. Who says, once the Union always the Union? Who says, the Union shall always endure and the Republic be perpetual; that it shall never be destroyed? he States a d the Union must coexist or the Union must di. The States might possibly exist without the Union, without the States the Union never! Beware how you trifle with the States I The union of the States is the Republic! The Republic is the States in fraternal union 1 The Union orinally cost too much, and too much of life an treasure has been expended in its name and on its behalf, to surrender it on a mere technicality, or to barter it for the glit tering empire on would build on its ruins. The fathers of the Republic were not mere partisans or fanatics, they were statEsmeu.to say Sir, it is an easy thingto break u and to destroy this Union, if the gentlemen of the majority are right in all their modes of disposin of it. The fathers of the Republic little dreame how frail a thing they were forming. There is scarccly a direction that rebels cannot drive their whole State through the constitution out of the Union. The leamed and able Gentfrom Ohio, Mr. Snsnusmosnfl in his answer, or perhaps should be pardoned if I say his evasion of the pertinent question of the honor a“bleGentfromNewYork, MLRAYMOND] If they (the States) were out of the Union when did they become so?” says substantially, as I understand him, when the regular course of justice was interrupted by revolt rebellion, or insurrection so that the courts of justice could not be kept open “when, in fact, the became bel ligerents. This doctrine would prevent the Government from suppressing an insurrection without destroying the State in the Union. An insurrection that has attained proportions sufficient to entitle the combatants to belligerent hts has, by its own force, carried the State out of the Union. Let an insurrection arise for any cause in any State and the Government of the U.S. be called upon to supress it and by default or neglect it fails to do “ so till the regular course of justice is interrupted so that the courts of justice cannot be kept open, ” and the revois t on put down, the State must fall a conquere province at the feet of the Government, never again to appear as a State in the Union till breathed upon by the republican majority of this House, now in centre of the Government. Let war arise in aState, let an attempt be made at revolt successful enough to hold the State till, according to the laws of war and of nations, belligerent rights should be mutually conceded. an that star falls, like Lucifer. from the road banner of the Republic, never again to 5 inc in the galaxy of the Union till its people shall give guarantees to Massachusetts, till the institutions of the States shall be homoge neous with NewEngland. If this doctrine be true, then indeed war has failed, must and will be always a failure, to restore the Union. It is indeed disuniou, eternal disuniou, and all elforts by war to preserve the Union worse than a delusionit is a crime. The ordinances of secession are void, the purpose of the rebels to secede has been subdued, their warriors have surrendered or tied the couu try in dismay; the triumphant banner of the republic floats proudly over the State; the glad shouts of thanksgiving and praise ascend from the national heart that rebellion is crushed and the Union saved; when, lo! some Republican logician has discovered that the war was conducted upon principles ofhumanity and according to the laws of nations; the insurgent ports were blockaded; prisoners of war were exchanged: the nations of the earth claimed to be neutrals between the contending parties; belligerent rights were mutually conceded; all our hopes of restored union are blasted; the State is dead. Awaywith such absurdity! ltisasfatal to the Union as the State. It places all the vast interests of the Republic at the mercy of a malignant few in a State, or at least of a bare majority strong enough to place the State in the control of an insurrection. To leave the State in the hands of the insurrection loses it to the Union. To make war to save it kills the State. In either event the State as such is lost to the Union. This doctrine effectually nullifies the constitutional power of the Government to suppress insurrection or resist rebellion. it is no answer that the territorial State is reserved togcther with dominion over the in abitants. This is no equivalent for the loss of the State as such. The Government of the Union cannot rest upon territorial dominion. This might port empire but not sup a republic of States. t may gratify those who see to multiply and consolidate power in the central Government: but it is as fatal to the constitutional Union of the fathers of the Republic, and if posmble more dangerous to liberty than the dogmas of secession. Let this work goon, let the central power dismantle and absorb the government of State after State as the inhabitants shall make some feeble effort by insurrection to right the wrongs that will accumulate upon them, and we shall find quite too soon thatt e liberties of the people are one. Civil liberty in this nation will never survive the States of the Union. The same power that demands the life of the States, will, when they, have been swallowed up inits grasping and growin desire for dominion, demand the surrender o republican liberty. It sees the opportunity, and with an eye to its own aggran dizement now resists the readjustment of the dislocated members of the Union. Whatever the motive for this overthrow of our form of government, whatever the inducement for this dark and fatal leap, it is nothing short of revolution when consummated, there will not be the semblance of the republic of the constitution remaining. In its ace you will have reared an overshadowing, powerful, central despot ism, which having no checks, and accumulating power as it rises, will dictate and control individual acts and individual liberty asit now does the action of the States. The honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] boldly declares his motives and purpose. He says: "Accordin to my judgment they oght never to be recognize as capable of actin in the Union, ” beimzcountedas valid States unti the constitution shall have been so amendedas t9 secureicrpotual nsccn“dIcfnte to the pnrtyof the Union.” “ cy should dgrant the right of suffrazq to personsofco or I think therewoul alwaysbe Union white menenoughin the South. aided by the blacks, a)edpiuvibdleicathneasrceepnredsaennctyation and thus continue the Here, then, is the motive and purpose of the majority of this House. The States are to be held in the grasp of despotic power; the Government is to be revolutionized to secure the ascendency of the Republican party. Proclaim it to the country, let it go out through all the land, the union, the Republic, must be deferred and sacrificed, ifneed be, to preserve the ascend ency of party. Oh, if bitter and unrelentin party might relent, I would a cal to you of this House in the name of Wasington, who warned against the fell spirit of party; I would appeal to you in the name of our common country now anx iously awaitin fraternal reunion; Lwould appeal to you in t lename of the brave dead whose odies are scattered like the leaves of the forest on all your mountains and in all your valleys, and whose spirits are now looking down from the blue above, to tell on they died for country and not party; I won d appeal to you in the name of those fathers and mothers who gave to the Republic, and not party, their 1stborn and bestloved sons; I would a peal to you in the name of the millions whoseliearts bleed afresh whenever memory recalls the departed, and who find their only solace in the fact that those they mourn fell in the service of the Union, the whole Union, and not in the blind service of party, to relent. Givens the full fruition of our hopes, the reward of our sacrifices, the fruits of our victories, the fraternal Union of our fathers, the brotherhood of States. parties are changing and evanescent; they go u and down on the waves of popular assion an preljudice; guard and strengthen them as you Wll they cannot live forever. The scepter of power will ere long fall from your hands. another party as despotic and grinding may yet dictate, may yet determine the terms and conditions upon which your States shall exercise their rights and functions in the Union. Party spirit knows no law; it refuses to reason; it has no attribute of justice, no sense of honor, no conscience, no toleration. The measure of its demands and exactions is the strength and power to enforce them. If on, today can die State the conditions upon which only the State of Tennessee may be permitted to perform her duties and exercise her rights in the Union, it may be only aquestion of time when some new elements, moved by popular ca rice, may comnine to dictate to NewEngland. It is a fear ful thing to trust the liberties of a great people to the capricious and evershifting power of rty. I for one deny the right or power to ictate any terms or attach any conditions out side of the constitution upon which any State may have its place in the Union. The only rightful conditions are obedience to the constitution and laws; and that obedience in itself consists in the full exercise of all its rights and the performance of all its constitutions obligations as a State in the Union. I can well understand how difficult a thing it is to look or act upon these eat questions Without prejudice or assion. whom I have already quoted says: “The tumult of discordnnd the flame of civilWar little agreewith the proceedingsof pure and exact justice. More quiet timesare to beawaited for.” I would wait for more quiet times to amend the constitution. The statesman and the legislator should never act from hatred or assron toward those affected by their acts. Tiloody hands and malignant hearts should never invade the sanctuary of law or justice. The man who from preconceived opinions or prejudice would be disqualified to sit as a juror where the person toward whom be entertained such feelings wasa art should look with distrust upon himself when e comes to legislate where is most sacred rights are to be a ected. Sir, the question has been repeated] asked whether we would consent that those who had been engaged in the attempt to break up and destroy ti: Union should come back and enjoy the benefits of the constitution they had endeavored to subvert. I answer, unhesitatingly, I would. There has never been a day or an hour since the 1st scene in the bloody drama at Sumter that my most ardent wish and prayer to God has not been that they might lay down their arms and come back; come back, not as conquered provinces, not to be held as conquered subjects, as a subjugated people, but as coequal, independent, sovereign States. To me the Union of our fathers is worth just as much as it was at the beginning of the war. Its restoration is just as necessary to the prosperity and happiness of this country now as then and I go further: the crime of those who would prevent its restoration is just as black and damnableas that of those who made restoration necessary. Sir, these are my conclusions, after. the most candid and best considerationl have been able to give the subject. The war is ever; its work of carnage an death is done; it has driven its plowshare down deep into our institutions; time can never remove its impress; its effect for 0d and for ill cannot be eradicated; the chains of bondage broken we would not again unite, the sundered ties of life we cannot; the passions, resentments, animosities, and hatreds aroused and engendered will slowly wear away; with it let the brotherhood revive. Our country has triumphed; its highest interest. its proudest glory, its richest. blessing will only be realized in the full resumption by every State of its rights, its duties, and its functions in the Union of8 the constitution. We want no Ireland, no Poland, no Hungar, with their oppressed and unhappy peoples c erishing, their smothered wrath and plotting revolution. A restored Union is restored amity. Many have been wrong; all have suffered. As we hope to be forgiven, let us forgive.