Mr. DAVIS. The honorable Senator is an American citizen; he is a patriot; he is a Senator; and in addition to that he is a professor of the Christian religion, a follower of the lowly and humble Redeemer, whose death was given to exinto the sins of a fallen and a wicked world. Vhat is the spirit that is taught to him by his Great Teacher? You say for give your enemies; you say turn your other cheek to the man who sniites you. You are taught benevolence and philanthropy and forgiveness by the precepts of the reli ion which the honorable Senator professes. an of which, I have no doubt, he is a very exemplary member; but it seems to me that he forgot all the spirit of his Christian charity and faith in the tenor of the remarks which he made. The honorable Senator stated another principle to which I fully subscribe. It was this: that the duty of protection by the Government and the duty of obedience to the Government. are mutual. It is the duty of the citizen to obey the law; and it is the duty of the government to protect the citizen and to enable him to perform his obligation to obey the law. Now, sir. what has been the condition and what. was the condition of things at the commencement of this rebellion? 1n the State of Tennessee there were 2 issues before the geople submitted to the aggregate vote of the State. The one was whether the State would call a convention even to consider the subject of secession, and the other was whether the State would secede. On the 1st issue there were nearly 15,000 Votes of a majority of the people of the State of Tennessee against the callin of a convention; and upon the question 0 secession there was a majority of upward of 56,000 votes in that State against it. How was it in the State of Virginia, the Senator's Own State? There was a large majority of the people of Virginia against secession, and that majority was; demonstrated by an actual vote at the polls of the people. Now, apply the principle of the honorable Senator. Here was a majority of 56,000 people in the State of Tennessee, and a majority of from 12 to 15,000 loyal people in his own State. They expressed opposition to secession at the polls. Vhat was the duty and the obligation of the Government, according to the honorable Senator’s own maxim and according to the universal maxim of justice and humanity as between governors and governed? These people were anxious to adhere to the Union, to perform their duties loyally as citizens. They expressed that disposition and purpose in the most solemn manner, and in the State of Tennessee by an overwhelming vote. According to the honorable Senator‘s maxim a principle to which I yield my hearty assent, and to which no just and humane man can otfera dissent the Government of the U.S. ought to have upheld, supported, and protected this 56,000 majorityin the State of Tennessee in their wish and purpose to adhere to the Union; and so of tie senator’s own State. Did the Government of the Union perform its obligation to the people? The Senator asks triumphantly, was there ever a Government in the world, since the commencement of time, that so perfectly and fully discharged all its obligations to these people who went into the rebellion? Sir, I say that at that great crisis, at the time when the question of loyalty and disloyalty was to be electively and finally decided, the Government was in flagrant default. It was not in the act of protecting the majorities in those States and the peeple in the other southern States who were opposed to secession in their position o ffidelity to the Government. None of the honorable Senator’s zeal, none of his eloquence, none of his vehemence of declamation against these rebels can shake the truth of that position. The true and loyal men who constituted large majorities in many of the southern States were abandoned, or, if they were not abandoned, they were left.wholly without defense and protection by the Government that he wants now to oppress them. Sir, I tell the honorable Senator, and it is the truth of the case, that before the Government of the U.S. can hold these men rigorously to the charge of treason, to the consequences of treason and rebellion, to its forfeitures, its punishments, and disabilities, heand those who favor such a policy ought to be prepared to demonstrate beyond question that the Government performed its duty fully and effectively toward these people. I‘hat cannot be done. It was not the fact. Then I assume, upon the gentleman’s own principle and the fair deductions from it, that every man who was willing to remain faithful to the Government of the U.S., provided he had received such protection and support from the Government as would have enabled him to maintain that position, ought to come under the benefit of the reservation, the exception of the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin. If there is any doubt in discriminating the guilty from the innocent, those who ought to receive the immunity from those who ought not to receive it, I, to save the innocent, would give it indefinitely to all, just as the benignant principle of the common law of England declares that if there is a doubt, the accused shall receive the benefit of the doubt, and that it is better for 99 guilty men to escape than that one innocent man should be punished. But, Mr. President, I do not intend at this time to enter into a discussion on this subject. I shall avail myself of the right which the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin said he would. Ata future time, in the progress of this debate, it is my purpose to enter into it, and to enter into it With more fullness and detail of principle and of fact than I have attempted upon the present occasion.