Mr. INGERSOLL. I had fondly hoped, Mr. Speaker, when Lee surrendered to GenlGrant, and Johnston surrendered to GenlSherman , the last armies of the rebellion, that we had heard the last of southern chiv alry, and that we also had heard the last and seen the last of northern sycopliancy and northern flunkyism. I had fondly hoped that there had been evinced enough of heroism and patriotism in the northern people in meeting and overpowering the rebelp armies in that one grand, continuous “onward march” for 4 yzears in maintenance of the integrity of the epublic to have inspired those iueii who in former ears had been the subservient tools of the sontern aristocracy with something like an appreciation of true manhood, so that they would, either for shame, or by virtue of the heroic example that had been set them by the true men of the North, have been willing to have remained in silence, and let the work oi reconstruction be performed by those who had saved the country yarnis, or at least not have shocked the country again by that flunkyism, that subse rviency, that sycophancy, that has ever disgraced that class of the northern people in their pliant yielding to every demand of the South. had hoped that those examples of heroism would have had at least a silencing effect upon them, and that they would not have thrust themselves forward as the willing tools of their former masters. But, sir, in this I have been mistaken; my fond hopes have not been consummated. I have been mortified beyond expression to find in the North that same set of men now advocating with the same reckless energy, and the same lack of honor and of principle, anything and everything which the reconstructed rebels tell them to advocate. They are as ready and willing today to subse rve the purposes of the whipped yet arogant rebels as they ever were. They are as ready tojoin hands today with them as they did in the passage of the odious compromise measures of 1850, just as they would have joined hands with them during the rebellion if they could have reached over the line of loyal bayoncts between; just as they did join principles with them in their Chicago convention and plntformin 1864for the sake of restoration to political power, or even for the moiety of power that might be granted them by the generosit of the South; but what can you now expect of the men w in time of war sympathized with the enemies of the country? be old battles for liberty and justice on the one side and for slavery and tyranny on the other are upon us again, and we must fight them out. The clash of arms it is true has ceased, the physical battle has ended between the North and South, but the old battle of ideas is upon us still. The honest hearted, patriotic, high minded, honorable men in the North who are contending for principle have the saute opposition, the same obstac es, to meet and overcome that they had before the rebellion. We have advanced, it is true, but there is great work yet before us. The rebels were not made rebels in a day, and they cannot be made patriots in a day. They were the legitimate offspring of slavery after an incubation of at least half a century, and now some are so crazy as to suppose that they can be turned into patriots in an our. In my opinion, they must be born again. The only difference is this: during the war the rebel had a musket, now he has none. The difference is in the musket, not in the rebel. Mr. Speaker, itihe northern people had been united upon the great principles upon which this war was prosecuted, and in the prosecution of the war at any time during the rebellion, it would have insured the complete and immediate overthrow of the rebel power and the establishment of peace upon the broad principles of eternal justice. We lacked that unanimity, and hence the terribly rotmeted struggle, involviii the sacrifice of iaif a million noble men an millions of treasure. It required all the energy of the honest hearted and patriotic people to maintain the arm of the Government against the rebellion, aided and encouraged as it was, by the cop crhead party; and now that the war has ceased)it requires all the same energy, all the same patriotism, all the same devotion to principles, to maintain the legislative power of the country against the power that has been defeated on the field of battle but which is now attemptingto usurp the Government, and in this Wicked attempt they are aided, I regret to say, by the Executive of this nation; in fact, he is their leader; without him they would be powerless for evil. We have not only the de feated rebels to light in this contest, together with their natural allies the copperheads in the North, those who sympathized with them and would have ffaternize with them, but for the line of loyal army that interposed between them and their rebel friends, but we have in addition the executive power and patronage of this Government. But, sir, we are not dismayed nor disheart ened. Wehave been used to tern orary defeats, to severer trials than this. Ye have gone through a storm of war and blood without in timidation, and, sir, as God lovesliberty and jus tice, as the American heart throbs in response to the sentiment of universal liberty, just so I sure this same power that was unconquerable: in war will be successful in peace, and we shall triumph at last over southern aristocrac and chiva ry, over northern sycophancy and unky ism, and the President also. They will all have to succumb to the heroic and invincible power of northern patriotism, fighting as we are the battles of universal liberty and universal justice. No, the northern patriots are not disheart ened. They have given freely of their blood and treasure; they are now submitting to taxIation by reason of the burdens that have been imposed by the war without a murmur; they I have submitted to it all without complaint, and l with an endurance and a confiding trust that i have no parallel in history, and they are ready l to endure and suffer whatever may be necessary for the glory and unity of the Republic. They will not suffer the fruits of their great victory. won at such enormous sacrifices, to be bartered away. They will reap the fruits of their victory; they will reestablish the Republic on the principles of justice, and they will never permit any rebel State to be represented in the congress of the U.S. until it shall establish a government that is republican in form, and recognizes the rights of mankind, irrespective of color, within its local jurisdiction. In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, there has been a false issue presented to the people. The POTUS has one what he could to present an issue to the people that is calculatcirto mislead and deceive them. He has disguised his real purpose. He talks plausibly (so do all imposters) about “ har monious relations, ” “taxation without repre, sentation, " occasionallymentions “ soldiers: and sailors, ” and now and then even ventures" to use the word “patriotism.” But what is all this for? Look at his acts, and then say to me, if you can, that the dearest object of his heart is not to secure representation from the rebel States, so that he may receive theirsu iport as a candidate for election to the Presidency in 1868, and receive their vote in the Electoral College. Under a pretense of restoring the Union he is playing a game for the “succession, ” otherwise he would demand guarantees from the South that the commonest prudence would declare necessary before they are clothed with full political power. The President and his friends continually persist in declaring to the people that the issue now is, whether or not a State can secede; whether or not the States of the South have been out of the Union or have continued in;it that the question nowis, in what way we shall “ restore” those States to the Union, or, in the language of the President, “restore them to harmonious relations with the Government;” for the lresident denies that they have ever been out of the Union, and his present friends sustain his side of the issue. Now, so far as the practical question for our action is concerned, so far as the interests of this republic are concerned, so far as the interests ofliberty and of justiceand of universal right are concerned, it is an immaterial issue whether they are in or out of the Union. So far as the legislation of congress is concerned, so far as the future status of the States that have been in rebellion is concerned, it matters not whether they have been out of the Union or not, or whether they are in the Union or not. We have heard too much already about States in and out of the Union, and not enough about the rebels in those States. The question is not, whether those States shall have representation in congress. but whether the reels in those States shall be so represented, and allowed to vote here with ref erence to a restoration of those States to the “harmonious relations? we have heard so much about. It is a matter of supreme indifference to me and to the loyal masses of this country whether those States, technically speaking, are in or out of the Union. But it is aquestion of vital importance to the country whether those unrepentant rebels shall be Represented in Congress, and by their power hero defeat the objects of the loyal majority in Congress, defeat the restoration of the Union upon a loyal and humane basis. This is the real issue and so far as my voice can go I will use it for the purpose of unmasking the deception that the POTUS would impose upon the people of this country. To what does it amount to whether I insist that the States are out of the Union, if I allow them to be represented here? Or what does it amount to if I concede that they have never been out of the Union, if I consent to their being represented here? Nothingin the world. They will admit that they are out of the Union, if you will admit them to representation in congress; and they will not even thank you for insisting that they are in the Union unless you also admit them to representation in Congress; the power to vote loyalty down is what they want. The question is, whetherthe rebels (who would control absolutely the power and future destiny of those States if they are admittedinto the Halls of Congress) are in a fit condition to be allowed representation here. You know, Mr. Speaker, and I know, that when a State, no matter how long it has been in rebellion or what the effect of that rebellion may have been upon that State or its people, is once admitte to Representation in Congress it is placed on an equal footing with the other States of this Union, and has the ame rights in Congress and out of it that any loyal State has. If you let the President carry out his programme of restoration, then farewell to your intervention by congress; farewell to the restraining power of the hrcedmens Bureau; farewell to your constitutional amendments and your “civil rights;" farewell to any and all legislation here which interposes in behalf of the true Union men of the southern States. When you admit these rebel States to representation here they care not whether you consider themes being in the Union or out of the Union so long as you give them a voice here again and when you give them their votes here you have them a power which, when united with their northern sympathizers in congress, will overwhelm the non-party and nion measures and reform (I should say de form) this Union in accordance with their own ideas. Are you, the million of brave and patriotic soldiers who survived the shock of war; are you, the patriotic men who defended and sustained our Army against the assaults of the “ fire in the rear” party, ready for this kind of restoration? llie sacred blood of our martyred heroes cries to Heaven against it. I take the ground, admitting, for the sake of argument, most distinctly, that no inatterif a State cannot get out and never was out of the Union, yet by the rebellion of its people against this Government, by waging open war upon its lawful authority, every citizen within such State Would become thereby an alien enemy to the U.S., and liable to be treated by this Government in all respects as one who never was a citizen of this Government, a foreigner domiciled within its territory, to say nothing of the right of the Government to hang them as rebels and enemies. lfthat position is correct, then it follows that if within any certain State all its inhabitants become alien enemies the Congress of the U.S. is alone vested with power to establish a government for them, to make laws for them, to control them so long as they shall remain alien ene mies or simply aliens. I lay this down as an axiom in our Government: that when aperson is an alien enemy, either by being the subject of a foreign jurisdiction or by virtue of his own treason, he remains an alien enemy to this government until Congress relieves him from that disability. The Presidents position is, that a citizen of the U.S. may be a rebel bel ligerent firing at the life of the nation today, and a lawful citizen tomorrow, and entitled of right to representation in Congress! An alien enemy, being such by virtue of hi rebellion and treason, forfeits all the rights that he ever enjoyed under the Constitution and as a citizen of the U.S. He forfeits the right to vote; he forfeits the right to be represented in Congress; he forfeits the right to hold Office; he forfeits every right except such as he may exercise under the law of nations; and the fact that he may have been born in this country only adds a deeperblackness to his crime; he is entitled to only the same protection, and that, in fact, only by the courtesy of the Government, that would be accorded to a subject of GreatBritain, or any other foreign Power, if he were simply domi ciled within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Let us not for et that these rebels were the most favored O our citizens. Their every interest had been generously protected and fostered by the Government always; and now, after they have sent to untimely graves half a million of the nations ravest sons; after they have deluged the land with blood and covered it with a shroud of woe, in the names of Fort Pillow, Libby prison, and An dersonville, they demand representation in Congress, and AndrewJohnson and William H. Seward say they ought to have it. Mr. Speaker, am I right when I declare that the people of these rebellious States are alien enemies to this Government? If I am, when and by what meansdid they become alien ene mies? Was it by act of the Government of the U.S.? No, sir. Was it by their own not of war? It was. If, then, they were ever alien enemies to this Government, when did they cease to be such; or are they not alien enemies today? The are alien enemies this day, unless by act of congress they have been recognized as being otherwise. The President cannot change an alien into a citizen. The Constitution has vested no power of naturalization upon the President. Congress aloncis vested with that power. A foreign born subject is required to reside in this country for 5 years before he can become a citizen, unless c has served in the Army; then why should these native born rebels receive so much more consideration than a foreigner residing peace ably among us with the intention of becoming a citizen? Sir, let me lay down in connection with this subject this proposition of law: that in order to be an alien to the U.S. Government it is not necessary that a man should be foreign born. He may be an alien although not foreignboru and I hold, sir, that the people of the southern States did, by treason and rebellion, become alien enemies to this Government. By their warfare against the Government they became itsenemies; and by the laws of war they became alien enemies and liable to be treated as such. Let me read, upon this point, from Lawrences Wheaten on International Law, page 899: “ In the U.S. it isincorrse t to suppose that alien asopposed to citizen moansforeign as respoolse ountry. Indians are the subjectsof the U.S., and therefore are not in more right of home birth citizens of the U.S.; but they may be madecitizens by somecompetent, act of the General Government, by treaty or otharmse." Now, sir, with reference to these rebels who inaugurated a rebellion, who formed ode facto government, recognized by the civilized Powers of the world as entitled to belligerent rights; which was recognized by our own Government as entitled to belligerent rights; they became enemies, and alien enemies, although not foreign born. and, sir, I hold, in accordance with the law which I have read, that the character of alien continues until relieved by competent authority of the General Government. I read now from the opinion of the SCOTUS, as recorde in 2 Blacks Reports, page 666, to show that the inhabitants of the southern States didz by Virtue of their rebellion and treason against the U.S. become alien enemies, and that is an independent fact, without reference to the status of the rebel States in their relation to the Union: "A war may exist where one of the belligerents claimssovereignrishts as against the other. “Insurrection against a.Government may or may not culminate in an organized rebellion, but a civilWar always beginsby insurrection againstthe lawful authority of the Government. A civilWar is never solemnly declared: it becomessuch by its accidents thenumber, power, and organizationof the persons who curryit on. When the partyin rebellion occupy and hold in hostile mann er a certain portion ofterritory; have declared their independence: have cast 021t eir allegiance: huve orgnnized armies; have commenced hostilities against their former sovereign. the world acknowledgesthem as belligerents, and the contestawnr. They claim to be in arms to establish their liberty and independence. in order to become a sovereign State, while the sovereignparty tgrieaante set, hem as insurgents and rebels who own alle and who should be punished with death for their treason. “The laws of war, as established among nations, have their foundation in renson.ondall tend to miti gate the cruelties and misery produced by these ourge of war. Hence the parties toricivilwar usuall concedoto each other belligerentrights. They exc tinge prisoners and adopt the other courtesics and rules common to public or national wars. A civilWar.saysVattel, breuks the bandsofso ciety snde government, ornt least suspendstheir force and effect: it producesin thenation twoindependent parties. who consider each other as enemies and acknowledge no common Judge. Those 2 parties. therefore.must necessarily be consideredas constituting, at least for a time, 2 separate bodies, 2 distinct societies. Having no common superior to judge betweenthem, lhcystondin preciselythesaine predicament as 2 nations who engage in a contest and haverccouiso to arms. “This being the case, it is very evident that the common laws of war, those maxinisof humanity, moderation and horior, ought to beobservedby both partiesin every civilWar. Should thesovereign conceive he has a right to hangup his prisonersas rebels, the opposite party Will make reprisals. &c.; the war will becomecruel. horrible, and every day more destructive to the nation." 1 The Supreme Court say: "As a civil wuris neverpublicly proclaimedeoamn inc. against insurgents, its actual existence is a fact ipnoloicuer domestichistory, which the court is bound to and to know.” “The true test of its existence, as found in the writings of the sagesof the common law. may be tohf juusst summarily stated: When the regular course is interrupted by revolt. rebellion or insurrection, so that the courts of justice cannot be kept open. civilWar exists and hostilities may be prosecutedon the samefooting usif those opposing {hedtlovernment were foreign encinics iiivaing the an. “The law of nations is also called the law of na ture: it is founded on the commonconsent as well as the commonsenseof the world. It containsno such anomalousdoctrineasfhal which [his court are now for the 1st timedesiredto pronounce, to wit. that insur gentswho have risen in rebellion against their sov cign. expelled hereourts. Established a revolutionary goycriiment, organizedarmies, and commenced hostilities are not ENIMIES beennse theytare traitors: and a war levied upon the Government by traitors in order to dismcmber and destroy it is not awar becauseit is an imurreclion.” In this opinion the court declare that these rebels, these traitors, these insurgents, who have been prosecuting this war against the Government, are ssaiiiss, to be treated in the light of public enemies, or alien enemies, entited to the same rights as though it were a foreign war originally, and no more and now I as, when the character of an alien once attaches to the rebellious party, when does that character cease? Does it cease simply because they acknowledge their defeat on the battle field? Not at all. The character of any criminal does not change when, being detected and overtaken, he acknowledges the crime and proffers to make restitution; he is a criminal still. The rebels were only defeated in carrying out their traitorous designs because they were met and over powered by the heroism of the northern people. Let us illustrate this a little further. We will presume that the people of Mississippi in 1860were peaceful citizens; in 1861 they Were rebels, in 1862, 1868, and 1864 they were bel ligerent:; in 1865they were subju ated: in 1866the Government arrests the leaers for trea son. But, say the rebels, you cannot try us for treason; although at 1st we were rebels, we afterward established the “ coufederacy, ” and you recognized as as a de fizeto government, as alien enemies, as belligerents; you waived. the right to try us for treason in thus recognizin as. Well, we reply, if that is so, we will ismiss the charge of treason, and treat on as conquered public enemies, as aliens. 0, no; that will not do; we will not submit to that; we claim, that notwithstanding you had the lawful right to fight and subdue us, that as soon as you wrested our arms from us we were at once transformed into citizens of the U.S. Government we sought to destroy, and are now entitled to representation in Congress and all other rights we ever enjoyed under the Constitution. We deny your conclusions, and we propose to contest the point with you before the people. Mr. Speaker, in my opinion we would have but little trouble in settling these difficulties, or finding a solution of the problems which now weigh so heavily upon the country, had the POTUS but conse ientiously and honestly discharged his duty. Had he had morejudgment and less ambition, more patriotism and less egotism, had be de sired to subse rve the interests of his country rather than his own, we would have had an easy deliverance from our troubles. When the surrender of the rebel armies was made, AndrewJohnson was POTUS He had exercised the authority but a few days. He had no experience in the administration of the Government, but he had ambition. He had a desire to make himself conspicuous before the country and before the world, and consequently, blinded by his ambition and craze by his egotism, he refused to do what the simplest minded man knew he on ht to have done under such circumstances. an all remember the condition of the country at that time. He ought to have called the Congress together at once in special session, called together the representatives of the party who, confiding in his honor and his patriotism, based upon what he had nblicly said on all occasions from the veryinauguration of the rebellion, clected him VEEP. Had he thus called the representatives of the peopletogetherto counsel and advise with, it won] have been an easy matter for Congress at that time to have shaped the legislation of the country to a solution of these difficulties, and adjusted a basis of reconstruction satisfactory alike to the loyal people of the North and the subjugated people of the South. The latter were willing at the time of the surrender to accept almost any conditions which would have spared their forfeited lives and their forfeited property. They were thoroughly whipped: they were subjugated, and they were ready to acknowledge it. From the published speeches the President had made previous to their subjugation, and immediately after, they never dreamed of finding any clemency in his heart They simply expected the rights and privileges belonging to a vanquished as. They never dreamed of being regarded as citizens of the U.S., entitled to the right of representation in Congress, and the rit to “ restore” the country they had moved coma and earth to destro. No, sir, they never dreamed of it. The leaders expected to be hung, if they put any reliance upon the oft repeated utterance of Mr. Johnson, that they should be hung, for he had declared time and a in that he would hang them; that he would am e treason odious: that it was the greatest crime known to the calendar of crimes; that traitors should be punished. This he had declared, and they knew it. With an army to back him, and loyal people to sustain him in ea in out these declarations, they never dreame of finding clemency and encouragement and protection, as the sequel has shown they have found, at his hands! Not only protection, sir, but rtmotionl and he has given them to understarit at the have a constitutional right to deliberate in the councils of the Government they attempted to, disrupt and Overwhelm that tlfe have a constitutional right to made laws which are to determine the future status of the States and the people of those States who have been engaged in this formidable rebellion against the Government. Under the PreSidents progr mme they are becoming much emboldened O ate. Many of the southern papers insist upon it that all acts of the present Congress arei legal and void, for the reason that the 11 southern States are denied representation in Congress. They even go so far as to advise the President to call the southern representatives to Washington, and have them go in a body and claim their seats; and in case opposuion is offered to this proposed outrage, they tell the President to the bayonet and clear the House of the radicals?acpaplsyl This is easily enou by said, but it will never be done. The NewYork News, referring to this subject of representation in State number, said: “Tho radicals oppose their admission. They bar the doors. They standarmed with stolen and unlaw Ihl weapons to dispute the passe e of duly elected members of Congress to their rightlul seats in the national Legislature. Then why does not the Chief pMraegviesntrtateof the Republic lnterposohis authority to this outrage against the representativesof the States and of the people? He has the power to do so. He is Commander in Chief of the armies of the U.S and has at his disposal an armed and disciplined force amply sufficientto preservethe onceat the seat of Govornment and to enforceobo ience to the laws beneaththe roof of the Capitol of the Republic. Let ii.day befiled for the representa tiires of the southern Statesand people to take their seatsin Congress.Thosoats are therereadyto receive the rightful claimants. Let them outer, take passession of their own and fulfill their official functions. Should violence be offered them by any man or number of men. under any retonso whatsoever, let the President send a domement of Federal troops to preserveorder in the Capitol. "1f radical conspirators attempt to support their “agitation by forco, the consequencesbe upon their hes. It is time that the Republic shonl have a complete and constitutional Legislature. We have been ruled too long by faction. We have been too long subject to the oaprioesof fanatics. The country imfustbe permitted to resumeits normal condition and revolutionists stand in the way, the executivearm is strong enough to swoop them from the path of restoration." The Richmond Whig gives the following advice to Mr. Johnson: "Call together a Congress composedof members from all the Statesof the Union. aswell thoseof the South as those of the North and that if the radical members should refuseto attend. that he shall recognise the northern conservamo membersand the loutberii members as the lawful Congress to sit in the Capitol and legislatefor the country. The Whig does not see how this (programmecould be accomplished peacefully an supposes that the radic al sectional Congress.as it terms it, would continue its sessions.9 peal to the people and proceedto muster an army i the U.S. Army should not side with it. In that case the Whig believes that the Presidpnt would be prepared to meet force with orco. The Enquirer of the same date, discoursmg 0n the same subject, says: “It is evident. indeed. that a violent collision be twoen Congress and the President is inevitable and isimminent. if the true spirit and intent of the constitution shall remain true, and its forms abusedfor the usurpation of power. In this issuethe Pros ident has thus far been altogether in the right and has evnncodall the moderaton. Congresshas been swphoonlldyingin the wron and has disllayed a corro yiolence. hat t io pub in peace is yet unbroken is due to the President. It dependsppon Congresswhether it can be permanently maintained. for we take it for granted that the President will not yield himself an nnrosistipg Victim to revolutionary violenco. Whatevier garb it may wear or allow the govesntihtuimtio.nto. tboe doovearntudrnwehdicohr t destroy redd.has been a congressional coup (11611cla!n bemet by a presidential coup deuil and in the cull"ion the hardest must fend oil"as to what should be O Presidents pillow." The Charleston SCarolininn says: "There are obvious steps to the more firm establishment of this Governmentin the call of a congress composedof the members of the southern States and such membersof the presentCongress as are readyto sustain his policy. Hn such a congressthere would as large aSennte and nearly as large a House. while with such a body to sustain him hecan even more justly represent the Government and throw the radicals.who shall accept the issue, into the do fensive attitude of an adversary faction." Is this “bringing forth fruits meet for repent ance, ” that the President used to talk about? How do on like this picture of “reconstruct ed” rebe s?. Ahl sir, this failure on the part of {he president to call Congress together was a great misfortune to this country; the greatest which ever befcll it, perhaps, with the exception of one. It was a greater misfortune when Booth, the assassin, sent his bullet, with unerring certainty, through the brain of that purest and best man, who, by his patriotism and by his virtue, ennobled and cle vnted that country for which he died. That was one of the great calamities which befell the country. Ah! how little did we then know how much we lost. The next, as it has turned out, was that AndrewJohnson was VEEPl Had AndrewJohnson been an honest man, and had he been with us, from principle, in this contest, it would, sir, have softened the rigor of that 1st calamity to the American people. But Andrew Jo nson was never with the Republican party on principle; never, sir. In the 1st place he was for maintaining this Union, as can lie proved by his last speech in the U.S. Senate, with slaver; for he deemed slavery secure only in the libion. In tlfiit speech he distinctly avowed that he was going “to fight for slavery in the Union;" he was satisfied that in the Union was the only safety for slavery, and that outside of it was certain ruin. He emphatically declared that “the institution would be perpetual if southern men stood to other in the Union." Andrew Jo nson is essentially a southern man. Born, reared, and educated in the South, he has the prejudices of the southem people; he has their animositics. their hatreds, and their superstitions. He, however, was never recognized by the leaders of the South, who in augurated the rebellion, as one of their peers, so be sacrificed nothing of a social character when he refused to go with them. He had never been with them as one of the spokes in their political wheel. AndrewJohnson today is filed with the poison of the malaria of slavery which he inhaled in his infancy, and during the ripening years of his life, and this I say in extenuation of his presentposition. He talked loudly. eloquently, and well with reference to the odiousness of the rebellion and the blackness of the crime of treason while it was his interest to do so. While he could remain in the U.S. Senate, or so soon as he resigned that position receive the appointmentof military governor ofTennessee, and go there and maintain authority and power and receive the emoluments of office, lie could talk as loudly in favor of the maintenance of the Union, and for the suppression of the rebellion and that traitors ought to be unis lied, and all that, as any man. I do not now but he has excelled almost any other in his denun ciations of treason, and in his assertion that it must be punished, &c., and that the people must be taught that treason is the crime of crimes. But sir, so soon as AndrewJohnson finds himself clothed with executive power and with the immense patronage of his position, and so soon as he had surveyed the political field, he says to the people of the South “ All my denun ciations against you are nothing but gammon. I am talking that for NewEngland. I never mean to ca out any of my threats against on. You {like care to sustain my policy, and in 1868 I will be the candidate for the Presidency. Iwill see that none of your necks are stretched for treason; I will see that none ofyou sffer; I will take care of the South ifion will let me hunibug the northern people y these denunciations against the offense of treason. Do this and it will all come out right.” Mr. Speaker, I believe the Gentfrom Missouri[Mr. HOGAN] delivered a speech on this floor a few days since, in which be chal lenged the Union party or any of its representatives in this Coneress, “to show wherein AndrewJohnson had been a traitor to the pledges and professions he had made during the rebellion. Is it to he expected that anyone is to be gammoned by any such "gaseou ade” as this? Are we to be told, and is it to be believed, that AndrewJohnson occupies today the same position that beheld in 1864and has held from 1861 up to within the ast few months? There is a radical difference ctween the AndrewJohnson of today arid the AndrewJohnson of a year ago; there is also an antagonism between the men who elected him and the men who now support him. Is not AndrewJohnson today trampling upon the principles he sustained and proclaimed a car ago? I proclaim here that he is, and I willprove it by his own record. Why, sir, if the AndrewJohnson of today is the man we elected VEEP then we have most wonderfully transformed ourselves. Somebody has been transformed. Either the Democratic party that denounced him as a traitor and a scoundrel of the deepest dye has been transformed, or t“he Union party or Mr. Johnson has been transmogrified.” Somebody has changed things are not now as they were. That party which recently denounced him now sustain him, from Va landigharn down, filling the air with buzzahs in his praise. Unless the entire Union party has been transformed in a brief period there has a change come over the spirit of the dreams of the Democratic party, and over its actions, too. Is it the Union party or the Democratic or AndrewJohnson that has changed? Sir. the Union party has not changed, nor has the Democratic party changed. The Democratic party is the same uncompromising foe of progress. civilization, liberty, and justice that it ever was during the rebellion, and the Union party stands today where it has always stood, nndannted and invincible, neither intim idated by threats nor seduced by lpatronage, the constant and nntiring friend O ibert, union, and universal justice God bless the Union part, say H there is nothing in common between the Democratic and the Union party. There is an antagonism which is irreconcilable between them; an antagonism as rest as that between the Union party and An rew Johnson. That antagonism does not exist between the Democratic party and the President. Andrew Jobn son is doing all he canto sustain the Democratic party. He has abandoned his old friends. He has betrayed the party that gave him a name and a position among the poten States of the earth. He has betraed the principles that he himself advocate within the past 4 years. He has given the lie to the sentiments which he expressed during the war on vital and important questionsl Sir, no man can make me believe, nor the Union men of this country, that the Democratic party which opposed the war, which created the Chicago p atform of 1864, declaring the experiment of restoring the Union by warn failure; the party which strove to get up “a fire in the rear of the loyal heroes fighting to put down the rebellion; no man can make me believe that that party in sustaining the AndrewJohnson of today is supporting the AndrewJohnson of 1862, 1863, an 1864. The Democratic party are not fools. They know that they are sustaining a man who coincides with them, and who is promoting their interests. The are using him to aggrandize their party, an w n they have accomplished their ends they wi I drop him and the time will come when he will be so low that there will none “so poor as to do him reverence, ” even in the Democratic party. [assert that there never existed a man so exalted or so powerful that he could betray the ; imyal Without dishonor and disgrace. Not "moo is known in the history of the world. i man betrayed his true friends. betrayed 7 “ANYthat placed him in poiver, who did not wider himse l politically infamous by that act oi betrayal. If illustrations were necessary I might cite the cases of John 10land James Buchanan. What did either of them make by their betrayal of those who elevated them to power? They have made a history which their children (if they are so unfortunate as to have any) will weep to road. So will AndrewJohnson, if he persists in the betrayal of those who put him into power, sink to the same level with Tyler and lguchanan; he is on the down grade now, and he will reach them if he does not soou stop. Mr. Speaker, let us go to the record of the POTUS and see What that proves. I have taken some little pains in the short time that I could spare from the discharge of other duties to run over his record, an ascertain what positions he assumed and what principles ho enunciated during the war, for the or ose of contrasting them with thQSe which liehas been utterin during the last 6 months. Let the recor itself show the contrast. It will appear as well defined and as apparent as the contrast between mid night and noon day. quote now from Savages Life of Johnson, on page 231, from the speech of AndrewJohnson, as a Senfrom lennesse e, in the Senate of the U.S., in the year 1861: “Mr. President. when I was interrupted by the motion to clear the galleries. I was making a general allusion to treason as defined in the Constitution of thoU.S., and to thosewhowere traitors and guilty of treason within the scope and meaningof the law and the Constitution. lily proposition was. that if they would show me who were guilty of the offensesI have enumerated.I would show themwho were the traitors. That bein done.were I the POTUS I would do as Thomas Jefferson did in 1806 with AaronBurr, who was chargedwith treason. I would have them arrested and tried for treason and if convicted.by the eternal (lod they should sulfer the penalty of the law at the hand! of the executioner." Now, I can point out to AndrewJohnson who the traitors are and now let him dare to declare that by the eternal God he will have them tried, and if convicted he will hand them over to the executioner! It will not satisfy me that AndrewJohnson is an honest man because he handed over to the executioner the poor miserable miscreant Wirz, and that poor unfortunate woman and 3 others who were one and all the more tools of the intellectual instigators of the assassination. That was but little; they had no friends; the amounted to nothing. AndrewJohnson ha no reference to such personswhen he made this declaration in the Senate of the U.S. No, sir; he made that declaration against the rebel leaders, against those in high position who were inaugurating this rebellion and what has he done tofullill that promise? “Were I POTUS, ” says he and now that he is POTUS, clothed with the power that he seemed to desire at that time, what has he done toward the consummation of that promise? He has done nothing. He has not ordered the trial of any single man in the U.S. for treason. 7 On the other hand, he has pardoned or paroled every single traitor against this Government. with the exception, I believe, of 2, perhaps but one. When it became necessary or GenlHumphreys, who had surrendered his sword not more than ten da shefore to GenlSherman , to be pardoned, that he might enter upon the duties of Governor of Missis sippi, ere was AndrewJohnson ready to pardon him. He had not been from the battle field 3 weeks before he was elected governor ofhlississippi bylhereturned rebel legions. party that placed lrim in power and survive that of that State; and AndrewJohnson at once. reiii. him an executive pardon to enable him to enter upon the duties of that office and I have been told that General Hiimphi eys never as much as asked for it. i work of restoration. Instead of making treason odious as he promised to do, he has one all that did well iild to restore traitors to political power an to shield them from the legitimate results of their crimes. He has given them place; he has given them power; he has recognized them as being entitled to all the rights of loyal citizens under the Constitution, with here and there a solitary exceptions and if I were a betting man, ifI may be allowed to make use of such a phrase here, I would bet all that I have on this earth that he never will order the trial of Jeff. Davisand that if he is ever tried and convicted, AndrewJohnson will pardon him. I only wish I was as certain to live 1,000years, and enjoy health and youth, as I am that JeffersonDavis never will make exiation for his bloody crimes while Andrew chosen is the POTUS ! Now, let us go a little further into this record, and see whether AndrewJohnson is a man who is keeping his promises or not; and whether it is true, as he would have it, that the northern men are all crazy radicals, and have themselves “gone back” on the principles they adopted during the progress of the rebellion. In this same Life of Johnson, by Savage, on page 295, AndrewJohnson is recorded as having made use of this language, in his speech at Nashville, while he was exercising the duties of military governor under commission from Abraham Lincoln: “ But in caning a convention to restore the State. who shall restoreand reestablishit? Shall the man who gave his influence and his meapsto destroy the Government 7 Is he to partincipatin the Greatwork of reorganization? Sha I he wobrought this inisei y upon the State of Tennesseecontrol its destinies?” Just listen: “ Shall he who broueht this misery upon the State be permitted to control its destinies? If this be so, then all this precious blood of our bravasoldiersand oilji lvrds so froolypouredout will have beenwantonly sin c. Sir, if that language was true as regarded the State of Tennessee, is it not true in reference to every other State Situated as Tennessee was. Certainly, sir; if it was wrong with regard to the local legislation of the State of Tennessee that traitors should participate in the reorganization of their local government, the same objection exists with regard to their reor ganizing any other State governmentwhieh they iave destroyed. Will not the same objection exist with regard to traitors participating in. lhc reorganization of the General Government in assuming its rightful jurisdiction over the rebellious Suites and in restorinv them to the Union practically? “Rebelsslionld not be represented in the Tennessee Legislature, ” but “they should be represented in the congress of the U.S. ” I cannot har ine nize these 2 positions of the President. They are irreconcilable. But AndrewJohnson does not talk today as he did then. No, sir, he is for lelting all those rebels participate in the conventions and in every step toward reconstruction; and if there is any treason in the way he has a pardon in his pocket ready to hand it to the man who may be embarrassed by any disability of that kind. Let us continue the examination of the record: “ All the glorious victorieswon byour noble armies will go for naught and all the battle fields which have beensown with dead heroes during the robe! lion will lHIVGhOOm Dade memorable in vain. "Why all this carnago and devastation? It was that1treason might be put down and traitors pun ]! l "Th crcfore I say that traitors should take a back seat in the work of restoration." Sir, if AndrewJohnson could have his way today, traitors would take a front seat in the He has turned square round. Then, when he was acting with the Union party, he proclaimed to the world “ that traitors should take a back seat.” Now he proclaims that traitors shall have a front seat. le would give them front seats in this Hall! He would introduce here the rebel horde from Mississippi, Alabama, and other insurrection ary States. He would have their names called ! his old position. on our rolls, and let them engage here in the work of legislation. That is what AndrewJohnson desires today. M[Hre.rLeAthVeRhEaNmCmEe, r fell.] of pennsylvania, obtained the floor.v