Mr. FESSENDEN. “ I cannot but add another very grave objection to this bill.” Is not. that a ground of objection to the bill? That is the way the paragraph commences. If the President had given us a little friendly advice in relation to that matter, disconnected entirely with a statement of it as an objection to the measure under co ration, nobody would have received it wi r nature and better race than myself. ot have accede to his reasons, by u have re ceived them with all respe did perhaps on some matters we should agree very much tter than we would appear to do when he stands in the position of President vetoing the bill, and I in the position of a Senator commenting upon it. But my objection to it was just there; he makes the fact that Sens&Reps have not been admitted from those States an objection to this bill; and while it stands so it is an objection to any bill, no matter what, that. we may choose to pass, or anything that we may choose to do which by any possi bility may affect the interests of ose States. The gentleman cannot get. rid of it or crawl out of it. Striking me with the force that this position of the veto message did, whatever I mig tthink of the Presidents other objections to the bill, and however I might treat them, that is one ground which rendered it impossible for me to yield my assent. by agreeing to waive in own Opinions in reference to the measure itse f, and to support his with a.view to get something; because you see that goes to the very foundation. No bill, the Senate will erceive, touchin a Freedmens Bureau, no bill touching any over interest connected with the colored people, no bill touchinganything that may affect the southern States, can in any way pass upon ground like that. Let us go a little further, sir. I received the im ression that the President really undertook to imit. what I understood to be the powers of Congress in relation to this matter, and to show that I will read a little more of the message. After speaking on the subject of introducing legislation before admitting Sens&Reps from these States into Congress, he says: righIt owfo Cuoldngnroetss into tejurf degree weaitchh tHhoeusuenqfourestionable itself, of the elections. returns, and qualifications of its own But that authority cannot be construed as including the right to shut out. in time of peace. any State from the represcptation to which it is entitled by the Constitutmn. In his speech yesterday, he said: “I say that when they complywith the Constitution.when theyhave given sutficient evidenceof their loyalty and that theycan be trusted.when theyyield obedienceto the law, I say extend to them the rilbt hand of fellowship and let peace and union be re stored.” He is talking there about representation. Is it not a plain, distinct, indisputable inference from what I have read from the veto message, that we cannot Judge upon any question except the simple question of the elections, returns, and qualifications of our own members? Let us hear what he gees on to say in that message: “At present all the people of 11 States are excluded—thosewho were most faithful during the war not less than others. I for instance, whose authorities hseeSntgaatgeeodfin Tennessee, was restoredto all her constitutional relations to the Union by the patriotism and energy of her injured and betrayed people. Does he mean as to judge upon the position of the State of Tennessee? “ Before the war was brought to a termination they had placed themselvesin relations with the General Government. had establisheda State government of theirpwn and asthey wero not included in the cmancipation proclamation. they. by their own act, had amended thgir coustitution so as to abolish slavery within the limits of their State. I why know no reason fully thocn State of Tennessee t,ufotiroenxaal mrepllaet.ioshnosutlod n the U.S. " I shall not read any more from the message, though it contains other language which goes to confirm the same idea. If I have mistaken the view of the President, I shall be ver glad to be corrected by him or by anybody that is authorized to speak for him; and one would think there are plenty of those gentlemen about; but what he sa 8 is, substantiall, in my judgment, this: “I have come to the conclusion that. these States are in the Uniouto be represented in the councils of the nationfwnd particularly is the State of Tennessee. Iadmit that certain thin 5 must be done; they must show their loya ty, but I am the person to decide u it whether those things have been done: whether that loyalty has been shown; whether that condition has been complied with, and all other conditions that I mayjudge necessary, and when I have decided that question with reference to these States. Congress may take up the question of the elections, qualifications, and returns of the members who presentthemselves to them, inquire into that, and have nothing to do but to settle the question whether they come within the description of the Constitution or not.” If the President does not mean that, then the question is for Congress to decide. If he does mean that, the issue of which I spoke is directly presented to Congress. For myself, I could not rest, as a Senator of the U.S. content with my position; I could not believe that I was faithful to the great interests committed to my care, connected with others as I am, by the State which sent me here, if I yielded for a moment to the idea, come from what source it me., that unybod but Congress had the right with reference to eastern and Representatives to settle preliminarily the question whether the States that sent them here were entitled to have Sens&Reps or not. Sir, we should be yielding everything, we should have no power left, we should be less than children, we should hardly be entitled to call ourselves slaves. if a question 11 n which the very existence of these bodies, the Senate and HoRep may depend, the question of whether a State, ora ody of men, or an organization anywhere is entitled to representation here, is not for us to settle and us alone, so far as those proposed members are concerned, without any dictation from anybody, ay, without any advice from anybody. The President is by the Constitution authorized and required to give information to Congress from time to time on the state of public affairs; but upon a question afiecting the representation in the Senate or in the HoRep, he is not competent even to advise us, from his position and from the necessity that exists that. all these different branches of the Government should be entirely independent of each other. I am free to say I should consider myself as sit ting in a body bound hand and foot, having no power, no rights. no independence, no O ar acter, if I thought I was compelled to ask the opinion of anyone with reard to the right of a Senator to sit upon this oor and the right of the State which sent him here to be represented upon this floor. It is a question for us, and only for us. Looking, therefore, upon these 2 arguments in this part of the veto messa e as I did, one distinctly indicating that no legislation af fecting the States which have recently been in rebellion would meet.with the approval of the President while those States were not repre sented here, the other that all the consideration that we as members of the Senate had a right to give to this subject was to look at the papers presented and say whether men coming are bad the proper credentials from some— body, leaving tequestion to be settled at the other end of the avenue whether or not the States themselves had aright to be re presented on this floor—while I considered those 2 things as not only shadowed forth. but distinctly stated in the veto message, I could not hesitate for a single instant to say that where such reasons were given for the veto of a bill, I could not, without sacrificing all my self respect, and what is Of more consequence as far as I am concerned, sacrificing all the rights and honors of the body of which I am a member, votn to sustain that message. whatever good reasons might be given in other arts of it. Under those circumstances, and, will confess, influenced by that particular message, influenced by those views and statements of the President, the committee of 15, which is so denounced, saw fit to propose distinctly the proposition to both Houses of Congress which is now upon your table; and it is this: That in order to close agitation— To have no more dispute about it among our selves as to our own action— upon a puestion which seemslikely to actiop of the Government,swell asto qudiiesttuthrbetuhne certainty which is agitating the minds of the ieople of the 11Stateswhich have been declared to be in insurrection.no Senatoror Representativeshall be admitted into either branch of Congressfrom any of said Statesuntil Congress shall have declared such State entitled to such representation. That, sir, is resuming the original proposition, substantially. Having been instructed to inquire into the condition of these States, and to report whether they, or any of them, were entitled to representation, and not being pre pared to report on that question, we propose to the House and the Senate this resolution, pro viding that— No Senator or Representative shall be admitted iunntotileCitohnegr rbersasnch of Congress from any Offfllil States shall have declared such State cuti tled to such representation.,Originally, I did not think that resolution i was necessary; but now I do. Why? In order that Congress may assert distinctly its own rights and its own powers; in order that theremay be no mistake anywhere, in the mind of the Executive or in the minds of the people of this country; that Congress, under the circumstances of this case, with this attempted limitation of its powers with regard to its own organization, is prepared to say to the Execu tve and to the country, respectful] but firmly, over this subject the have, and t iey mean to exercise, the most ful and plenaryjurisdiction; they will be limited with reard to it by no considerations arising from teviews of others than themselves, except so far as those considerations may affect the minds of individuals; we will judge for ourselves, not only upon cre dentials and the character of men and the position of men, but upon the position of the States which sent those men here. In other words, to use the language of the President ain, when the question is to be decided whether they obey the Constitution whether they have a fitting constitution of their own, whether they are loyal, whether they are propared to obey the laws as a preliminary, as the President says it is, to their admission, we will say whether these preliminary requirements have been complied with, and not he, und nobody but ourselves. It was my very strong opinion and im ression with reference to this matter that indliiced me to ask the Senate to take up this question now. I deem it as transcending in importance the question of the amendment of the Constitution which has been under discussion for several days. I deem that in the present condition of the country, situatednswe are, ittrsn seciids in importance every question. Where are we, sir? Let us allow ourselves to consider for a moment. If we are not to inquire into and be satisfied of the condition of these States, if we are not to inquire and ascertain whether they are or are not in such asituation that they may safely come here and govern, (because when they come here they come as rulers,) but if somebody else is to settle that question for us, all that Congress has to do is this: when a State chooses to go out of the Union and make war upon it, it is to provide the means to legislate; when the State has been conquered and is ready to come back again, it is to inquire of somebody else whether the State is in a condition to come back, and is to take the men who are sent here, and who may come here with credentials from a military governor appointed by the President, without a word except to inquire as to their iialifications. Mr. President, this subject is one upon which much might be said. I have been proud of the fact—and perhaps I am, therefore, to be hum bled—that I am a membbr of the Senate of the U.S. I have deemed that the position was a great one. one of which any man, no matter what his powers might he, might be proud, and with which his utmost ambition might be well contented. Why? I supposed that Senators were somewhat in the nature of representatives of the people, although selected by the Legislatures ot the States; that Senators, like Representatives, were sent here for the purpose of guarding the interests of the people, an, although other officers were chosen for specific terms and exercised for the time greater power, that after all the protection of this Government must be found in its Congress; that public opinion was represented here, the public wishes were represented here, the rights of the whole people were guarded here, the money of the people was taken care of here—I mean in Congress, taking both Houses together—and that, in fact, all the essential powers of the Government, all that was to be one lies at the very foundation, everything that was necessary in order to protect our RFG, and to save the liberties of the country rested in the faithfulness of the Sens&Reps of the U.S., and in their power to judge of what was necessary in order to constitute and regulate their own bodies. But, sir, if this is not so, if they are confined simply to a mere question of papers, to a more question of cre entials, to simply taking the opinions of others as to who are entitled to seats in this body, sofar as States having the right to send them here are concerned, then I consider that we are reduced to be more creatures of circumstance, nothings, nobodics; at any time we may be overwhelmed; at any time we may lose our power; at any time we may cease to be that check, which the Constitution intends we should be, upon the Executive of the U.S., and upon the other branches of the Government; at any time we vmay lose,all of which we have been so justly proud with reference to our own condition as assigned us by the Constitution of the U.S. Senators will pardon me, Ihope, for speaking at such len h upon that subject. I believe that the resident is a friend of his country. I believe that he is a patriotic, de voted citizen; that he would do nothing to injure any of its institutions under any circumstance if he was aware, while doing it, of what he was doing. I believe, however, in reference to this matter that he has spoken unguardedly. His feelings in relation to the admission of tennessee particularly, and these other States, have carried him beyond what I believe in calmer moments and on due considertion he would be willing to go; far be 0nd what he himself on a calm review would find it in his power to stand by. This art of his message is not well considered. that is all Ichoose to say of it. But it is a message from the POTUS It is a part of the record. We must consider it as a part of the record, and while it so stands as a reason given for vetoing abill of Congress, we must treat it precisely in the same manner as if we believed that every word of it was intended. I would not insin uate for a moment that the President would advance a sentence that was calculated to wound the Constitution in any degree. fin the contrary, I believe he would not. O man has shown a greater attachment to it than he has and I wish to speak of him respectfully and kindly. But whcflier he means it or not, when he advances opinions and lays down principles which, in my judgment, strike at the very existence of this body as a power in the Governmentnt, I cannot but enter my solemn dissent from it, and call upon Congress to assert its own rights and its own position with reference to allt ese questions. Mr. Presi cut, I have spoken at greater length with reference to this matter than I intended. I had desired, as I did on a former occasion, to say something upon the main nestion which renders our consideration of his matter necessary. I exhausted myself before upon another branch of the subject, and I have done pretty much the same now with regard to this. But if the Senate will forgive me I wish to state my own views in as few words as possible upon the great question of reconstruction. It comes in here naturally, and perhaps I may as well state in opinions upon that subject before I leave tcquestion under consideration. For 4 years wewere inastate of war, and during those 4 years, according to my recol lection, almost from the begiiiniii, we discussed the question of reconstructing tcStates. A great many gentlemen in this Chamber and in the other House made elaborate speeches upon the question of reconstruction. I, made none. I did not express an opinion upon it, for the simple and single reason that we had nothing at that time to reconstruct, and I thought it better to attend to the proper business we had in view, to quell the rebellion, to overcome the rebellious States, and to put them in a condition to be reconstructed, before we undertook to reconstruct them. The proper time has now come. We are now entited to consider the question of reconstruction. The President began to consider it before we did; I mean since the overthrow of the rebellion. He took his own course. I have had occasion once or twice to speak of the course that he took as not entirely meeting my own views, while I did not undertake to find the slightest fault with him for the course he chose to follow. But, sir, with reference to that matter allow me to say that I think the better way would have been for him to have kept all those States under his own power as Commander in Cliiefof the Army of the U.S., and waited until Congress came together, to consult with congress as to what was the best mode of getting them back again into the Union. He did not choose to do that, and I had no disposition to complain, for I believe he acted with good [no tives and good intentions. He chose, by vir— tue of his power as Commander in Chicf of the Army, to appoint provisional governors in some of these States, and I do not know but in all of them, and to say to the States that he would aid them in the process of reconstruction by appointing men who should call conventions, and under which they might make constitutibns, &c. The proceede to do itfand it is within my recol ection, and I think it must be in the recollection of a great many others, that while that was being done, and up to a very recent period, the Presidents declaration was that it was only an experiment, that if it turned out, from the conduct of these States, that they were loyal and could put themselves in a fit position to be admitted into the Union, then they could be admitted; but if not, nothing was lost, because they were in our hands, re ferring to Congress and to the President. I was content with that, so far as it wentmind I believed that.when we came together as 9.Con gress the great question in reference to these matters would be in our hands. We met. We passed a resolution that the 2 Houses of congress would considerit, and it seems that that resolution gave very great offense in many quarters. But, sir, we have been proceedingto consider it, and, according to my view, as I have exressed it here today, we had a perfect right, and not only a perfect right but it was our duty to do so. The question of reconstruction, then, on our own plan, accordingto our own ideas, is before us, and with reference to that I Wish to lay down a few ver simple propositions. With regard to what is transpiring before the committee of 15 it will not become me to say much; nothing in fact as to what they intend to do. That must be shown by their actions. But I can state some views as they occur to me with regard to our powers and what is expedient. Mr. President, I think it will not be disputed b anybody, not even by the Senfrom lifarylnnd—and I call his attention to it—that this country has been in a state of war, deci dedly in a state of war, war according to the books, war in its worst acceptstion, war in the Very strongest meaning of the term, without any limitation or unlification. If we have been in a state of war, he question arises—and it is a very simple one, and 1I think this whole thing lies in a narrow compass—is there an dis ute as to what are the consequences O war? Vhat are the consequences of successful war? Where one nation conquers another, overcomes it without qualilications, withoutterms, without limits, and after a bitter contest succeeds in crushimr its enemy, occupying its enemysterritory, estroing its posts, what are the consequences? The Senator is efectl familiar with the writers on international aw. Let him read the chapter in the book under my hand upon “ Acquisitions by War.” Is there anything more certain than that the conqueror has a right, if he chooses, to change the form of government, that he has a right to punish, that he has a right to take entire control of the nation and the people, that he has a right to exact security for the future, and such security for his own safety as he may demand; that all these ri has are I118,with on y the limitation that he sha I not abuse them and conduct them in a manner contrary to humanity, in the ordinary accetation of the term?