Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. President, I, too, like the honorable gentleman who has preceded me, have stood by the graves of the martyred 1,000s. I, too, have had pressed upon me all the solemn considerations which he so eloquently portrays. I have stood where the Senator has not stood; I have stood over the grave of my 1st born son, who fell a sac rifice in this rebellion. I have been tried, not only by all the great considerations that can move the statesman, but I have been tried by the deepest emotions of the human heart and standing ever the grave of my best be loved, the pride of my life. I have raised my hand in the presence of Him who liveth and reigneth forever, and have sworn that I would never give over the struggle till the rebellion should be suppressed, the Union restored, and peace and prosperity returned once more to our country. Sir, I made 100s of speeches, not so able as that of.the honorabiiz Senator who has preceded me, but in the same vein, while we were in a state of war. I made them to nerve my countrymen to the conflict. I made them to fire their indignation. I made them to fill up the ranks of our Arm, and rush our sons to the shock of battle. 0d Almighty! Does not the Senator know the difference between war and peace 7 We are not now in the midst of war. Peace has come upon this country, and the duties and responsibilities that rest upon us are those of eace, not of war. When we had the responsibilities of war upon us, and we were bound to nerve every arm and strain all our power to overcome a gigantic rebellion, there was no argument, no appeal, nothing that could be said to arouse the indignation and fire the heart of the country, that we did not say. But now when peace has come upon the country, shall we still go on with speeches to wage war? That is the question. I say that no principle of magna nimity demands or tolerates it, no principle of wise statesmanship will justify it; no spirit of Christianity can tolerate it for a moment. Sir, I, too, like the honorable Senator, expect to meet that train of martyred dead when we all go to our final account; and the question I expect to be called upon to answer at that dread reckonin, will be, “In what manner have you treated a fallen and vanquished foe when he had surrendered?” Shall I treat him still as a foeman? Shall I treat him still with a spirit of vengeance; or shall I treat him as a Christian, as a man? Sir, there is nothing in history, nothing in statesmanship, nothing in Christianity, which tolerates or justifies asirit of unrelenting vengeance which would stil undertake to slaughter by wholesale those who have been engaged in rebellion. But, sir, that the rebels should be punished is true. As a mass they have been punished. Take the States and the people of the States that have been engaged in this rebellion I speak of them asa mass and they have already been punished sufficiently to satisfy a sense of justice when considered by any wise statesman or by any just thinking man. That there may be individuals who have been most deeply engaged in this rebellion who still ought to be prosecuted and brought to trial and punished for their great crime, I do not don t. For more than 6 months there has been pending in this body a bill to enable the courts, which alone can try these offenders, to obtain jurors whicfih are necessary in order to have a jury at a I am sorry that the honorable Senfrom Nevada has left the Chamber, for afte. but ting to me so many pointed questions I desired to put some to him. I put this question to the Senator, and those who sympathize with him: how many do you wish to sag? An swer the question. Sir, the men who are continually denouncing the Executive for not prosecuting and hanging the leaders of this rebellion have never yet ventured to say, and they will not undertake to say, that this Government could or should or ought to go into a wholesale prosecution against those who have been engaged in the rebellion. A very few prosecutions would satisfy even those who are the most determined and bent upon the prose cution of those who have been engaged in the rebellion. Is the Executive at fault for not entering upon the punishment of those men? How should he punish them 7 Should he order their execution without any trial? I am sorry the Senator has left his seat, but I wish to deal with him frankly. I wish him to answer that question. I ask those gentlemen who sympathize with what the Senfrom Nevada me said, and denounce the President for not bringing these men to punishment, do you propose that he shall execute them, as Commander in Chief of the Army, without trial? Is there a man in this body who would undertake to say that? Is there one single man on the floor of this Senate who will so that the POTUS ong t to take JeffersonDavis, or another person engaged in this rebellion, an order him to be shot or hanged without trial? There is not a man, with all this denunciation of the President, that dare stand up and say it. Then the question arises, how are they to be tried? Some, perhaps, will say by a court martial or a military commission. The supreme Court have decided that civilians not engaged in the Army cannot be tried by a military commission or court martial. What, then, are you going to do about it? If the President, under these circumstances, should order a court martial to try men who are not civilians, men who are not in the Army, and condemn them, and sentence them, and shoot or hang them, the President would be guilty of a high misdemeanor in the violation of the Constitution of the U.S. How. then, are they to be tried? They must be tried in the tribunals of justice. They must be in dicted; they must be brought before a court; they must be arraigned and tried as other men are tried for the commission of offenses. I see that my honorable friendfrom Nevada is now present, and I desire to put the question to him, how many would you try, and in what manner would you try them? By military commission or in court?