January 6, 1865

Mr. ASHLEY. I desire to call up this morning, pursuant to notice previously given, the motion to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution in reference to slavery was rejected.

Mr. HOLMAN. Does the gentleman call it up for action to day

Mr. ASHLEY. No, sir; but for discussion, intending to allow that discussion to run on until the House sees fit to order the main question to be put.

The SPEAKER. This being private bill day, it requires a majority vote to set aside the consideration of private bills.

The consideration of private bills was set aside by a majority vote, and the motion to reconsider was taken up.

Mr. ASHLEY. Mr. Speaker," Ifslavery h not wrong, nothing is wrong." Thus simply and truthfully has spoken our worthy Chief Magistrate.

The proposition before us is, whether this universally acknowledged wrong shall bo continued or abolished. Shall it receive the sanction of the American Congress by the rejection of this proposition, or shall it be condemned as an intolerable wrong by its adoption?

If slavery had never been known in the United States, and the proposition should be made in Congress to day to authorize the people of the several States to enslave any portion of our own people or the people ofany other country, it would be universally denounced as an infamous and criminal proposition, and its author would be execrated, and justly, by all right thinking men, and held to be an enemy of the human race.

I do not believe such a proposition could secure a single vote in this House; and yet we all know that a number of gentlemen who could not be induced to enslave a single free man will nevertheless vote to keep millions of men in slavery, who are by nature and the laws of God as much entitled to their freedom as we are. I will not attempt to explain this strange inconsistency or make an argument to show its fallacy. 1 content myself with simply stating the fact.

It would seem as if no man favorable to peace, concord, and a restored Union could hesitate for a moment as to how he should vote on this proposition. Certainly, whatever of strife, sectional bitterness, and personal animosity these Halls have witnessed since my appearance in Congress, or, indeed, I may say, since the organization of par- •ties in 183&, slavery has usually been the sole cause. No observer of our history, or of the political parties which have been organized and disbanded, now hesitates to declare that slavery is the cause of this terrible civil war. All who understand anything of our troubles, either in this country or Europe, now know that but for slavery there would have been no rebellion in this country to day

In the very nature of things it was impossible for a Government organized as ours to endure half slave and half free; and nothing can be clearer to the reader of history than that the men who made our Constitution never expected nor desired the nation to remain half slave and half free. Our fathers were men of ideas, and they believed that with the adoption of the Constitution slavery would cease to exist. Sir, while demanding liberty for themselves, and proclaiming to the world the inalienable right of all men to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they were not guilty of the infamy of making a Constitution which, by any fair rules of construction, can be interpreted into a denial of liberty, happiness, and justice to an entire race.

That the founders of the Republic were sadly disappointed in their expectations that slavery would cease on the adoption of the national Constitution is undoubtedly true. Instead of disappearing as they confidently expected, circumstances unforeseen by thf m so strengthened slavery that in less than eighty years it became the dominant interest in the nation, and in 1SG0 openly demanded the entire control of the national Government. Because this demand was refused by the free laboring men of the North the slavemasters of the South organized this the most wicked of all rebellions, and for nearly four long yeai a have waged this terrible war with the avowed purpose of destroying the best form ofgovern merit ever vouchsafed to man, in order to establish in its stead a Government whose corner stone should be human slavery. This is the logic of the contest. It has at last so fully developed itself that all the world, including its most stupid editors, now understand it. The Government of our fathers must either be maintained, and slavery die, or slavery must live and the Government be destroyed. The conflict is irrepressible," and beyond compromise. The nation cannot longer endure half slave and half free.

llnd statesmen administered this Government for the past thirty years instead of the trading politicians who have disgraced it, first by apologizing for, then justifying, and at last openly defending slavery as a right guarantied by the national Constitution, we should have had no such desolating war as we have in this country to-day. 1 If the national Constitution had been rightfully interpreted, and the GovemmeiUorgamzed under it properly administered, slavery could not have legally existed in this country for a single hour, and practically buta few yeata after the adoption of the Constitution. Only because the fundamental principles of the Government have been persistently violated in its administration, and the Constitution grossly perverted by the courts, is it necessary to day to pass the amendment now under consideration. I say this much in vindication of the memory of the great and good men who, when establishing this Government, made a Constitution which to day is the best known among men.

As for myself, I do not believe any constitution can legalize the enslavement of men. 1 do not believe any Government, democratic or despotic, can rightfully make a single slave, and that which a Government cannot rightfully do it cannot rightfully or legally authorize or even permit its subject to do. I do not believe that there can be legally such a thing as property in man. A majority in a republic cannot rightfully enslave the minority, nor can the accumulated decrees of courts or the musty precedents of Governments make oppression just. I do not, however, wish to go into a discussion ofthe question of slavery as an abstract question. It is a system so at war with human nature, so revoking and brutal, and is withal so at variance with the precepts of Christianity and every idea of justice, so absolutely indefensible in itself, that I will not uncoverits hideous blackness and thus harrow up my own and the feelings of others by a description of its disgusting horrors, or an attempted recital of its terrible barbarism and indescribable villainy.

It is enough for me to know that slavery has forced this terrible civil warupon us; a war which we could not have avoided, if we would, without an unconditional surrender to its degrading demands. It has thus attempted to strike a deathblow at the national life. 11 has shrouded the land, in mourning and filled it with widows and orphans. It has publicly proclaimed itself the enemy of the Union and our unity as a free people. Irs barbarities have no parallel in the world s history. The enormities committed by it upon our Union prisoners of war were never equaled In atrocity since the creation of man.

For more than thirty years past there is no crime known among men which it has not committed under the sanction of law. It has bound men and wou n in chains, and even the children of the slave master and sold them in the public shambleslike beasts. Under the plea of Christianizing them it has enslaved, beaten, maimed, and robbed millions of men for whose salvation the Man of sorrows died. It so constituted its courts that the complaints and appeals of these people could not be heard by reason of the decision that black men had no rights which white men were bound to respect." It has for many years defied the Government and trampled upon the national Constitution, by kidnapping, impiisoning, mobbing, and murdering white citizens of the United States guilty of no offense except protesting against its terrible crimes. It has silenced every free pulpit within its control, and debauched thousands which ought to have been independent. It has denied the masses of poor white children within its power the pi ivilege of free schools, and made free speech and a free press impossible within its domain; while ignorance, poverty, and vice are almost universal wherever it dominates. Such is slavery, our mortal enemy, and these are but a tithe of its crimes. No nation could adoptacode of laws which would sanction such enoimines, and live. No man deserves the name of statesman who would consent that such a monster should live in the Republic for a single hour.

Mr. Speaker, if slavery is wrong and criminal, as the great body of enlightened and Christian men admit, it is certainly our duty to abolish it, if we have the power. Have we the power? The fifth article of the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Homes shall deem it iiece -«aiy, shall propose iuneiuhnentd to thw Constilntiori, or, on 'the application ol the Legislature* of two thirds ol the several States, shall call a convention for propot ni amendments, which, in either ease, shall be valid to all intents and purposes a p utol this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of tineo fourths of the sevciai States, oi by convention-; in three fourths thereof, as one or the other mode ol i uihe uion inaj beptopoM d by the Congress provided tli it no amendment which may tie made prior to the year 18J8 shall in any manner affeet the first and tomtli cLiu es m the ninth section of" the article; and that no State, without its? consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The question which first presents itself in examining this provision of the Constitution is, what constitutes two thirds of both Houses? or, what, in the eye of the Constitution, is two thirds of the House of Representatives? Is it two thirds of the entire number of members to which all the States including the States in rebellion, would be entitled, if they were all now represented, or is it two thirds of the members who have been elected and qualified?

This question would have entered largely into the discussion of the subject now under consideration had not your predecessor, Mr. Speaker, decided, and this House sustained him in declaring, that a majority of the members elected and recognized by the Mouse made a constitutional quorum.

It has, so far as the action of this body can dispose of the question, been authoritatively settled, and settled as I think it should have been, by declaring that a majority of the members elected and qualified constitutes a quorum, and that two thirds ot a quorum can constitutionally pass this amendment. The question having been thus disposed of, I do not care to make an argument in support of a proposition thus authoritatively settled.

My colleague from the first district, [Mr. Pendleton,] in a speech which he made at the last session against the passage of this amendment, raised the question as to the constitutional power of Congress to propose, and three fourths of the Legislatures of the States to adopt, an amendment of the character of the one now under consideration. He claimed that, though Congress passed the proposed amendment by the requisite two thirds, and three fourths of the Legislatures of the several States adopted it, or, indeed, all the States save one, it would not legally become a part of the national Constitution. These are his words:

But neither three fourths of the States, nor all the States save one, can abolish slavery in that dissenting State, because it lies within the domain reserved entirely to each State for itself, and upon it the other States cannot enter." Ta this position defensible? If I read the Constitution aright and understand the force of language, the section which I have just quoted is today free from all limitations and conditions save two, one of which provides that the suffrage of the several States in the Senate shall be equal, and that no State shall lose this equality by any amendment of the Constitution without its consent; the other relates to taxation. These are the only conditions and limitations.

In my judgment, Congress may propose, and three fourths of the States may adopt, any amendment, republican in its character and consistent with the continued existence of the nation, save in the two particulars just named.

If they cannot then is the clause of the Constitution just quoted a dead letter; the States sovereign, the Government a confederation, and the United States not a nation.

The extent to which this question of State rights and State sovereignty has aided tUjfr- terrible rebellion and manacled and weakened the arm of the national Government can hardly be estimated. Certainly doctrines so at war with the fundamental principles of the Constitution could not be accepted and acted upon by any considerable number of our citizens without eventually culminating in rebellion and civil war.

This fatal heresy doubtless carried many men of character and culture into the rebellion who were sincerely attached to the Union. If we may credit the recently published private letters of General Lee, written in the spring of 1861, to his sisterand friends, and never intended for publication, he was induced to unite his fortunes with the insurgents by the so called secession of Virginia, under the belief that his first and highest allegiance was due to his State. Sir, I know how hard it is for loyal men to credit this. To thinking men nothing seems more absurd than the political heresy called States rights in the sense which makes each State sovereign and the national Government the mere agent and creature of the States. Why, sir, the unity of the people of the United States antedates the Revolution. The original thirteen colonies were never m fact disunited. The man who had the right of citizenship in Virginia had the same right in New York. As one people they declared their independence, and as one people, after a seven years' war, conquered it. But the unity and citizenship of the people existed before the Revolution, and before the national Constitution. In fact this unity gave birth to the Constitution. Without this unity and preexisting nationality I may so express myself—the Constitution would never have been formed. The men who carried us through the revolutionary struggle never intended, when establishing this Government, to destroy that unity or lose their national citizenship. Least of all did they intend that we should become aliens to each other, and citizens of petty, independent, sovereign States. In order to make fruitful the blessings which they had promised themselves from independence and to secure the unity and national citizenship for which they periled life, fortune, and honor, they made the national Constitution. They had tried a confederation. It did not secure them such a Union as they had fought for, and they determined to" form a more perfect Union." For this purpose they met m national convention, and formed a national Constitution. They then submitted it to the electors of the States for their adoption or rejection. They did not submit it to the States as States, nor to the governments of the several States, but to the citizens of the United States residing in all the States. This was the only way in which they could have submitted it and been consistent with the declaration made in the preamble, which says that" we, the people of the United States, in order to form amore perfect Union, &c., do ordain .and establish this Constitution." The whole people were represented in this convention. Through their representatives they pledged each other that whenever the people of nine States should ratify and approve the Constitution submitted to them, it should be the Constitution of the nation.

In the light of these facts, to claim that our Government is a confederation and the States sovereign seems an absurdity too transparent for serious argument. Not only is the letter of the Constitution against such a doctrine, but history also. Since the adoption of the national Constitution twenty two States have been admitted into the Union and clothed with part of the national sovereignty. The territory out of which twentyone of these States were formed was the common territory of the nation. It had been acquired by cession conquest or purchase. The sovereignty of the national Government over it was undisputed. The people who settled upon it were citizens of the United States. These twenty one States were organized by the concurrent action of the citizens of the United States and the national Government. Without the consent of Congressthey would haveremainedTerritories. What an absurdity, to claim that the citizens of the New England States, or of all the States, «r of any section of the Union may settle upon the territory of the United States, form State governments, with barely inhabitants enough to secure one Representative in this Houseunder the apportionment, secure admission as a State, and then assume to be sovereign and master of the national Government, with power to secede and unite with another and hostile Government at pleasure, and to treat all citizens of the United States as alien enemies who do not think it their duty to unite with them. This is the doctrine which deluded many men into this rebellion, and which seems to delude some men here with the idea that the national Constitution cannot be amended so as to abolish slavery, even if all the States in the Union demanded it save Delaware. Under this theory of State sovereignty, States like Florida and Arkansas, erected on the national domain, may, as soon as they secure admission into the Union, secede and embezzle all the property of the nation, including the public lands and forts and arsenals, declare all citizens of the United States who do not unite with them alien enemies, confiscate their property, rob them of their liberty, by impressing them into their army to fight against their own country and Government and it they refuse, to punish them by imprisonment and death. After doing this, if the authority to commit such wholesale robbery, impressments, and murders is denied them by the national Government they set up the claim that they are sovereign and independent, and are only defending their homes, their firesides and household gods, and we have men all over the North who to day defend this monstrous assumption and villainy.

Mr. Speaker, I presume no man, not even my colleague, will deny that when the thirteen colonies or States assembled by their representatives in convention to make the present national Constitution they might have abolished slavery at once. t r if the theory of the old parties is true, that a republican Government may authorize or permit the enslavement of men, which 1 deny, they could have provided for the emancipation of all slaves in twenty or fifty years, if they had seen fit; and if the people of nine States had voted to ratify such a constitution slavery could not, after the period named, have existed by State law and in defiance of the national Constitution, either in one of the old thirteen States or m any one of the Statesadmitted into the Union since us adoption. If it was competent for the men who made the national Constitution to prohibit slavery at that time, or to provide for its future prohibition, why is it not just as competent for us now? The framers ofithe Constitution providedfoi its amendment in the section which i have already quoted. This was a wise provision. They provided that when an amendment was proposed and adopted in the manner and form prescribed it should become a part of the national Constitution, and bo as valid and binding as though originally a part of that instrument.

Had the framers of the Constitution desired die protection and continuance of slavery they could easily have provided against an amendment of the character of the one now before us by guarding this interest as they did the right of the States to an equal representation in the Senate. They did not do it, because, as the history of the convention abundantly proves, the great majority of the framers of the Constitution desired the speedy abolition of slavery, and 1 contend that, so far from the Constitution prohibiting such an amendment, it has expressly provided for it.

Mr. Speaker, there is not a single section or clause in the national Constitution which clothes, the political organizations which we call States* with any of the attributes of a sovereign Power, but, on the other hand, prohibits in positive and "unmistakable language any State from doing any act which a sovereign might do without the consent of Congress.

The supreme power of the national Government is rigorously maintained throughout the Constitution, and it is most emphatically ordained in article six, clause two, of the Constitution as follows:

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States winch shall be m pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or winch fhal) be made, under the authority of the United States, shall he the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

Section eight, article one, enumerates seventeen distinct sovereign powers of a national character conferred on Congress by the Constitution, and, as if to leave no doubt on the minds of any, this extraordinary enumeration of powers is followed by this sweeping and significant provision*

To make all huvs which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and fill other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

If I understand this provision correctly, it means that the framers of the Constitution intended that the national Government should be intrusted with the interpretation of the Constitution, not only as to the construction of the powers delegated by it to Congress, but to all departments of the national Government. They never intended that any State, or any number of States, nor the officials of State governments, should be competent in any capacity to judge of the infractions of the national Constitution by any department of the national Government, nor of the propriety ofany law passed by Congress. Any citizen has the undoubted right to express his opinions, and criticise the action of the General Government or of any department thereof; but neither is a State nor are the officials of a State clothed with any authority to decide as to the constitutionality of any law passed by Congress, nor as to the propriety of any act done by any department of the national Government,

It is past comprehension how any man with the Constitution before him, and the history of the convention which formed that Constitution within his reach, together with the repeated decisions of the Supreme Court against the assumption of the State rights pretensions, can be found at this late day defending the. State sovereignty dogmas, and claiming that the national constitution cannot be so amended as to prohibit slavery, even though all the States of the Union save one give it their approval.

That provision of the national Constitution which imposes upon Congress the duty of guarantying to the several States of the Union a republican form of government is one which impresses me as forcibly as any other with the idea of the utter indcfcnsibilty of the State sovereignty dogmas, and of the supreme power intended by the framers of the Constitution to be lodged in the national Government. in this connection we ought not to overlook that provision of the Constitution which secures nationality ofcitizenship. The Constitution guaranties that the citizens of each State shall enjoy all the rights and pnvilc esof citizens of the several States. it is a universal franchise which cannot be confined to States, but belongs to the citizens of the Republic. We are fighting to maintain this national franchise and prevent its passing under the control of a foreign Power, where this great puvliege would be denied us or so changed as to destroy its value. The nationality of out citizenshi p makes our Ai my a unit, although from distant States, and makes them also invincible. It is objected that if we pass this proposition the requisite number of States cannot now be secured foTits adoption. In answerto this objection I have to say that Congress has not, in submitting the proposed amendment, limited the time in which the States shall adopt it; nor has Congress attempted authoritatively to declare that it will require the ratification of twenty seven States to adopt this amendment.

I hold that whenever three fourths of the States torn, lis represented proposition in it Congress will legally give become their consent a part of to the national Constitution, unless other States, now without civil governments known to the Constitution, establish governments such as Congress shall recognize, and such States, together with any new States which may be admitted, shall be represented in Congress before three fourths of the States now represented adopt the proposed amendment; in which event the States thus recognized oradmitted must be added to the number of States now represented in Congress, and the ratification of three fourths of the States thus recognized, and none others, is all that will be required to adopt this amendment.

I lay it down as a proposition which 1 do not believe can be successfully controverted, that neither the Constitution of the United States nor the constituted authorities under it can know of the existence of a State in this Union unless it has a civil government organized in subordination to and working in harmony with the national Constitution. This principle has been fully recognized by all the coordinate branches of the Government since the outbreak of the rebellion. In this House we have authoritatively declared that a majority of the members elected and qualified are aquorum competent to transact business. The Senate at this session have adopted this rule also. Two thirds of this quorum, then, if this decision be correct, as I believe it is, may constitutionally pass the proposition before us. If we may constitutionally pass this amendment by a vote of two thirds of a quorum of this House and Senate as now constituted, three fourths of the States now represented in Congress may constitutionally adopt it provided they do so before any new States are admitted, or before a rebel State government is organized and recognized by the joint action of Congress and the Executive. I believe this is the true theory of the Constitution. Certainly it is the only theory consistent with national existence. If we adopt the theory that a State once a State is always a State we have no safety from factions and revolutions. Suppose that within the territorial jurisdiction known on the map of the United States as South Carolina there should be no civil government organized in the next fifty years such as Congress will recognize, do gentlemen claim that at the expiration of that time the old State organization would still be in existence, and that in order to secure the adoption of a constitutional amendment such a State ought to be included in the number from which the constitutional three fourths of thcStatesmust be secured for the ratification of an amendment? If not, then with what propriety can it be claimed as necessary to day The constitutional State government of South Carolina is as completely destroyed at this moment as though their Representatives had not been in these Halls, or their local government recognized by Congress for the past fifty years. Certainly no thoughtful man who has carefully examined this subject will defend the absurdity of the constitutional existence of political communities which we call States after their constitutional State governments have been destroyed by the action of their own citizens.

Speeches were made at the last session, and indeed at every session of Congress since the rebellion, to prove that the several acts of secession of the rebel States being illegal, were therefore void, and that the State constitutions in those States not only remained, but that the government of such States could at any time be putin motion without the consent of Congress, whenever ten or more loyal men could be found to assume the Governorship and a few of the subordinate offices therein. Loyal citizens of the rebel States are fast being cured of this fallacy. They have learned by experience that the Government of the United St iti x is supreme, and that local governments in rebel ftt iu p cannot be put in motion without the consent of Congress. The mass of men did not at first seem to recognize the fact that while acts of secession were illegal and void as affecting the rights of the national Government, its jurisdiction and sovereignty, nevertheless it was such a crime that those committing it forfeited all rights guarantied them by the national Constitution under their State organization.

Mr. Speaker, can there be such a thing known to our national Constitution as a State without a constitutional government? In my opinion, sir, a State government, to be constitutional, must be organized and act in subordination to the national Constitution and in obedience to the laws of Congress. The national Constitution requires the officers in each State to swear to support it while discharging the duties of any State office to which they may have been elected or appointed. If a State does not act in subordination to the national Constitution and its officers do not take an oath to support it, and they send no Senators or Representatives to Congress, there can be no constitutional State government in such State. Add to this the crime of secession, rebellion, and levying war, and the taking of an oath by the officers of such State to support another and a hostile government, and I claim it terminates of necessity, and of rightought to terminate, the existence of a constitutional government in every such State. In a constitutional point of view, it" there is no loyal State government, such as I have described, but in its stead a government unknown to the Constitution established by the action of its citizens, then, in fact, there is no constitutional State government, and, of course, no State known to the Constitution. ThcStates then in rebellion have no constitutional governments. They have civil organizations, however, hostile to the United States; organizations which are recognized as tie facto rebel governments. When the rebellion is suppressed there will be no constitutional State governments, in fact, in one of the rebel States, and certainly the rebel de facto government cannot remain or be recognized by us after the rebellion is put down. The people residing within the limits of these so called States will be under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress, because in point of fact they cannot be subject to the laws of a State which has no State government known to the national Constitution.

I may be answered that it is the duty of Congress to guaranty to each State a republican form of government, and that this provision of the Constitution implies the continued existence of the State, although its government may have been overthrown by violence or by the deliberate acts of a majority of its citizens. Grant it, for the sake of the argument, but what will be the legal condition of such State if the minority do not call upon Congress to secure them a republican government? What will be its condition if Congress, in the exercise of its constitutional power, attempts to secure such State a republican government and loyal citizens cannot be found m sufficient numbers to maintain a State government? Is not the condition of such State for the time being that of a quasi Territory? Certainly, during the time it remains in rebellion and is unable to maintain a State government it is not a State. If so, then, for practical purposes, whetherof national administration or for the adoption of this amendment, States in rebellion and without civil governments which Congress can recognize, are not States within the meaning of the Constitution, and cannot act upon this amendment to the Constitution, or do any other act which a loyal State of the Union may lawfully do.

In pursuing this argument we must keep steadily in view the fact that the United States are not a confederation, but a nation; that the national Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that the Government organized under it is clothed with the sovereignty of the whole people. The first and highest allegiance is due from the citizen to the national Government; he isalso subject to the laws constitutionally enacted by his own local State government. If there be no local State government in existence the citizen is legally subject only to the laws of Congress. In the absence of a constitutional State government in any portion of the territory of the United States, where a State government formerly existed, Congress has all the authority of a State government within such territory. If, then, in the rcbclliousStatcs there is no constitutional civil governments, are they States within the contemplation of the Constitution? I again ask the question can there be such a thing known to our national Constitution as a State without a constitutional government? If not, then the rebel States, having no constitutionally organized civil governments, are not States within the meaning of the Constitution, and the territory and the citizens residing therein are subject to the jurisdiction of Congress the same as citizens in any Territory of the United States. If the contrary theory is true, that a State once a State is always a State, nothing can be clearer to my mind than that the Constitution ought to be so amended at once as to make it impossible for a minority of the States to destroy the Government, as they might do every four years, if the Electoral College failed to elect a President and Vice President of the United States.

In the event of the Electoral College failing to elect, the duty devolves on the House of Representatives; each State having one vote. Two thirds of all the States must be present, and a majority of all the States is required to elect a President. The same rule applies when a Vice President is to be elected by the Senate. These are the words of the Constitution:

But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each State having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of tiie States."

Now, suppose that from any cause two of the States represented here were not represented, and there were but twenty three States represented in this House, and there had been no election ill 1864 of a President by the Electoral College. The election for President in that event would have devolved on this House.

Would you, Mr. Speaker, have decided when the question was raised, as it would have been, Is there a constitutional quorum present that itrequired the presence of members in this House from two thirds of the States, inciudingthe eleven rebel States; or in other words, that twenty four States must be represented here, and that it would require a majority of thirty six States, or nineteen votes, to elect the President? If you would have so decided, and this Houseshouldhavc sustained that decision, and if but twenty three States were present, there would have been an end of the Government. If we could not proceed to elect a President with the Representatives of twenty three out of the twenty five loyal States the Government would have fallen to pieces for the want of an Executive. If the duty of electing a President had devolved on this House at this session, and but twenty three States were present, the question would not only have been raised as to what constituted a quorum, but the question also as to whether we should receive and count the electoral votes which, in the event of no election of President by the Electoral College, would probably have been seat here from several of the rebel States toembarrass, distract, and divide us. Sir, no loyal man can contemplate a contingency such as I have suggested without a shudder. If the theory that a State once a State is always a State is to obtain in the national administration, there is no safety or security for the Government. I do notknow, sir, how you would have decided such a question if it had been raised under circumstances such as I have suggested; but I have faith to believe that you would have decided as I would have decided, that this House cannot know of the existence of a State in this Union which has not a civil government organized in subordination to and working in harmony with the national Constitution. Any other decision would have been fatal to our national existence. Let us not set a bad precedent now by declaring that it will require the ratification of twenty seven States to secure the adoption of this constitutional amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I find ample authority in the Constitution for the national Government to protect itself against any action which a minority of the States might attempt by confederating againstit. The Constitution clothes Congress with the power todeclarethepunishmentoftreason." Itclothes Congress with all power necessary to defend and preserve the Government which it created. "Levying war against the United States" is declared by the Constitution to be treason. A State which, by its constituted authorities, supported by a majority of its citizens, enters into any" treaty, aliiance, or confederation," and makes war upon the national Government, commits the crime of treason, and it is competent for Congress to inflict any penalty it may deem expedient. I want the national Government to inflict punishment so terrible upon the authors of this rebellion that in all coming time there shall be no such rebellion again. I want no precedent established which shall pave the way for a minority of the States and a minority of the people to destroy this Government. I want the precedent established that the States and people remaining loyal to the Government, as distinguished from those who rebel against it, shall be clothed with the sovereignty of the Government. In this way only can we come out of this contest safely and u obtain indemnity for the past and security for the future."

But I have already detained the House much longer and said more on this point than I intended. I discussed this question at greater length at the last session, and experience has only confirmed me in the views then expressed. Gentlemen who have made speeches in this House, and editors who have charged me, and those agreeing with me on this question, with being practical disunionists and with recognizing the doctrines of secession, because holding that the lawful governments in the rebel States were destroyed by their acts of treason and rebellion, will not care probably after our experience to repeat such speeches and opinions, nor to have them republished to enlighten their readers or their constituents.

There is another consideration which ought not to be overlooked when weighing the practicability and expediency of this measure, and that is its financial aspect. Doubtless manygentlemen think this question has less connection with our finances and the credit of the country than any other before us. Not so. In my opinion, and I know I but utter the opinion of many practical business men, the passage of this amendment will give the Government a credit, both at home and abroad, which no victory of our arms, important and invaluable as many of them have been, has yet given us. Its passage will be a guarantee for peace, unity, stability, prosperity, power. It will be a pledge that the labor of the country shall hereafter be unfettered and free, and 1 need not say that under the inspiration of free labor the productions ofthe country will be tripled and quadrupled. It will be a pledge to the industrious German, and to all the free laboring men of Europe who are seeking homes among us, that they shall no longer be excluded, as they have been practically, from a country whose climate is softer and fertility greater than any on the continent.

I need not detain the House with an array of facts and figures to demonstrate the great advantage of free over slave labor. All thinking men have examined and comprehend the priceless value of free labor. Pass this amendment, and the free laboring men of the North and of Europe will flock to the South, so that, in from three to five years, there will be four or five producing men in the rebel States where there was one before the rebellion; add to this vast number the four million emancipated slaves, and you have a free labor force which, under the security thus given to capital and the inspiration thus given to labor, will make the land to blossom like the rose, and by their energy, enterprise, and power the free laboring men of the South will obliteiate in a few years all trace of this terrible and desolating war, and make it a country which for prosperity and wealth shall acknowledge no superior, and a Government which for stability shall have no equal.

Suppose your Secretary of the Treasury goes into the market to morrow to borrow 500 000 000 payable in thirty or forty years, what will be the first question asked by the capitalist? Will it be as to the rate of interest you are willing to give, or will it be rather as to your ability to pay the principal? I take it that that would be his first inquiry. He would ask you, What will be the condition of your country and Government thirty or forty years hence?" If you could answer him, as you might truthfully answer him, were this amendmentadopted," Sir, in thirty or forty years we shall not be indebted at home or abroad a single dollar, and will be the most powerful and populous, the most enterprising and wealthy nation in; the world;" if you could tell him this, and add, as you may, that in thirty or forty years we will show the world a Government whose sovereignty on the North American continent will not be questioned from ocean to ocean, and from the Isthmus of Panama to the ice bound regions of the North; and tell him, also, that our system of free labor, guarantied by the national Constitution to all generations of men, with free schools and colleges and a free press, with churches no longer fettered with the manacles of the slavemaster, with manufactures and commerce exceeding in vastness anything which had ever been known, and a nation of men unrivaled in culture, enterprise, and wealth, and more devotedly attached to their country than the people of any other nation, because ofthe constitutional guarantee of the Government to protect therightsof all, and secure the liberty and equality of its people; if you could tell him this, and that such a race of free men would make the South and the entire nation what New England is to day your Secretary could have all the money he wanted, and on his own terms.

Mr. Speaker, what say the soldiers of the Union Army to the proposition before us? Shall not their voices be heard and their wishes be respected by their Representatives in the American Congress? Sir, there are no men in the Republic to whose wishes and judgment 1 would more willingly defer on this question than to the brave men who are periling lite and all for country; to the men who nave vanquished the enemy where ever they have met him, saved the nation, and by their heroism on the battle field and their fidelity to principle at the ballot box made the passage of this amendment possible. Almost every letter I receive from the brave men who are in the Army from my district contains the anxious inquiry, a What of the constitutional amendment; will it pass?" And I doubt notthat the same question has been asked by constituents at home and soldiers in the field of four fifths of the Representatives upon this floor. What shall be our official answer? Shall the glad news go forth to cheer alike the soldier and the citizen and the friends of this Government everywhere, that the expressly declared will of the people is to be respected and enacted into law; that on this great question there are no longer party divisions, but that practically the Representatives ofthe people are as united as they in demanding the passage of this constitutional amendment? If this shall be our answer, a shout will go up from our brave men in front of Richmond, at Savannah, and all along the Union lines and throughout the entire country, such as never before arose from the hearts and lips of men on the passage of any act by the American Congress.

Mr. Speaker, the year which has just closed has been a year of anxiety and also a year of joy. The ordeal through which as a nation we have passed has been a terrible one. I speak of the ordeal on the battle field and at the ballot box We have presented to the world a sublime spectacle. We have tested our strength and know the constancy and courage of our men. Such disinterestedness, such heroism, and devotion to country, the world has never witnessed. Consecrated by u dispensation of fire and blood, the children of the Republic have grown to the full stature of manhood. Standing here in the nation s Council Halls, in the beginning of a new year, on the threshold of a new era, and in the presence of such events, let us comprehend the duty of true statesmen, and while legislating for the present, legislate also for the generations of men which are to succeed us. The eyes of the wise and good in all civilized nations are upon us. The men who embrace and defend the democratic idea in Europe are patiently and anxiously waiting to have us authoritatively proclaim to the world that liberty is the sign in which we conquer; that henceforth freedom is to be the animating principle of our Government and the "life of our Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, while the Union soldier fights to vanquish the enemies ofthe Government, the duty of the true statesman is to provide that the enemy once vanquished shall never again be permitted for tiie same cause to reorganize and make war upon the nation. Pass this joint resolution submitting to the people for their ratification or rejection this proposed amendment to the national Constitution, and I am sure the nation will adopt it with shouts! ofacclamation and when once adopted, you know, sir, and I know, and the enemies of this Government know, that we shall have peace, and that no such rebellion will ever be possible again. Pass thisamendmentand the gloomy shadow of slavery will never again darken the fair fame of our country or tarnish the glory of democratic institutions in the land of Washington. Pass this amendment and the brightest page in the history of the ThirtyEighth Congress, now so soon to close, will be the one on which is recorded the names of the requisite number of members voting in its favor. Refuse to pass it, and the saddesl page in the history of the Thirty Eighth Congress will be the one on which is recorded its defeat. Sir, I feel as if ho member of this House will ever live to witness an hour more memorable in our history than the one in which each for himself shall make a record on the question now before us. I implore gentlemen to forget party and remember that we are making a record, not only for ourselves individually, but for the nation and the cause of free government throughout the world. While members of the Thirty Eighth Congress we cannotchange the record which each must now make, and those who do not return to the next Congress can never reverse their votes of to day but must forever stand recorded, if voting against this amendment, among those voting to justify the rebellion and perpetuate its cause.

The genius of history with iron pen is waiting to record our verdict where it will remain forever for all the coming generations of men to approve or condemn. God grant that the verdict may be one over which the friends of liberty, impartial and universal in this country and Europe and in every land beneath the sun, may rejoice; a verdict which shall declare that America is free; a verdict which shall add another day of jubilee, and the brightest of all, to our national calendar. If this verdict is not given by the present Congress, I know, and you all know, it will be given by the next Congress; and that, too, with alacrity. The decree has gone forth; the people have pronounced it; and now is the golden hour in which we may all unite, if we will, and inaugurate a new era in our history. Let no man put forth his puny hand to stay the certain approach of the hour m which this act shall pass, or of the grand jubilee which shall follow its enactment into law. Let no member of this House attempt to postpone this great measure with the hope of being able to circumvent, by some petty scheme of compromise, the plainly written decree of Omnipotence. Let no loyal man, in such anhouras this, record his vote against this just proposition, and thus vote to prolong the rebellion and perpetuate the despotism of American slavery in this Republic.

Mr ORTH Mr. Speaker, we are still grappling with treason and rebellion. Four years of war, desolating, destructive war, with all its attendant sacrifice of life, health, and treasure, have not yet sufficed to assure to us a permanent peace and an undivided nationality. That sublime spectacle, the simultaneous uprising of twenty millions of our people in behalf of duly constituted order and government, which was witnessed by the world after the affair at Port Sumter, was an evidence of our love of civil liberty, of our veneration for the labors and services of the fathers of the Republic, and of our determination to protect and preserve republican institutions. Howfew, alas! if any, among us, could then penetrate the future and see the magnitude of the struggle in which we were about being involved; how few, indeed, before that time really comprehended or appreciated the blessings of free government, and the sacrifices we would, if necessary, make for its preservation.

This protracted struggle has brought us its lessons of experience, and if we are wise we will accept them, and profit by them, dearly bought as we know them to be. But if we emerge fiom this terrible conflict, as I firmly believe we shall, a better people, with our Government thoroughly tested and purified, with our resources only more fully developed instead of exhausted, with a purer and better republicanism and with the true spirit of libei ty pervading our people and our institutions, these glorious results will be Worth ad and more than their cost.

With a population devoted to the arts of peace, with an empty Treasury, without an Army or a Navy worthy the name, we accepted the dread alternative of war, and for four years, with sublime, heroic devotion, our young men have marched to battle and to death, sustained by the loyal men and women at home, with an energy that never flagged, and a firm resolve that never hesitated. Defeat and disaster from time to time seemed but to swell the nation s heart, and nerve the nation s arm to deeds of nobler daring. Great losses called for greater sacrifices, and the call was met with a cheerful response, until defeat and disaster are now beginning to turn to decisive victory.

In the midst of this struggle, when all our thoughts were turned upon the conflict, and every energy taxed to support the Government in its vast endeavor to save the nation s life, the time fixed by law for the selection of a President and other officers of the Government, State and national, arrived and demanded the people s attention.

This was regarded by the wisest among us as the most critical period in our history. The question was frequently asked and freely canvassed, can our Government, which had demonstrated its power in times of peace and of foreign war, withstand the shock of an exciting popular election in the midst of civil war and rebellion.' The, duty could not be evaded. The contest came, and the friends of the Government had to meet at the bar of public opinion their political opponents, many of whom sympathized openly with the enemy, while others criticised and condemned almost every act of the Administration. Calmly, quietly, deliberately, as became a great people engaged in the solution of momentous problems, the American voters exercised thenright of suffrage, and thus exhibited to the world a spectacle of unsurpassed grandeur, without a parallel in history, and beyond the power of achievement by any nation on the face of the globe. With majorities unprecedented, they declared to the world, on the 8th day of November, 1864, that we are a nation, and are willing and able to defend our nationality. Here is a record by which the traitor may learn his doom; a record from which thesympathizercan derive no comfort; a record to confirm the doubtful, to fix the wavering, and cheer the patriot and a record which will afl oid profitable reading to the intermeddling nations of Europe. In the broad sunlight of that glorious record let us read our duty and our destiny. At whatever cost, at whatever sacrifice, under every imaginable state of circumstances, whether its consummation be near at hand or afar off, we must subdue the rebellion. We owe this to ourselves, to the institutions committed to our care, to those who shall hereafter occupy the land we now occupy, to the memory of our revolutionary ancestors, to the sacred cause of religion and religious liberty, to the civilized world, and to the devotee of freedom in whatever clime or country he may be found.

This war is not of our seeking; its cause, if it be not utterly causeless, is not chargeable to us. We have at all times exhibited a ready acquiescence in the requirements of our national bond. We invaded no rights, we withheld no remedy; but time and again, and again, at the sacrifice of self respect and of manhood, we have yielded to the behests of the slave power. It was not until treason had reared its armed crest; not until treason had insulted our emblem of nationality; not until treason boldly attacked our national existence, that we took up arms in self defense and, having taken up those arms, let them not be grounded until traitors shall submitto constituted authority, and be thoroughly subjugated and properly punished. We entered upon this national defense totally unprepared in every department of the Government, so thoroughly had treason diffused itself and almost completed our destruction before the administration of public affairs passed from traitors and imbeciles into the hands of honest and loyal men. But among the people there was that patriotism, that devotion to liberty, which supplied every deficiency, which freely poured its wealth into the national coffers, built a navy that commands the respect of the world, and organized an army whose prowess will subdue the rebellion, and whose heavy tramp shall yet shake the civilized earth. Four years of exhaustive war upon a scale of grandeur unknown in modern or ancient times, with all us burdens, instead of enervating or unnerving our people, has but served to demonstrate our strength, our resources in men and money, and( what is far better) our exhaustless patriotism, and proved to the world our complete ability to sustain the Government, to suppress the rebellion, to gather upland reconstruct its shattered portions, to remove the cause of all these troubles, and to settle with other nations whatever accounts may require adjustment.

The people fully understand and appreciate the position of public affairs; they are not silent or disinterested spectators of the hurried scenes that crowd the hour, and are fully equal to every emergency as it arises. Let no man distrust their honesty, their intelligence, or their patriotism. They are daily and hourly and with alacrity, performing every duty which the national peril imposes, and they are expecting of us, as their Representatives, a like performance of our duty.

Liberated as the public legislator now is of mere party harness and party machinery, let him strip off these unworthy garbs, gird on the mantle of public duty, and see that every manly effort is put forth to carry out the unmistakable voice of our people. To effect the complete restoration of law and order, that being the primal object of the war on our part, we should not hesitate to strike blows wherever they shall be most effectual, and to remove every obstacle which lies in the pathway of complete success. The Union of these States under the forms ofrepublican government molded in the spirit of liberty, is to our people more precious than any other earthly interest, and to preserve it all other interests must yield.

In my humble opinion we cannot hope for complete success until slavery, the universally acknowledged cause of rebellion, shall be extinguished, and both monsters buried in a common grave.

Slavery is dying; it raised its arm to destroy this Government, and the American people have decreed that it is unfit to live. The course of events for the last four years has shown conclusively that there is no panacea to relieve the patient; the skill of its ablest defenders cannot long shield it from its inevitable doom. No act of ours is necessary to accomplish this result, but while we are witnessing its death agony let us take care to provide by amendment of the Constitution that under no circumstances hereafter shall slavery exist in any of these States.

The bill now under consideration proposes to submit the followingamendmentof the Constitution to the several States for adoption or rejection, according to the terms prescribed by that instrument, and if ratified by the votes of three fourths of the States willthen become a partof our fundamental law:

Article K XIII.

Sec. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except a* a puni hmeut for eutne wheieof tiie pain shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United {^latesoi iun place subject to then jiuisdiction,

Skc 'i Congress j shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The effect of such amendment will be to prohibit slavery in these United States, and be a practical application of that self evident truth," that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

This bill originated in the Senate during the last session of Congress, in obedience to what was believed to be the general sentiment of the American people, and passed by the necessary vote of two thirds of the members of that body. It was then sent to this House for concurrence, and after considerable discussion was defeated by a vote of 95 in the affirmative and 66 in the negative, (twentyone members notvotmg,) being twelve votes less than necessary to make the two thirds vote required by the Constitution. The question now before us arises upon a motion to reconsider such vote, action upon which was continued from the last to the present session of Congress.

Probably it was right that the question of reconsideration should thus have been postponed. During the last session of Congress we were just entering upon an exciting political canvass; this very question of slavery, its further continuance or its utter destruction, entered largely into the issues and discussions of that canvass; and in a Government like ours, resting upon the will of the people, and deriving its "just powers from the consentofthe governed," it was well to have another and more definite expression of the public will. We passed through thatcanvass; nearly every one of us on this floor went directly before our own people with our respective records of the last session accompanying us, and the result of that canvass is now a partof our nation s history." No man can question or gainsay the popular verdict; it has been expressed in unmistakable language, and he who is willing to bow to the voice of those whom for the time being he represents in this Hall, cannot doubt the action which the people now expect at his hands.

Congress cannot amend the Constitution, and hence, if this bill should pass, the question will then simply be referred to the people of the several States for their action. In other words, we, by our action here, simply authorize the people to determinne for themselves whether they will ratify or reject the proposed amendment. To me it seems that on such a proposition there should not be a dissenting voice. Whatever questions may otherwise divide us, we all assent to the proposition that our people are capable of self government and have the right to alter their laws, fundamental as well as statutory.

Is slavery, then, too sacred to be submitted to the ordeal and judgment of ourpeople? Whatis this institution of American slavery? A system of fraud, of injustice, of crime, and of tyranny. In the comprehensive language of an eminent divine, it is the" sum of all villainies." It tramples upon every moral precept, sets at defiance every divine law, and destroys every natural right of man. Like the poisonous upas, it diffuses its deadly malaria, and slave and masteralike become its victims. It has debased the social circle, polluted the sanctuary, defiled the judicial ermine, and corrupted every department of the Government. It was the evil genius which troubled the fathers in their labors of patriotism, and produced dissension where concord alone should have reigned. Like the old serpent, itentered our Garden of Eden and seduced from theirloyalty many of the sons etnd daughters of the Republic. Winding its deadly folds around the goddess of Liberty, it claimed and exercised despotic power in the very sauclum sanctorum of her temples. It laid its hand upon our nervous system and the nation became palsied. For eighty years it has been the deadly enemy of republican institutions; for eighty years it has molded the legislation of the country; for eighty years it has controlled the foreign policy of the Government; for eighty years it has crippled the powerand energiesof an otherwise free people; for eighty years it has ruled the executive and influenced the judicial departments; for eighty years it has commanded the Army and the Navy; for eighty years it has muzzled free speech and free press; for eighty years it has poisoned public opinion and repressed every aspiration of freedom; for eighty years it has made the American name a hissing and a by word among the nations of the earth; for eighty years it robbed the American people of their rights under the Constitution; for eighty years it has ruthlessly trampled upon every principle of the Declaration of Independence; for the last four years it has waged a fiendish malignant remorseless war against us, striking with death the first born in almost every loyal household, bringing untold misery upon the nation, demanding from ourpeople sacrifices of blood and treasure to an extent that might well appall and crush the spirit of any other people on earth; and yet with this glaring and damnable record against this institution, we have gentlemen within this hall of freedom, sitting beneath the folds of that thrice glorious flag of liberty, Representatives of a free people, who hesitate to strike this last blow which shall exterminate the monster forever and ever.

This Congress may not heed the public voice; it may refuse to respond to the known sentiment of our constituents; but before the close of this year, so recently ushered into existence, another Congress, fresh from the people, will obey their voice, and secure to themselves, by such act, an honorable fame, and he remembered with gratitude by untold millions who are hereafter to enjoy Us blessings.

Another and also a very important question is rapidly pressing upon us for solution. As our conquering armies move from State to State, subduing the rebellion and preparing the way for the resumption of civil authority, we shall continue to have, as we now have, applications from these States for recognition, or, if i may use the term, for readmission. I do not for a moment believe in either of the positions assumed by the respective friends of each, that secession can take any State out of the Union, or that any State by such act has destroyed itself, committed suicide, as it is said, or that the rebellious, district is to be considered and treated as foreign territory. In dealing with this question of recognition, we must exercise that caution and circumspection which its magnitude demands." Each House of Congress" shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members;" and hence no man claiming to represent any State can have a seat on this floor until these several facts shall have been adjudicated by this House. Here we obtain a potential voice in the question of reconstruction, and while it is desirable that civil government shall supersede nnhtaiy authority as speedily as possible, let us not in our anxiety mistake the rising of the sun for its meridian splendor.

Torn, convulsed, and shattered as the social and civil systems of the rebellious district must necessarily be, it is unreasonable to expect that its people will be capable, upon the dispersion of the rebel armies in their respective States, of immediately exercising civil functions and authority. Society has almost been resolved into its original elements; vestiges of lurking treason will remain, and the bad passions engendered by the strife must be suffered to subside before reason will be fully able to resume its sway. While we remember that it is the constitutional duty of the United States to u guaranty to every State in this Union a republican form of government," let us not forget that the surest and safest way to discharge this duty is to provide proper guards and checks for the protection of individual and social rights in these communities; to keep over them, so long as may be necessary, a guardian watch and care; to remove every opposing element; "to bind up the broken reeds;" to infuse a love of Country and of devotion to the Constitution and laws of the land; and last, but not least, to see that the name and spirit of human bondage shall be erased from every State constitution, and personal freedom without distinction assured to every one of their citizens.

When these things shall have been accomplished, and society reconstructed upon this improved baM«, with every germ of aristocracy uprooted, we shall then be prepared to perform the constitutional injunction, readmit these" wayward sisters" to the family circle, and establish within the borders of each, m truth and in fact, a republican form of government.

Some good people, in connection with this matter, are giving themselves, in my opinion, much unnecessary uneasiness about the question," What shall we do for or with the freedmen?" May we not with equal propriety ask," What shall we do for or with the late owners of these freedmen The one is as important as the other, and both may well claim the consideration of the statesman and the philanthropist". Both classes have been and are being hboiated from the thialldom of slavery, and their new condition presents many interesting phases. The war, however, in its varying changes, is daily relieving both questions of many of their supposed complications, and probably the wisest course to pursue is to hasten the day when the system which has debased the one and enfeebled the other shall cease to exist; to leave both classes in the hands of God who created them, and giving to each equal protection under the law, bid them go forth with the scriptural injunction, "hi the sweat of thy face shall thou eat bread."

But, Mr. Speaker, our duty as a people will not end with the suppression of the rebellion, the extinction of the evil which caused it, and the restoration of the Constitution and laws over the entire extent of our national domain. We have accounts to settle with other nations who, during this long struggle for nationality, have thrown many obstacles in our way, and given to our adversaries every moral and material assistance in their power without actually, eo nomine, becoming their allies. The aristocracies of Europe have long viewed with alarm the successful rise and progress of democratic ideas of government on this continent, and sought for a favorable opportunity to crush them out of existence. The success of our system, based upon the doctrine of man s capacity and natural right for self government they easily foresaw must ultimately and inevitably lead to a conflict on their own soil; for ideas and principles so entirely antagonistic will sooner or late* produce reflection, discussion, decision, the final result of which probably would be the entire change of their governmental systems. Hence, upon the breaking forth of armed rebellion among us, they seized upon the fact with avidity as the auspicious momentso longdesired, and with indecent haste acknowledged our bands of traitors to be a" belhgerentPower and entitled to "belligerent rights."

In view of my responsibility as a member of this House and a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which are referred the important and delicate relations between this and other nations, I desire to declare calmly and dispassionately that the conduct of France and England throughout our troubles has been, and yet is, of such a character as to call, at an early day, for full and thorough investigation and full and thorough settlement and adjustment. We have seen and felt their aid to our adversaries; through their connivance the rebel soldier has been armed and clothed and fitted for his assaults upon our nationality; in their harbors and upon their waters, almost unmolested, have rebels fitted out their pnatical crafts, sailing under their colors; armed with their guns, manned by their subjects, but commanded by rebels, have these vessels been sent upon the ocean to prey upon our commerce and to destroy it. And here they have been but too successful. That commerce which, four short years ago, whitened every sea and visited every harbor, is now utterly destroyed, and scarce an American merchantman now unfurls the American flag.

The right of asylum has been freely granted to rebel pirates; and these freebooters, whom the civilized world has long since held as" enemies of mankind," are received with open arms, nurtured, caressed, encouraged, and strengthened for their work of destruction.

British subjects and British vessels, in defiance of the queen s proclamation, but without an attempt at punishment by British officials, are constantly engaged in contraband trade with the rebels, violating our blockade, which is recognized by that Government but suffered to be violated with impunity by its subjects.

Public fairs are held in Great Britain, under the leadership of her aristocracy, aided by southern snobbery, for the avowed purpose of raising money for the rebel cause, and but a few days since, under the thin guise of philanthropy, a British lord—Lord Wharncliffe—had the impudence to ask permission of our Government to remit British gold to rebel prisoners in our hands, while not a word of sympathy is heard, ora morsel of comfort offered, in behalf of the thousands of our brave soldiers who are Ituiguishmgin southern prisons, denied the absolute necessities of life, and treated with an inhumanity and barbarity that would disgrace the most degraded heathen nation on earth.