d 141 41
gang ter " if#ClUPOra.
VirEDNESDAY, MARCH a, 1E367.
Teo Veto of the Reconstruction Bill.
We puklieh.to-day Presidant John.:
son's veto•of the Reconstruction Bill,
sent to Congress on Saturday, and the
proceedings of Congress in relation to
it.
The President states that the bill
shows upon its face that the establish
ment of peace and good order is not its
real object"', because, upon the fulfil
ment by the Southern people of the five
conditions imposed upon them, the
pains and penalties of the bill at once
cease, whether peace and good order
exist or not.
He objects to, it, because over each of
the five districts into which the ten States
are divided, a military officer is placed,
with the power of an absollite monarch.
Because, further, no kind of trial is se
cured to persons accused of crime,-but
the absolute power of life and death is
given to the military commander.
He objects to it again, because there
is no power given to the government
under the Constitution to establish a
measure like this, and cites the decision
of the Supreme Court in the Milligan
case. Heargues that the injunctions of
the Constitution ought to be observed,
and urges the immediate admission to
Congress of loyal Representatives from
all the States.
The argument is a most masterly and
unanswerable one, although it will be
seen It produced no effect upon the
Radical element in Congress. The issue
is now fully made up between that body
and the President, and the people of
the country will be called upon, it may
be very soon, to give their judgment
upon it. The new Congress will doubt
• less essay to impeach the President.
Wade has been elected President of the
Senate, with the avowed intention of
making him the PreSident. The people
have remained quiescent under many
indignities and wrongs during the past
year or two; it remains to be seen
whether they will calmly submit to
this lust and greatest outrage of all.
We think they will not. Forney, in
his " Occasional " letter in the ,S'unda.y
Prom, says "the reading was succeeded
in both houses by the resolute and al
most 'universal demand for his (the
President's) instant impeachment and
removal from time office he dishonors,"
and thinks " we are on the eve of ex
. citing and, probably, fatal events!" We
believe that we are.
Radical Inconslstenelem
The inconsistencies of the Radical
leaders have been exposed so often, with
HO little effect, upon their deluded fol
lowers, that It would seem to be labor
lost to indulge In any further remarks
:Wont them. But us water, constantly
dropping, will finally wear away the
!limiest rock, It may be that a persistent
exposure of the inconsistencies of their
leaders will eventually wear away the
obdurate skulls of the blind followers
of Radicalism and open their brains to
the light of reason.
Since they have had the control of
public allairs, tho• Radicals have given
many evidences of their total disregard
of their own record, made in open day
and in the lace of all the world. But
they never gave a more striking evi
dence of their want of consistency than
on Saturday evening last, when, in both
branches of Congress, they passed the
Military I lovernment Bill over the veto
of the President. The preamble to this
bill reads as follows:
iiEREA.s, No legal Stith , governments
or adequate protection life or property
now exists in the rebel Stains )1 . Virginia,
North Carolina, South Carolina,
Leeisinell, Florida,
Texas, and Arkansas; and whereas, it is
necessary that 110:11 . 1.111111 gnud I,nler should
lie effibreed in said Slates until loyal :11111
rtpll Mule gpV(.111111,111S 1.1111 IR' it' -
gaily UStabli:sl3llll.
This preamble distinctly affirms that
no legal State government exists in the
State of Virginia; and under the pro
visions of the bill, Gov. Pierpont will
he turned out of the Executive Chair
and a Brigadier General will be appoint.
ed to execute the laws, or whatever lie
may choose to substitute for them.
The public will not find it difficult to
remember when and how Mr. Pierpont
became Governor of Virginia. After
the constituted authorities of that State
had passed an ordinance of secession
and hostilities had actually broken out,
the Union men in the western part of
the State and along the Potomac, en
couraged and sustained by the adminis
tration of President Lincoln, and ap
plauded by the whole Radical party of
the North, repudiated the Richmond
government and elected a Governor and
Legislature of their own. They chose
Mr. Pierpont as their Chief Magistrate,
and he and the Legislature elected along
with him were recognized by President
Lincoln and the Radical Congress of the
(Infted States as the legal State govern
ment of Virginia.
It was at this .time considered very
desirable to increase the number of free
States, and the inhabitants of Western
Virginia were encouraged to separate
from the eastern part and to set up a
State for themselves. This required the
assent of the State of Virginia as well as
theta the Congress of the I 1 n Red States.
The i'lerpont government assented in
the name of Virginia, and when the
Senators and Representatives of IVeaf
Virginia knocked at the doors of the two
houses of Congress, they were admitted;
"and they are there unto this day."
Thus did Congress acknowledge the
legality of the Plemont government of
Virgin ht. if that government was 110 f
legal, then the State of West Virginia
has no legal existence, and her Senators
and Representatives have no right to sit
In Congress. 1f it toe legal then It 18
legal non', for Gov. Pierpont wields the
Executive pywer at this moment by
the same riiht, that he wielded It when
he signed the bill whereby the State of .
Virginia assented to the eree,tion of the
new State of West Virginia.
If the Radicals in Congress really 1,, ; -
lieved that there is no legal govern men t
In Virg,inia, and were hottest enough t,,
actin accordance with their convictioh,.
they would tumble out the Senators and
Representatives of West Virginia. But
they want a good working two-thirds
majority in the Senate; and as the Sen
ators front West Virginia, with an abject
meanness that would disgrace a freed
man who had never known his father,
have bastardized themselves by voting
for this military bill, which in effect de
clares that as Senators they were not
born in lawful wedlock, they will be
permitted to retain their seats, whilst
(boy. Pierpont, whose title is at least as
good as theirs,will be cast out.
Will the time never come when the
rank and file of the Radical party will
see the glaring inconsistencies and the
barefaced thehimesty of their leaders?
Indignant
The Lebanon Advertiser is very In
dignaut over the rejection by the Sco
ate, us Assessor of that District, of Ni al° r
Grant Weidman, a soldier who fought
bravely in the war. The Advertiser says
with more force than piety: "He re
.eelved his cofintry's thanks on Satur
day! To h-1 with such thanks!"
TM) Democrats have carried the city of
pyx r. 'Th acuse,
at looks makin
wg
ell. Lot a gain of 7 our Connecti63 in a single
'yea
tbt 'brethren do as much in their whose
I:l3tate, and they will win a victory whole
''influence will b 0 felt from ono end of 'the
country to the other.
Famine at Borne. '
I Reports of extreme destitution in a
part of our country led some few weeks
since to a public meeting in the city of
New York, at which niabiperkg
of were charged!with4he duty of as
,
certaining the facizijn the Ode and of
devising means, if', they were 'found:to
be correct, for thereilef of those in need.
This Commission. hag • beat) 'organized.
Its Executive Committee consists of
Nathan Bishop, Howard Potter, F. G.
Foster, J. T. Johnston, Wm. T. Cole
man, S. D. Babcock, J. I. Bruce, Jr.,
J. Pierrepont Morgan, E. C. Cowden,
Geo. Cabot Ward, C. R. Agnew, • and
Daniel Butterfield, U. S. A. Archibald
Russell, Chairman; Edward Bright,
Cor. Sec. ; Jas. M. Brown, Treasurer;
Fred. Law Olmsted, Rec. Sec. ; and
John Bowne, Acting General Agent.
Office—Adams' Express Building, 61
Broadway. Depot forsupplies from the
East—No. 33 Water street.
We have been furnished with a circu
lar, in which the Commission say they
have ascertained that a state of famine
exists in that part of the country, which
lies between the ridges of the mountains
and the navigable waters of the largest
rivers flowing through the cotton pro
ducing districts east of the Mississippi,
owing to an extraordinary drought
which prevailed last summer, and to
the fact that much less ground than
usual was planted, because of condi
tions resulting from the rebellion. Ex
treme destitution prevails chiefly among
the lower classes, and the women and
children who have been deprived by
the war of their natural protectors. This
famine must continue and increase in
severity until June, when the crop of
green corn may be looked to for relief.
They also state that, owing to similar
causes, the destitution in the greater
part of the seaboard counties, though
less general, is still great and appalling.
The Commission proposes to provide
the barest means of sustenance for
human beings, and in the cheapest
form, namely—lndian Corn, of which
a bushel may be expected to sustain a
family in extremity for a week.
It believes that, because of the ad
vantages which it possesses as a chari
table agency for the economical pur
chase of corn, the most valuable form
of contribution will be that of money.
it, however, also asks for contributions
in the form of corn or other breadstuffs,
bacon, and other cured meats and fish ;
also, for suitable wearing apparel for
working women and . girls. Delicacies
and nice things are not wanted.
The emergency Is too Imminent to
admit of the organization of any ma
chinery of co-operation throughout the
country, and the Commission therefore,
can but beg the charitable everywhere
to take tills matter spontaneously in
hand, and either indtvidually or by
adopting
,the simplest plan of associa
tion, to solicit from their neighborhood
contributions for its aid. We trust our
citizens will respond liberally to this
call 'upon their charity. We know we
need but to state the hideous facts as
they exist, to enlist their ardent sym-
pathies.
We clip the following from yester
day's IVocid in reference to the doings
of the Commission :
We are happy to learn that the South
ern Relief Commission (J. M. Erown,
GI Wall street, Treasurer,) have had so
large an increase of receipts the last
three days as to enable them to send,
on the United States steamer Memphis,
30,000 bushels of corn, In equal quanti
ties, to Charleston, Savannah, and
Mobile. The Memphis sails:Jo-day or
to-morrow, and before the close of an
other week the Commission hope to be
able to ship by another national vessel
a yet larger quantity of corn, towards
relieving the fearful destitution prevail
ing in large sections of Al abama,Georgia,
South and North Carolina.
There is the best reason to believe
that five hundred thousand bushels of
corn must be sent to the destitute dis
tricts within the next three months to
supply the pressing demands of starving
multitudes. Without this help from the
North, three hundred thousand people
will be in a state of suffering that must
bring death to many of them. And be
sides this, many planters will not have
the means to provide the labor and the
seed for another harvest.
Let the contributions to the treasury
come in from the city and the country,
that supplies may be sent forward in
generous shiploads.
Impartial Suffrage.
"Impartial suffrage" in Georgetown,
D. C., has resulted in the triumph of
the negro over the white man. The
" loyal" press is jubilant ; the " poor
white trash " are requested to take back
seats; the African stands erect asserting
his dignity, his manhood, and his su
periority over the Caucasian. The loyal
exclaim that the election In Georgetown
must be accepted as a refutation of all
the absurd and egotistical theories that
the white man has thrown around him
self. It must be accepted as a refutation
of the long-received belief that the
African is inferior to the white by the
economy of the Creation. Historic evi
dence that six thousands year have
failed to develope lu the negro the ca
pacity for self-govern men t,while around
hill] all shades of the human family
(save his own) have advanced to the
highest degrees of human refinement,
must go for nought but assumption and
prejudice of caste.
It matters not to the Radicals that
while nation after nation has sprung
up, struggled for empire, and figured
conspicuously in the world's history,
the African has never emerged from
his native wilds—never advanced one
step from his native barbarism. In St.
Dom ingo,w here something better might
have been expected of him, from the
very moment he escaped from the care
and government of the white man he
has gradually relapsed towards the con
dition of his Ethiopian progenitors.
The policy of the Radicals in enfran
chising the negroes of the South and
disfranchising the great bulk of the
whites, will plane a half-dozen of the
Southern States under the immediate
control:of a people but little removed
from barbarism. What will be tile re
sult? Millions of people steeped in ig
norance, incapable of a proper appreci
ation nt government, inflamed to mad
1.,- by designing demagogues, will
lahly refuse to comply with their
to the general government.
'gat lons must be enforced, and
10! the A Noun, like tile poor In
dian, will make lils exit from the White
the point of the
bayonet.
ti ixteen StatiAllenlad 1'(,11:e!
The Fortieth
...onvress Lm: sixteen
of the thirty-six States composing
the Union unrepresented. Not only
the ten Southern States are without a
voice, but because of the blind and vin
dictive legislation of the Thirty-Ninth
Congress, New Hampshire, Con neeti
cut, Tennessee, Rhode Island, Ken
tucky, and California are without
representation. The terms of the Coo
gressmen from these last six States ex
pire with the Thirty-Ninth Congress,
and us members from these last six States
will nut be elected for some time to
come, it now becomes a question, shall
the Jacobins, with only five-ninths of
the States composing the Union, be
competent to enact laWe governing the
whole, when four-ninths are excluded
by the vindictiveness of the bare ma
jority'? We call up 9 the people to
pause and think.
An embezzlement ofsso,ooofromthenrst
National Bank of Hudson, New York, has
been revealed by an investigation, and the
cashier has been arrested.
Recons ma
Lion Bill Over the President's Vett, on
enturdny.
SENATE.—AI 8.30 P. M. the veto ottiie
President ori the reconstruction bill Was
taken up and read—and the reading having
bean conoluded;—
:Nr. Mins:id took theoor, ying abet
while doing., as he: Most sincerelyl jus
justice tO the conscientious purpose °Vibe
V rip r t, d h e e rit N a lit i l e o i t t rert m that h e :l
to' to that result and to Send thlsmes-•
sage to Congress.
There were many propositions in law,
contained in that message,whieh could not
be maintained. There were many errorsof
judgment in it which, upon examination,
would be apparent, and above all, the re
sult to which he (the President) bad been
compelled to come, in the exercise of his
•own judgment, - which•there was no doubt
was conscientiously exercised—he (Mr.
Johnson) saw nothing but continued tur
moil, error and danger to the South and to
the entire country. He rose, therefore, for
the purpose of stating very briefly, in addi
tion to what he had already said when the
measure was before the Senate on a former
occasion, why it was that he had cast the
vote he Rad cast on that occasion, and why
it was that he should give the same vote
now. (Applause iu the galleries, which
was repressed by the Cha'r.)
It will not be for a moment supposed,
said Mr. Johnson, by those to whom I am
addressing mysetf, that I am governed
now, or that I was governed then by my
hope of popular applause. My motives, if
I know myself, were perfectly pure and
patriotic. t saw before me a distracted and
almost bleeding muntry. I thought I saw,
and I think I see now, the means by which
it might be restored to a healthful condi
tion, and the Constitution of the country in
the end preserved.
I have arrived, Mr. President, at that
period of my life when, if ever any other
ambition animated me, I can haveno other
ambition now than that of serving my
country.
Having referred to the views he had pre
viously expressed on the question of recon
struction, concluding that when the war
ceased the States wore restored to their for
mer relations, and that no conditions for
their representation were requisite or Con
stitutional, Mr. Johnson said that tho pres
ent and the late Executive thought differ
ently. It was unnecessary for him to say
what were the conditions exacted by the
present Executive. They wore, in his [Mr.
Johnson's] judgment, US unconstitutional
as any that could be found in this bill.
The Congress of the United States were
of opinion that, notwithstanding the people
of the Southern States complied with the
terms exacted by the present Chief Magis
trate, they could not be restored with ut the
sanctidn of Congressional legislation; and
this was the judgment of the country.—
Then how were they to come back? Only
by complying with the conditions which
Congress may impose Whether Congress
had the authority to impose them or not, or
failing to comply, to remain in the sad con
dition in which they now are. He [Mr.
Johnson] imputed bad motives neither to
Congress nor to the Executive. He thought
ho knew his duty to the Constitution of the
country too well to call in question the mo
tives of either.
He accorded purity of purpose and pa
triotic principles to both. He differed from
both, but lie sought the restoration of the
Union, and saW no way of accomplishing
it now but by the adoption of the measure
now before the Senate. We are now, in
my opinion ' in a state of quaiii war. Our
condition is now revolutionary. Ten
States of the Union are virtually held as
provinces, upon the ground that wo have a
right to hob' them as enemies of the Union
and the Government. In that state of
things, to hesitate in the adoption of any
measure which promises, even the most
distantly, to put an end to this revolution
ary condition, Is, In my judgment, to be
false to the true Interests and safe. y of the
country.
In conclusion, Mr. Johnson said be was
glad to sou from the public prints of the
South, and to be informed by many of the
leading men of the South, that It was the
purpose of the Southern States to organize
under this bill. They are taking lessons
front experience. The constitutional amend
ment, if it had been adopted, would have
brought into this chamber mid the other
chamber, representatives from the South.
Of that I have no doubt. Now, it will not.
The bill which we passed and which was
afterwards amended in the House, would
have accomplished the same purpose upon
termstless exacting than the one now before
the Senate. It was untended, trod the
amendment is the most obnoxious feature
of the bill. The Senate passed it, and I
voted for it. Why 7 Because I thought 1
knew-1 thought I had satisfactorily
ascertained that this failing, a meas
ure of a more rigid character—a measure
Munded upon the idea that the people of
the South were. conquered enemies, and
their properly liable to forfeiture—would
have been enacted.
Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware, said he did
not rise to debate this bill, which the Presi
dent, in his wisdom, had vetoed. lie ap
proved of the exercise of the veto power
upon this, the roost iniquitous bill ever
presented in the Senate, lie expressed the
hope that the Southern people would never
enter the Union upon the terms now pre
sented to them.
Mr. llenderson, of Missouri, followed
Mr. Saulsbury in a brief review of the
bill, and an endorsement of the veto.
Mr. Dixon, of Connecticut, believed the
bill to be in conflict with the provisions of
the Constitution, and should consider him
self, in voting for it, as violating his official
oath. The country was now at peace. The
termination of the war has been announced
by the President, and recognized by Con
gress and after this declaration by Con
gress he could see no power to establish
military governments. Believing the bill
to be a plain and palpable violation of the
Constitution, he shook( vote against it.
Mr. Buckalew next addressed the Senate
against the bill, and after further debate the
question was put, " Shall the bill pass, the
President's objection notwithstanding ?"
It was decided in the of as follows :
Yens.—Messrs. Anthony, Cattel, Chand
ler, Conness, Cragln, Creswell, Edmunds,
Fessenden, i'ogg, Foster, Fowler, Freling
huysen, Grimes, Harris, Henderson, How
ard, Howe, Johnson, Kirkwood, Lane,
Morgan, Morr'll, .Nye, Poland, Pomeroy,
Ramsay, Ross, Sherman, Sprague, Stew
art, Sumner, TrumLiull, Van Winkle,
Wade, Willey, Wilson, Williams, Yates
-38.
SAys.—Messrs. Buckalew, Cowan,Dav is,
Dixon, Doolittle, Hendricks,Nesmith, Nor
ton, Patterson, Saulsbury-10.
A itsENT,—Messrs. Brown, Guthrie, Mc-
Dougall, Riddle-1.
The Chair, Mr. Foster, announced that
two-thirds of both houses having voted to
puss the bill, notwithstanding the objections
of the President, it has become a law.
The galleries had been densely crowded
all the evening, Even the reporters' gal.
lery was packed, as it generally Is on great
occasions, with gentlemen .representing
themselves us correspondents, whose con
nection with the press has probably been
limited to writing advertisements of situa
tions wanted, dogs lost, or the like.
The announcement of the vote was fol
lowed by strong manifestations of applause.
The Chair directed the sergeant-at-arms to
arrest the offenders against the decorum of
the Senate. As the offenders wore about a
hundred to one against the doorkeepers, no
arrests worn made.
II OUM li. —The reading of the message was
admirably delivered, and was listened to
with most unwonted attention on the part
of members on both sides of the House, and
by the speetatort In the crowded galleries.
The Speaker—The question under the
Constitution Is—will the House on recon
sideration agree to the passage of this bill ?
Stevens--1 propose that we proceed
immediately to that
Mr. Eldridge—The minority °alio House,
profoundly sensible that their official duty
would require them, If in their physical
power, to defeat this bill, are equally con
scious thatno effort of theirs can prevent
by this bill, as they think, a dissolution of
the Union. They only, in the name of the
republic, iu the name of all that they hold
dear, protest against this action of this
Congress.
Mr. Le Blond. As one member of the
House on this side, believing as I do that
the passage of this bill is the death-knoll of
republican liberty on this continent—
[laughter on the Republican side]—if I had
a sufficient number of members on this side
of the House to stand with me, this bill
never, never should become a law. I would
leave it to the next Congress, with sixteen
States unrepresented to take the responsi
bility of striking this blow at the Govern
ment.
Mr. Eldridge. We understand that the
Speaker will hold, and that a majority of
the House will sustain him in that ruling,
that by a two-thirds vote ail rules can be
suspended, including those under which
the action of the majority has sometimes
been resisted. That being so, we feel that
it would be useless for us to make any
further effort. Were it otherwise, I, for
one, should feel it my duty to stand with
with the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Le
Blond], until the last hour of this expiring
Congress should have passed.
The Speaker. The gentleman from Wis
eetimin (Mr. Eldridge) has alluded to an
anticipated decision by the Chair, as if it
was a now one. The Chair has stated to
gentlemen 011 both sides frankly that every
Spelt Icor of all parties who has occupied this
Chair has held that on Mondays, after the
morning hour, and on the lestten days of a
session, by the rules which we have our
selves adopted, two thirds can suspend all
the rules of the House, thus suspending
every rule that stands in the way of im•
mediate action on tiny measure. It is not
a new decision ; it is as old as the history
of Congress.
The question was then taken on the pas
sage of the bill, turd it resulted—yeas 135,
nays, 48, as follows:
YEAlL—Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames,
Anderson, Arnell, Ashley (Nev.) Ashley,
(Ohio,), Baker, Baldwin, Bunks, Barker,
Baxter, Beaman, 13enJumin, Bidwell, Bing
ham, Blaine, Blow, Boutwell, Brandegee,
Bromwell, Broomall, Buckland, Bundy,
Clarke ( Ohio, ) Clarke (Kansas,) 'Cobb,
Conkling D , gook, Cullom, Darling, Davis,
Dawes,, efrees, Delano, Deming, Dixon;
Dodge, Donnelly; Dumont, tiis.lvy; gggle-
ston, Lillot, Farnsworth, Farquhar, Ferry,
Garfield, Grinnell, Griswold, Harding (Ill,)
Hart, Haves, Henderson, illgby, Hill,.
HplmeSLl l cooper Hotchkiss, Hubbard, •
acwa,) l ,Hubbard V. Vsu) Hulburd (N. Y.
Hitibbard (Conn.) übbell(Chio,) Hulburd
ftersoW, Jonok,s, Julians" Kassoni Kelley
Ketcham, Koontss, Loftin, Lawrence, (4 1 a.)
Liwrenoe (Ohio,) Loan, Longyear, Lynch,
' Marquette, Marston, Marvin; Maynard,
McClurg ; Mclndoe, McKee, Moßuer'Mer
our, 'Maier, Mocirherui, - . Morrill, idorris
'Moulton, Myers, Newell, O'Neill,' Orth,
Paine, Patterson, Perham, Pike, Plants,
Pomeroy, Price Raymond, Rice, (Mass,)
Rice, Maine), Rollins, Sawyers, Schenck,
Scofield, Shellabareer ' Sioam, Splading,
Starr,Stevens, Stokes, Thayer F. Thomas,
J. L. Thomas, Trowbridge, ' Upson, Van
Aernami Van Horn, (N. Y.,) Ward, (N.
Y.,) Warne r _ Washburn, (Ind.,) Washburn,
(Mass.,) Welker, Wentworth, Whaley,
Williams, Wilson (Iowa), Wilson, (Pa.,)
Windom; Woodbridge, Colfax, Sp'r-135.
NAYS.—Messrs. Ancona, Bergen, Boyer,
Campbell, Chanler, Cooper, Dawson, Den
nison, Eldridge, Flock, Glossbrenner,Good
year, Hale, Harding. (Ky), Harris, Haw
kins, Hise, Hogan, Hubbell (N. Y.) Hum
phrey, Hunter, Jones,Kerr, Kuykendall,
Le Blond, Leftwich, arshalL McCulloch,
Niblack, Nicholson, Noell, Phelps, Rad
ford, Ritter, Rogers, Ross, Rousseau,Shank
lin, Sitgreaves, Stillwell, Strouse, Taber,
Taylor (Tenn.), Taylor (N. Y. ) , Thornton,
Trimble, Ward (Ky.), Winfiel-48.
Greeley Wants a Veto.
The following appeared editorially in
the New York Tribune several days
ago :
We hiive never yet seen any specific vote
of the Senate on the naked question of in—
flation like that given in the House on Mr.
Stevens's proposition, and the previous
vote of the same body against contraction.
In our ignorance we shall be pardoned for
expressing our hope that the Senate is wise
enough, and resolute enough to resist the
blind and reckless inflationists of the House;
and that they will place the seal of their
condemnation on the wretched measure in
which they were asked to concur.
But should the Senate fail of its duty, we
shall turn to the President for a veto upon
such mischievous and dangerous legislation,
as increasing the volume of our paper cur
rency, with the confident expectation that
it will be applied.
Horace Greeley calling upon " the
President for a veto upon mischievous
and dangerous legislation!" Has not
the President time and again endeav
ored to arrest mischievous and danger
ous legislation by his veto, and has
not the Tribune as often applauded "the
blind and reckless " fanatics for setting
aside his veto? Why it Is one of the
grounds of the proposed impeachment
of the President, that he has refused
his assent to such wholesome laws as
would enable Ben. Butler to lay in a
new stock of spoons. Greeley had better
sustain some of the vetoes already sent
in by the President, before he calls for
another.
Fenton Fizzles
Our readers will recollect the case of
Capt. George Olney, who was arrested
in the city of New York a few weeks
ago by the order of Gov. Fenton upon
the requisition of the Governor of Vir
ginia; hisoffence consisting in running
away with his steamer from Norfolk,
Va., after it had been placed in the
hands of the Sheriff on an attachment.
Judge Dean, Olney's counsel, had
him released on a habeas corpus, The
case was argued a day or two ago before
Gov. Fenton, Judge Dean insisting that,
as Virginia was not recognized by Con
gress as a State in the Union, the requi
sition of Gov. Peirpout for Olney's ar
rest, could not be respected. Fenton
found himself in an ugly fix, for he
could not justify his action in issuing
the order for Olney's arrest, without
holding that Virginia was a State in
he Union ; and he could not maintain
his positiop In his party without hold
ing that she was not a State. He creeps
out of his difficulty in a very lame
manner, basing his change of front upon
newly discovered facts, which facts he
is very careful not to disclose. Here is
his decision:
A mandate having been issued on the
1211, day of February, to the authorities of
the City of New York, to arrest and deliver
George Olney to the agent of the State of
Virginia, in compliance with a requisition
from the Governor of said State, and said
Olney being now in custody, and it appear
ing from new facts, which have come to the
knowledge of the Executive since issuing the
mandate, In such form as to compel atten
tion thereto, clearly showing that the acts
charged against said Olney are not suffi
cient to warrant such surrender to the agent
aforesaid, I therefore hereby revoke said
mandate, and direct that said Olney be re
leased from custody. R. E. FENTON.
The Veto of the Tenure of Office 11111
The President's veto of the Tenure of
Office bill was sent to Senate on Saturday.
The President says in his message: The
bill, in this respect, conflicts, in my 4judg
ment, with the Constitution of the United
Suites. This question, as Congress is well
aware, is by no means a new one. That
the power of removal is constitutionally
vested in the President of the United
States is a principle which has bean not
more distinctly declared by judicial author
ity and
,juridical commentators than it has
been uniformly practiced upon by the
Legislative and E:xecutive Departments of
the fiovernment. The question arose in
the House of Representatives so early as
the Pith of June, 17:49, on the bill for es
tablishing an Executive Department, de
nominated the Department of Foreign
AfTairs. « r * r "'
The subject was long and earnestly do•
bated in the Senate, and the early construc
tion of the Constitution was nevertheless
freely accepted as binding and conclusive
upon t. ongress. The question canto before
the Supreme Court of the United States in
January 1889, expurte Hennen. It was
declared by the Court on that occasion that
the power of removal from office was a sub
ject much disputed, and upon which a great
diversity of opinion was entertained in the
early history of the Government.
This related, however, to the power of the
President to remove officers appointed with
the concurrence of the Senate, and the great
question was, whether the removal was to
be by the President alone, or with the con
currence of the Senate, both constituting the
appointing power.
No one denied the power of the President
and Senate jointly to remove whore the
tenure of the office was not fixed by the
Constitution, which was a full recognition
of the principle that the power of removal
was Incident to the power of appointment.
But it was very early adopted as a practical
construction of the Constitution, that this
power was vested in the President alone,
and such would appear to have been the
legislative construction of the Constitution;
for, in the organization of the three great
Departments of State, War and Treasury,
in the year 1789, provision wits made for the
appointment of n subordinate officer by the
head of the Department who should have
charge of the records, books and papers ap
pertaining to the office when the head of the
Department should be removed front office
by the President of the United States.
The President then quotes Judge Story
and Chancellor Kent in support of his
argument, and says The events of the
last war furnished a practical confirmation
of the wisdom of the Constitution, as it has
hitherto been maintained in many of its
parts, including that which is now the sub
ject of consideration. When the war broke
out rebel enemies, traitors, abettors and
sympathizers were found in ovary depart
ment of the Government, as well in the
civil service as in the land and naval and
military services. They were found in Con
gress and among the keepers of the Capitol;
in foreign missions; in each and all of the
Executive :Departments ; in the Judicial
service; in the Post Office, and among the
agents for conducting Indian affairs. As
upon probable suspicion they were prompt
ly displaced by my predecessor, so far as
they held their offices under executive au
thority, and their duties were confided to
now and loyal successors, no complaints
against that power or doubts of Its wisdom
were
. entertained in any quarter. I sin
cerely trust and believe that no snob civil
war is likely to occur again.
I cannot doubt, however, that in what
ever form and on whatever occasion sedi
tion can raise an effort to hinder or embar
rass or defeat the legitimate action of this
Government, whether by preventing the
collection of revenue, by disturbing the
public peace, or separating the States or be
traying the country to a foreign enemy, the
power of removal from office by the Execu
tive as it has heretofore existed and been
practised, will be round indispensable un
der these circumstances, as a depository of
the executive authority of the nation. Ido
not feel at liberty to unite with Congress in
reversing it by giving my approval to the
bill.
A. committee at Guelph, C. W. awarded
a prie, fora crop of 04,000 pounds of tur
nips' from an acre of land. The second
prize was given for a crop of 60,830 pounds.
The lightest of five other crops was 52,320
pounds. The committee recommended
planting turnips in drills 28 inchels apart,
and 9 to 12 inches apart in the rows.
The only way to be happy is to take the
drops of happiness as Gotgives them to us
every day of our lives. The boy must
learn to be happy, while he is learning his
trade ; the merchant while he is making his
fortune. If he fails to learn this art, he
will be sure to miss his enjoyment when he
gains what he has sighed for.
VIE PRESIDENT'S VETO OF THE
~TAB? RECONSTRUCTION BILL.
..01FASELINGTON, March 2.—The following
l ite t tOmessageof the President of the United
a
*veturning to the House of Hepreeen
,,
bill entitled "an Bei toiwiwide for
tbeelBcten• • .
t government of the rebel States el .
To.the House of .Representativea:
have examined the bill "To provide
;for the,imore efficient government ofsat,o,
rebel- States," with the care-and anxiety
which its transcendent imporlance is calcu
lated to awaken. lam unable to give it my
assent, fur reasons so grave that I hope a
statement of them may have some influence
on the minds of the patriotic and enlighten
ed men with , whom the decision must
ultimately rest.
The bill places all the people of the ten
States therein named under the absolute
domination of military rulers, and the pre
amble undertakes to give the reason upon
which the measure is based, and the ground
upon which it is justified. It declares that
there exists in those States no legal gov
ernments, and no adequate protection for
life or property, and asserts the necessity
of enforcing peace and good order within
their limits. Is this true as matter of fact?
It notisdenied that the States in question
have each of them an actual government,
with all the power, executive, judicial,
and legislative, which properly belong-to a
free State. They are organized like the
other States of the Union, and like them,
they make, administer, and execute the
laws which concern their domestic affairs.
An existing de-facto government, exercising
such functions as these, is itself the law of
the State upon all matters within its juris
diction. To pronounce the supreme law
making power of an established State ille
g,al is to say that law itself is unlawful.
The provisions which these governments
have made for the preservation of order,
the suppression of crime, and the redress of
private injuries, are in substance and prin
ciple the same as those which prevail in the
Northern States and in other civilized coun
tries. They certainly have not succeeded
in preventing the commission of all crime,
nor has this been accomplished anywhere
in the world. There, as well as elsewhere,
offenders sometimes escape for want of vig
orous prosecution, and occasionally, per
haps, by the inefficiency of courts, or the
prejudice of jurors. It is undoubtedly true
that these evils have been much increased
and aggravated, North and South, by the
demoralizing influences of civil war, and
by the rancorous passions which the con
test has engendered. But that these people
are maintaining local governments for them
selves, which habitually defeat the object of
all government, and render their own lives
and property insecure, is in itself utterly
improbable, and the averment of the bill to
that effect is not supported by any evidence
which has come to my knowledge. All the
information I have on the subject convinces
me that the masses of the Southern people
and those who control their public acts,
while they entertain diverse opinions on
questions of Federal policy, are completely
united in the effort to reorganize their so
ciety on the basis of peace, and to restore
their mutual prosperity as rapidly and as
completely as their circumstances will per
mit.
The bill, however, would seem_to show
upon its face that the establishment of peace
and good order is not its real object. The
fifth section declares that the preceding sec
tions shall cease to operate in any State
where certain events shall have happened.
These events are
First. The selection of delegates to a State
Convention by an election, at which negroes
shall be allowed to vote.
Second. The formation of a State Consti
tution by the convention so chosen.
Third. The insertion into the State Con
stitution of u provision which will secure
the right of voting at all elections to negroes,
and to such white men as may not be dis
franchised for rebellion or felony.
Fourth, The submission of the Constitu
tion for ratification to negroes and white
men not disfranchised, and its actual rati
fication by their votes.
Fifth. The submission of tho State Con
stitution to Congress for examination and
approval, and the actual approval of it by
that body.
Sixth. The adoption of a certain amend
ment to the Federal Constitution by a vote
of the Legislature elected under the now
Constitution.
Seventh. The adoption of said amendment
by a sufficient number of other States to '
make it a part of the Constitution of the
United States.
All these conditions must be fulfilled be
fore the people of any of these States can be
relieved from the bondage of military dom
ination • but when they are fulfilled, then
immediately the pains and penalties of the
bill are to cease, 110 matter whether there be
peace and order or not, and without any
reference to the security of life or property.
The excuse given for the bill in the pream
ble is admitted by the bill itself not to be
real. The military rule which it establishes
is plainly to be used, not for any purpose
of order or for the prevention of crime, but
solely as a means of coercing the people
into the adoption of principles and measures
to which it is known that they are opposed,
and upon which they have an undeniable
right to exercise their own judgment.
I submit to Congress whether this measure
is not in its whole character, scope, and
object, without precedent and without au
thority, in pa Ipii ble conflict with the plainest
provisions of the Constitution, and utterly
destructive to those great principles of lib
erty and humanity for which our ancestors
on both sides of the Atlantic have shed so
much blood and expended so much treasure.
Tho ten States named in the bill are di
vided into live districts. For each district
an officer of the army not below the rank
of Brigadier General is to be appointed to
rule over the people, and ho is to be sup
ported with an efficient military force to
enable him to perform his duties and en
force his authority.
Those duties and that authority, as defined
by the third section of the bill, are " to pro•
tect all persons in their rights of person and
property, to suppress insurrection, disor
der, and violence, and to punish, or cause
to bo punished, all disturbers of the public
peace or criminals."
The power thus given to the commanding
officer over all the people of each district is
that of an absolute monarch. His mere
will is to take the place of all law. The law
of the States is now the only rule applicable
to the subjects placed underhis control, and
that is completely displaced by the clause
which declares all interference of State
authority to bomull and void.
He alone is permitted to determine what
are rights of person or property, and he
may protect them in such way as, in his
discretion, may seem proper. It places at
his free disposal all the lands and goods in
his district, and he nmy distribute them
without let or hindrance to whom ho pleases.
Being bound by no State law, and there
being no other law to regulate the subject,
he may make a criminal code of his own,
and he can make It as bloody as any re
corded in history, or he can reserve the
privilege of acting upon tbo impulse of his
private passions in each case that arises.
Ho is bound by no rules of evidence ; there
is indeed no provision by whicif he is au
thorized or required to take any evidence at
all. Everyth i ng is a crime which he chooses
to call so, and all persons are condemned
whom he pronounces to be guilty. Ile is
not bound to keep any record or make any
report of his proceedings. He may arrest
his victims wherever he finds them, without
warrant, accusation or proof of probable
cause. If he gives them a trial before he
inflicts the punishment, he gives it of his
grace and mercy—not because he is com
manded so to do.
To a casual reader of the bill, It :night
sown that some kind of trial was secured
by It to persona accused of crime, but such
is not the case. Thu, officer "may allow
local civil tribunals to tryoffenders ; ' but,
of course, this does not require that Ito
do so. If any Stato•or Federal court pre
sumes to exercise its legal jurisdiction by
the trial of u malefactor without his special
permission, he can break it up and punish
the Judges and jurors as being themselves
:malefactors. He can save his friends from
justice, and despoil his enemies contrary to
justice.
It is also provided that "ho shall have
power to organize military commission or
tribunals."
But this power he is not commanded to
exercise. It is merely permissive and is to
be used only when in his judgement it may
be necessary forth° trial of offenders. Even
if the sentence of a commission were made
a prerequisite to the punishment of a party, it
would be scarcely the slightest check upon
the officer who has authority to organize it as
he plea ses,prosoribe its mode of proceeding,
appoint its members from among his own
subordinates, and revise all its decisions,
Instead of mitigating the harshness of his
single will, such a tribunal would be used
much more probably to divide the respon
sibility of making It more cruel and unjust.
Several provisions, dictated by the hu
manity of Congress, have been Inserted in
the bill, apparently to restrain the power of
the commanding officer, but it seems to me
that they are of no avail for that purpose.
Tho fourth section provides, first, that trials
shall not be unnecessarily delayed, but I
think I have shown that the power is given
to punish without trial,'and, if so, this pro
vision is practically inoperative.
Second. Cruel or unusual punishment is
not to be inflicted; but who is to decide
what is cruel and what is unusual? The
words have acquired a legal meaning by
long use in the courts. Can it be expected
that military officers will understand or fol
low a rule expressed in language so purely
technical, and not pertaining, in the least
degree, to their profession? If not, then,
each officer may define cruelty according to
his own temper, and if it Is not usual, he
will make it usual. Corporal punishment,
imprisonment, the gag, the ball and chain,
and the almost Insupportable forms of tor
ture invented for military punishment, Ile
within the range of choice.
Third. The sentence of a commission is
not to be executed without being approved
by the commander, if it affects life or
liberty, and a sentence of death must be
approved by the President. This applies to
cases in which there has been a trial and a
Sentence.
I take it to be clear under this bill that
the military commander may condemn to
death without even the.form of a trial ky n
military commission. $9 ilittt the /ffeOf
, . „
. _
tlondemned may depend upon tho will of
two men instead of 01i0.
It is plain that the authority hero given
to, he military officer amounts to absolute
desrpotism. But to make it still unendura
,bleuthe bill, provides that it mny,
aej be
!pilita4toas many subOrdinatesnichdole
ooses
to', appoint, for it' eclares that he shall
"Finnish or cause tole punished." Such a
power - has , not been wielded by any mon
arch in England for. more' than five bun
, dred years, In all that din% no people who
speak the iEnglish, language have borne
such servitude. It reduces the whole popu
lotion of the ten States—all persons of every
color, sex and condition, and every stranger
within their limits to the most abject and
degrading slavery. No master ever had a
control so absolute over his slaves as this
bill gives to the military officers over both
white and colored persons.
It may be answered to this that the offi
cers of the army are too magnanimous, just,
and humane to oppress and trample upon
a subjugated people. Ido not doubt that
army officers are as well entitled to this
kind of confidence as any other class of
men. But the history ofthe world has been
written in vain if it does not teach us that
unrestrained authority can never be safely
trusted in human hands. It is almost sure
to be more or less abused under any cir
cumstances, and it has always resulted in
gross tyranny where the rulers who exer
cise it are strangers to their subjects, and
come among them as the representatives of
a distant power,
and more especially when
the power that sends them is unfriendly.
Governments closely resembling that here
proposed have been fairly tried in Hungary
and Poland, and the suffering endured by
those people roused the sympathies of the
entire world. It was tried in Ireland, and
though tempered at first, by principles of
English law, it gave birth to cruelties so
atrocious, that they are never recounted
without just indignation. The French Con
vention armed Its deputies with this power,
and sent them to the southern departments
of the republic. The massacres, murders
and other atrocities which they committed
show what the passions of the ablest men
in the most civilized society will tempt
them to do when wholly unrestrained by
The men of our race in every age, have
struggled to tie up the hands of their Gov
ernments and keep them within the law,
because their own experience of all man
kind taught them that rulers could not be
relied on to concede those rights which they
were not legally bound to respect. The head
of a great empire has sometimes governed
it with a mild and paternal sway, but the
kindness of an irresponsible deputy never
yields what the law does not extort from
him. Between such a master and the peo•
pie, subjected to his domination, there can
be nothing but enmity; he punishes them
if they resist his authority, and if they sub
mit to it he hates them for their servility.
I come now to a question which is, if pos
sible, still more important. Have we the
power to establish and carry into execu
tion a measure like this? E answer,
cer
tainly not, if we derive our authority from
the Constitution, and If we aro bound by
the limitations which it Imposes.
This proposition Is perfectly clear, that
no branch of the Federal Government, ex
ecutive, legislative, or judicial, can have
any just powers except those which it de
rives through and exercises under the or
ganic law of the Union. Outside of the
Constitution we have no legal authority
more than private citizens, and within it
we have only so much as that instrument
gives us. This broad principle limits all
our functions, and applies to all subjects.
It protects not only the citizens of States
which are within the Union, but it shields
every human being who conies or is brought
under our jurisdiction.
We have no right to do in one place more
than in another that which the Constitution
j says we shall not do at all. If, therefore,
the Southern States were, in truth, out of
the Union, we could noCtreat their people
in a way which the fundamental law lor
bids.
Some persons assume that the success of
our arms in crushing the opposition, which
was made in seine of the States to the exe
cution of the .legal law, reduced those
States, and all i air people, the innocent as
well as the guilty, to the condition of vas
salage, and gave us a power over them
which the Constitution does not bestow, or
define, or limit.
No fallacy can be more transparent than
this. Our victories subjected the insurgents
to legal obedience, not to the yoke of an
arbitrary despotism. When an ausolute
sovereign reduces his rebellious subjects,
he may deal with them according to his
pleasure, because he had that power before.
But when a limited monarch puts down an
insurrection, he must still govern according
to law. If an insurrection should take
place in one of our States, against the au
thority of the State government, and end
in the overthrow of those who planted it,
would that take away the rights of all the
people of the counties where it was favored
by a part or a majority of the population?
Could they for such a reason be wholly out
lawed, and deprived of their representation
in the Legislature? I have always con
tended that the Government of the United
States was sovereign within its Constitu
tional sphere, that it executed its laws like
the States themselves by applying its coer
cive power directly to individuals, and that
it could put down insurrection with the
same effect as a State, and no other. The
opposite doctrine is the worst heresy of
those who advocated secession, and cannot
be agreed to without admitting that heresy
to be right. Invasion, insurrection, rebel
lion, and domestic violence were anticipated
when the Government was framed, and the
means of repelling and suppressing them
were wisely provided for in the Constitu
tion ; but it was not thought necessary to
declare that the States in which they might
occur should be expelled from the Union.
Rebellions, which were invariably sup
pressed, occurred prior to that out of which
these questions grow. But the States con
tinued to exist, and the Union remained
unbroken. In Massachusetts, in Pennsyl
vania, in Rhode Island, and in New York,
at different periods in our history, violent
and armed opposition to the United States
was carried on. But the relations of those
States with the Federal Government were
not supposed to be interrupted or changed
thereby, after the rebellious portions of
their population were defeated and put
down. It is true that in these earlier cases
there was no formal expression of a deter
mination to withdraw from the Union. But
it is also true that in the Southern States
the ordinances of secession were treated by
all the friends of the Union as mere nulli
ties, and are now acknowledged to be so by
the States themselves. If we admit that
they had any force or validity, or that they
did, in fact, take the States in which they
were passed out of the Union, we sweep
from under our feet all the grounds upon
which we stand in justifying the use of
Federal force to maintain the integrity of
the Government. This Is a bill passed by
Congress in tine of peace. There is not,
In any one of the States brought under its
operation, either war or insurrection. The
laws of the States, and of the Federal Gov
ernment, are all in undisturbed and har
monious operation. The courts, State and
Federal, are open mad in the full exercise of
their proper authority'. Over every State
comprised in these live military districts,
life, liberty, and property are secured by
State laws and Federal laws, and the
National Constitution is everywhere
in force and everywhere obeyed.—
What, thou, is the ground upon which this
bill proceeds? The title of the bill an
nounces that it is intended for the more
efficient government of these ten States. It
is recited, by way of preamble, that no
legal State governments, nor adequate pro
teution for life or property exist in those
States, and tliat peace and good order should
be thus enforced.
The first thing which arrests attention,
upon these recitals which prepare the way
for martial law, I s this: That the only
foundation upon which martial law can
exist, under our form of government, is not
stated or so much us pretended ; actual war,
foreign invasion, dotnestio insurrection—
none of these appear, and none of these, In
fact, exist. It is not even recited that tiny
sort of war or insurrection is threatened.
Let us pause here to consider, upon this
question of constitutional law and the power
of Congress,la recent decision of the Supreme
Cour of the United States In ex parte
Milli
gan. I will first quote from the opinion of
the majority of the court: " Martial law
cannot arise from a threatened invasion.
The necessity must be actual and present,
the invasion real, such as effectually closes
the courts and deposes the civil administra
tration." We see that martial law comes in
only when actual war closes the courts
and deposes the civil authority. But this
bill, In time of peace, makes martial law
operate us though we were In actual war,
and become the cause instead of the conse
quence of the abrogation of civil authority.
One more quotation:
"It follows from what has boon said on
this subject that there are occasions when
tnartiallaw can be properly applied. If In
foreign invasion or civil war the courts are
actually closed, and it is impossible to ad
minister criminal just ice according to law,
then, on the theatre of active military oper
ations, where war really prevails, there is a
necessity to furnish a substitute for the
civil authority thus overthrown, to preserve
the safety of the army and society ; and as
no power is left but the military, it is
allowed to govern by martial rule until the
laws can have their flee course." I now
quote from the opinion of the minority of
the court, delivered by Chief Justice Chase:
"We by no means assert that Congress can
establish and apply the laws of war where
no war has been declared or exists. Where
peace exists the laws of peace must pre
vail." This is sufficiently explicit. Peace
exists in all the territory to which this bill
applies. It asserts a power in Congress in
time of peace to set aside the laws of peace
and to substitute the laws of war. The
minority concurring with the majority de
clares that Congress does not possess that
power. Again, and if possible more em
phatically, the Chief Justice with re
markable clearness and condensation
sums up the whole matter as follows:
"There are under the Constitution three
kinds of military jurisdiction, one to beex
ercised both in peace and war; another to be
exercised in time of foreign war withold the
boundaries of the United St r ides, or in time
of rebellion and 01 , 01 kiiffit , j 1 44/1 States or
districts Occupied to rebels ? treated as bel
,
11 rents, and a third to be exercised in time
of invasion or insurrection within the lim-
its of the United States, or daring rebellion
within the limits of the States maintaining
adhesion to the National Government, when
the public, danger requires its exorcise.
Ths 3 Erst of these may be calledjuristlic
tion:Aindee military law; and is found in
acts Of Congrios.j)rescriblog rules and arti
clecof war, or otherwiseproviding for the
government oftberiational:forces, Thesecond
maybe ; distingalahed as military govern
ment, superseding , as far as may be deemed
expedient, the local law, and exercised
by the military commander, under the
direction of the President, with the ex
press or implied sanction of Congress.
While the third may be denominated
martial law proper, and is called into
action by Congress, or, temporarily, when
theaction of Congress cannot be invited,
and in the case of Justifying or excusing
peril, by the President; in times of insur
rection or invasion; or of civil or foreign
war within districts or localities where or
dinary law no longer adequately secures
public safety and private rights." It will
be observed that of the three kinds of mili
tary jurisdiction, which can be exercised or
created under our Constitution, there is
but one that can prevail in time of peace,
and that is the code of laws enacted by
Congress for the government of the national
forces. That body of military law has no
application to the citizen, nor even to the
citizen soldier enrolled in the militia in
time of peace. But this bill is not a part of
that sort of military law, for that applies
only to the soldier, and not to the citizen,
whilst contrariwise the military law pro
vided by this bill applies only to the citizen
and not to the soldier.
I need not say to the representatives of
the American people that their Constitution
forbids the exerriseofjudicial power in any
way but one ;:that is, by the ordained and
established courts. It is equally well known
that in all criminal cases a trial by jury is
made indispensable by the express words
of that instrument. I will not not enlarge
on the inestimable value of the right thus
secured to every free man, or speak of the
danger to public liberty iu all parts of the
country, which must ensue from a denial of
it anywhere or upon any pretence. A very
recent decision of the Supreme Court has
traced the history, vindicated the dignity,
and made known the value of this great
privilege, so clearly that nothing more is
needed. To what extent a violation of it
might be excused, in time of war or public
danger, may admit of discussion. But we
are providing now for a time of profound
peace, where there is not an armed soldier
within our borders, except those who are in
the service of the Government. It is in
such a condition of things that an act of
Congress is proposed which, if carried out,
would deny a trial by the lawful courts and
juries to nine millions of American
citizens and to their posterity for an in
definite period. leseems to be scarcely
possible that any one should seriously
believe this consistent with a Constitution
which declares In simple, plain and unambi
guous language, that all persons shall have
that right, and that no person shall ever, in
any case, be deprived of it. The Constitu
tion also forbids the arrest of the citizen,
without judicial warrant founded on proba
ble cause. This bill authorizes an arrest
without warrant, at the pleasure of a mili
tary commander. The Constitution declares
that "no person shall b. held to answer for
a capital or otherwise inTamous crime, un
less on presentment by a grand jury."—
This bill holds every person nut a soldier
answerable for all crimes amid all charges
' without any presentment. The Constitution
declares that " no person shall be deprived
of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law." This bill sets aside all
process of law, and makes the citizen an
swerable, in his person and property, to the
will of ono man, and as to his life, to the
will of two. Finally the Constitution de
clares that "the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus shall not be suspended un
less when, in case of rebellion or invasion,
the public safety may require it ;" whereas
this bill declares martial law, which of
itsell suspends this great writ in time of
peace, and authorizes the military to make
the arrest, and give to the prisoner only
one privilege, and that Is a trial without
unnecessary delay. He has no hope of re•
lease from custody, except the hope such as
it is, of release by acquittal beforea military
commission. The United Slates are bound
to guarantee to each State a republican
form of government.
Can it be pretended that this obligation
is not palpably broken if we carry out a
measure like this which wipes away every
vestige of republican government in ton
States, and puts the life, property, liberty
and 'honor of all the people In each of them
under the domination of a single person
clothed with unlimited authority'? The
Parliament of England, exercising the om
nipotent power which it claimed, was ac
customed to pass bills of attainder; that Is
to say, it would convict men of treason and
other crimes by legislative enactment.
The person accused had a hearing, some
times a patient and fair one, but generally
party prejudice prevailed insteadof justice.
It often became necessary for Parliament
to acknowledge its error, and reverse its
own action. The fathers of our country de
termined that no such thing should occur
here. They withheld the power from Con
gress, and thus forbade its exercise by that
body, and they provided in the Constitu
tion that no State should pass any bill of
attainder. It is, therefore, impossible for
any person in this country to bo consti
tutionally punished for any crime by a legis
lative proceeding of any sort; neverthe
less here is a bill of attainder against nine
millions of people at once. It is based upon
an accusation so vague as to be scarcely
intelligible, and found to be true upon no
credible evidence; not one of the nine mil
lions was heard in his own defence. The
representatives of the doomed parties were
excluded from all participation in the trial.
The conviction is to be followed by the most
ignominious punishment ever inflicted on
large masses of men. It disfranchises them
by hundreds of thousands, and degrades
them all, even those who are admitted to
be guiltless, from the rank of freemen to
the condition of slaves. The purpose and
object of the bill, the general intent which
pervades It from beginning to end, Is to
change the entire structure and elturacttir
of the State governments, end to compel
them by fore° to the adoption of organic
laws, and regulations who'll they are un
willing to accept, if left to themselves. The
negroes have not asked for the privilege of
voting; the vast majority of them pave no
idea what It means, This bill not Only
thrusts it into their hands,
but compels
thorn, as well as the whites. to use it in a
particular way.
If they do not form a Constitution with
prescribed articles in it, end afterwards
elect a legislature which will act upon
. certain measures in a prescribed way,
neither blacks nor whites can be relieved
from the slavery which the bill imposes
upon them. Without pausing to consider
the policy or impulley of Africanizing the
Southern part of our territory, I would
simply ask the attention of Congress to
that manifest, well-known and universally
acknowledged rule of constitutional
which declares that the Federal Govern
ment has no jurisdiction, authority, or
power to regulate such subjects for any
State. To force the right of suffrage out of
the hands of the white people, and into the
hands of the negroes, is an arbitrary viola
tion of this principle. This bill imposes
martial law at once, and its operations will
begin so soon es the general and his troops
can be put In place. The dread alternative
between Its harsh rule and compliance with
the terms of this measure is not suspended,
nor the people afforded any time for free
deliberations. The bill says to them ; Take
martial law first, then deliberate. And
when they have done all that this measure
requires them to do, other conditions and
contingencies over which they have
no control yet remain to be fulfilled ;
beibre they nun be relieved from martial law
another Congress must first approve the
constitutions made in conformity with the
will of this Congress, and must declare
these States entitled to representation in
both Houses. The whole question thus re.
meths open and unsettled, and must again
occupy the attention of Congress ; and in
the meantime the agitation which now pre
vails will continue to disturb all portions of
the people. The bill also denies the legality
of the governments of ten of the States
which participated In the ratification of the
amendment to the Federal Constitution
abolishing slavery forever within thejurie
diction of the United States, and practically
excludes them from the Union. If this as
sumption of the bill be correct, their con
currence cannot be considered as having
been legally given—awl the important
fact is made to appear that the consent of
three-fourths of the States, the requisite
number, has not been constitutionally ob
tained to the ratification of that amend
ment, thus leaving the (petition of slave
ry where it stood before the amendment
was officially to have become a part of the
Constitution, That the measure proposed
by this bill does violate the Constitution in
the particulars mentioned, and in many
other ways, which I forbear to enumerate,
Is too clear to admit of the least doubt. It
only remains to consider whether the in
junctions of that instrument ought to be
obeyed or not. I think they ought to be
obeyed, for reasons which I will proceed to
give as briefly as possible. In the first
place, it is the only system of free govern
ment which we can hope to have as a na
tion when It ceases to be the rule of our
conduct; we may, perhaps, take our choice
between complete anarchy, a consolidated
despotism,and total dissolution in the Union.
But national liberty, regulated by law, will
havepassed beyond our reach. It is the
best frame of government the world ever
• saw; no other is, or can be, so well adapted
to the genius, habits, or wants of the Ame
rican people, combining the strength of a
greatempire, with unspeakable blessings
• of local self-government, having a central
power to defend the general interests, and
recognizing the authority of the States as
the guardians of industrial rights. It is
"the sheet-anchor of our safety abroad,
end our peace at home." It was ordained
"to form a more perfect Union,
establish
justice, Aggy r e domestic tranquility, pro
mote the general welfare, provide for the
common defence, and secure the blessing's
of liberty be ourselves and to our pro
parity." Time great ends have been at
. tamed heretofore, anti wd.l bq again by
faithful 9 1 r 3 4 1 . 0 4ei t i. 0 it; Put tlltry are certain
to bo lost If we treat with disregard its sa
cred obligatientf.' was to punish tho
gross crime of defying the Constitution,
and to vindicate its supremeauthority, that
wo carried on a bloody war of four years'
duration. Shall we now acknowledge that
we sacrificed a million of lives, and ex
pended billions of treasure, to enforce a
Constitution which is not worthy of respect
and preservation. Those who advocated
the right of secession, alleged in their own
Justification, that wo had no regard for
law, and that their rights of property, life,
and liberty would not be safe under the
Constitution, as administered by us. If
we now verify this assertion, we prove that
they were in truth and in fact fighting for
their liberty. Anti instead of branding
their leaders with the dishonoring name of
traitors against a righteous and legal gov
ernment, we elevate them in history to the
rank of self-sacrificing patriots; consecrate
them to the admiration of the world, and
place them by the side of Washington,
Hampden, anti Sydney. No. Let us leave
them to the infamy they deserve. Punish
them as they should be punished, according
to law, and take upon ourselves no share of
the odium which they should benr alone.
It is a part of our public history, which can
never be forgotten, that both houses of Con
gress, in July, 1861, declared in the form of
a solemn resolution, that the war was, and
and should be carried on, for no purpose of
subjugation, but solely to enforce the Con
stitution and laws, and that when this was
yielded by the parties in rebellion the con
test should cease, with the constitutional
rights of the States, of individuals, unim
paired.
This resolution was adopted, and sent
forth to the world, unanimously, by the
Senate, and with only two dissenting voices
by the House. It was accepted by the
friends of the Union in the South as well as
In the North, as expressing honestly and
truly the object of the war. On the faith of
it many thousands of persons in both see
dons gave their lives and their fortunes to
the valise. To repudiate it now, by refusing
to the States, and to the individuals within
them, the rights which the Constitution and
laws of the Union would secure to them is
a brea.•it of our plighted honor, for which I
can imagine no excuse, and to whieh I elm
not voluntarily become a party.
The ev Is which spring from the unsettled
state of our Government, will 110 acknow
ledged by till. Commercial intercourse is
impeded, capital is in constant peril, tallithc
securities fluctuate in value, peace itself is
not secure, and the sense of moral and
political duty is impaired. To avert these
calamities front our country. it is impera
tively required that we should immediately
decide upon some course of administration
W hich can be steadfastly adhered to.
I ant thoroughly convinced that any set
tlement, or compromise, or plan of action
which is inconsistent with the principles of
the Constitution will not only be unavailing
but mischievous, that it will but multiply
the present evils instead of removing them.
Thu Constitution in its whole integrity and
vigor throughout the length and breadth of
the land is the best of all vain promises.
. Besides our duty does not in my Judgment
leave us a choice between that and any
other. I believe that it contains the remedy
that is so much needed, anti that if the Co
ordinate branches all() diovernment would
unite upon its provisions, they would be
found broad enough and strung enough to
sustain, iu time of peace, the nation which
they bore safely through the ordeal of a
protracted civil war. Among the most
sacred guarantees of that instrument are
those which declare that " Each State shall
have, at least, one representative," and that
" no State, without its consent, shall be de
prived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."
Each llouse Is made the ' judge of the Wee
dons, returns, anti qualifications of its own
members ! " and may "with the concur:)nm)
of two.thirds expel a 11101111)er." Thus, its
heretofore urged, In the admission of Sena
tors and Representatives front any and all
the States, there can be no Just grounds of
apprehension that persons who are disloyal
will be clothed with powers of legislation,
for this could not happen when the Consti
tution and the laws are enforced by a vlgi
, lant and faithful Congress. When a Sena
tor or representative presents his certificate
of election, he may 11 I. once he admittou or
rejected; or should there be any questimi
• us to his eligibility, his credentials may be
referred for investigation to the appropriate
committee. If admitted to a seat, it inust
be upon evidence Hatimaictory to the Ileum)
of which he thus becomes a tnainber,
that he possesses the requisite consti
tutional anti legal qualifications. If re-
fused admissionas It member for want of
due allegiance to the Government, and re
turned to his constituents, they are admon
ished that none but persons :loyal to the
United States will be allowed a voice in the.
legislative councils of the nation, and Um
political power and moral Influence of Con
gress are thus effectively exerted In the
interests of loyalty to the Government and
fidelity to the Ultion," and is It not far
better that the work of restoration should
be accomplished by shnple compliance
with the plain requirements of the Consti
tution than by a recourse to measures
which in effect destroy the States and threat
en the subversion of the General Govern
ment. All that is necessary to settle this
simple but important question, without
further agitation or delay, is a Willingnomu
on the part of all to sustain the Constitution
and carry Its provisions into pruelical opera
tion. If to-morrow, either branch of Con
gress would declare that upon the presen
tation of their credentials, members con
stitutionally elected and loyal to the gen
eral Government, would be admitted to
seats In Congress, while till others would
be excluded, and their places remain vacant
until the selection by the people of loyal,
qualified persons, and if at the same time
assurance weregiven that this policy would
be continued until all the States were repre
sented in Congress, it would send a thrill of
joy throughout the entire land, as indicating
tho inauguration of a system which must
speedily bring tranquillity to the public
mind.
While we are legislating upon subjects
which are of great hnportance to the whole
people, and which must affect all parts of
the country, not only (luring the life of the
present generation, but liar ages to come, we
should remember that all men are entitled
at least ton lion ring in the councils which de
cide upon the destiny of themselves and their
children. At present ten States aro denied
representation, nod when the Fortieth Con
gress assembles on the fourth day of the
present month, sixteen States will be with
out a voice la the 'louse of Representatives.
This grave fact, with the important ques
tions before us, should induce us to pause
in a career of legislation which, looking
solely to the attainment of political ends,
fails to consider the rights It transgresses,
the law which it violates, or the Constitution
Which it imperils.
ANDREW JOHNSON
WASIIIIVOTON, March 2, 18117.
Impeachment Report
The Committee on the Judiciary of the
House charged with an exatninatlon of cer
tain allegations of high critnes and misde
meanors against the President of the United
States, made a report through Representa
tive Wilson, of lowa, on Saturday night.
The committee say, that soon after the
adoption of the House resolution, lion.
James M. Ashley communicated hi tho
committee such facts on he possessed In
support of him accusations, and the investi
gation has since been almost uninterrupt
edly proceeded with. A largo number of
witnesses have been examined, and many
documents collected, but the Investigation
covers such a wide field that the committee
have not finished their labors, and cannot
make a definite report. Sulficlont testi
mony, however, mays the committee, has
boon brought to its notice to Justify imd de
mand n further prosecution 01 the investi
gation.
Thu testimony taken will pass into L o
custody of the (lurk of the Douse, and can
go into the hands of such corn:tattoo as may
be charged with bringing this investigation
too close. The report is signed by Thomas
D. Morris, Chairman, F. E. Woodbridge,
Georg() P. Boutwoll, Thomas Williams,
Barton C. Cook and William Lawrence.
Repromentative A. J. Rogers presented a
minority report; says ho has carefully ox
atnined the testimony, and Ilnds not ono
particle of evidence to sustain any of (ho
charges made. Most of the testimony taken
has been of a secondary chgracter, and
would not be admitted in at court of Jostle°.
Ile does not see why the committee should
hold back the testimony and keep the
country longer in a state of excitement,
when the and must boa complete vindica
tion of the President, ifJustico be done by
the committee.
The Womhinigton County Hoinieldem.•
Robert Folxer Convicted of Murder In
the First Degree
The trial ofFolger, indicted for the murder
of Robert Dinsmore, of Washington county,
on the night of the 14th of December last
was commenced in the Court of Oyer and
Tertniner of Washington county, last week,
and the case was given to the jury on Sem ,
day night. The murder, it will be remem
bered, was committed in December last.
Mr. Dinsmore was a farmer, and resides
about four miles from Washington. On the
night of the murder two men called at Mr.
Dinsmore's house, and asked to see him ?
When he made his appearance at the door
he was immediately seized and murdered.
loolger was arrested the day,following the
murder, and after his incarceration in jail
made a confession in which he acknow
ledged his guilt, and implicated Win. Mont
gomery, sou of Hon. Wm, Montgomery, one
of the leading members of the Washington
county bar, as an acwmplice. Montgomery
was arrested some time afterwards in West
Virginia,
loolger was first placed on trial, and, as
stated above, the case was submitted to the
jury on Saturday night. Montgomery's
trial commenced yesterday morning, anti
Folger will be called as a witaess by the
prosecution.
The Jury in Folget's case agreed upon a
verdict at half-past six o'clock on Saturday
evening, finding him " guilty of murder in
the first degree." When the verdict was
read to the prisoner ho maintained the
greatest composure. He was remanded for
sentence.
Mrs. E. R. Hopkins, the wife of a respect
able mechanic in iiiabmond, Va., eloped
with a roan named Robert J, op
Wednesday lastt