Newspaper Page Text
ERROR CEASES TO BE DANGEROUS WHEN REASON IS LEFT FREE TO COMBAT IT.”—Jefferson.
VOLUME XIX.
ATLANTA, GA., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13,1867.
NUMBER 11.
IDtthty Jntelligfttffr.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA,
Wodneaday, March 13, 1860.
The ■••ue Before (be Southern People—
The Conquerors and the Conquered.
The reader will find in this morning’s issue of
the IsTEi-LiOKSCen, two communications ad
dressed to it over the signatures, respectively, of
“ Georgian," and” Vindicator.” These com
munications have laid npon our table for over a
week, in view of the fact that we deemed it im
politic, at the time of their reception, to agitate the
question which they discuss, for the simple but
important reason, that, in regard to the “Sherman
Military hill,” no finality had been reached, and
we did not approve of any movement on the
part of our people which might prejudice the
President’s anticipated veto of that bill when
it should reach Congress. That finality has now
been reached ; all uncertainty has been removed ;
the Ml has become a late ; and as an issue is now
before the people of our State we no longer
withhold the views of our correspondents
“Georgian” and “ViNDirAToii”—both of whom
we know to be patriotic gentlemen, of great
moral worth, “ native and to the manor born,”
and who when “grim visaged war” was desola
ting their own “sunny land” stood gallantly up
in its defense. It is right that such men should
be heard, and we only discharge a solemn duty
imposed upon the press, at this important crisis
of affairs in the South when we give to their
views space in the columns of this journal. It
is not our intention to comment upon the views
of either of these correspondents. We have
other duties to discharge to the people of our
good old commonwealth, which now imperative
ly demand our attention.
The Nonnan conquest of the Saxons was not
more complete than lias been the conquest of
the South by the North. As in that instance
terms were dictated by the conqueror, so it is in
the present. It is nowhere written in history
that the brave Saxons who yielded to, or accept
ed the terms imposed upon them by their Nor
man conquerors, degraded themselves in so do
ing. The “chroniclers of the times” in that age
tell a different tale, and history, while it has
saved I lie memory of that brave and gallant peo
ple from any such reproach, records, “as with a
pen ol iron and the point a diamond” the unjust
exactions and oppressions of their Norman mas
ters ; and history is now only repeating it
self. Let the people of the South profit by this
historic example ! Let them submit patiently,
manfully, heroically, to the terms imposed upon
them ! Resistance would he worse than tolly ; it
would be madness.
The issue before our people now is not
whether the nevro shall have the right of suf
frage extended to him or not. That question
lias been, and we apprehend for all future time,
irrevocably determined—determiued by “the pow
ers that lie,” and there is no power in the South
by which the stern decree may be revoked.—
Within the space of two day's following the cn-
nctinen'. of the “Military bill,” that right was ex
ercised at a city election in the “Old Dominion.”
and will be in the once “Empire State of the
South,” despite its repugnance to the race in the
South which has hitherto maintained this to be
a white man’s government, but who have now
no power to resist the decree that establishes a
contrary rule. Our people must be taught, must
learn, to receive this infiiction of their rulers as
a fixed fact, and govern themselves accordingly’.
In submitting to it, patiently enduring it, they
will act wisely. Under the operations ot the
“Military hill,” in every other respect too, they
will act wisely Jo place no obstacles, by any
coarse of conduct, in the way of those national
authorities who will soon be appointed to take
military control of the State. These ndnionitions
may not tic necessary, and we trust they are not,
liut no harm can accrue is their being ofiered.
It is the policy’ of organized secret associa
tion in the South to goad and provoke the peo
ple into imprudent expressions and actions. We
caution our people to steadily’ resist such influ
ences. Tlie “provisional government” under
which we now live, and even when it shall be
presided over and directed by military power
will, we teel confident, protect the lives and the
property ol the citizen. We have no tears to
the contrary. The liberty of pursuing aM in
dustrial pursuits we feel confident will not be in
terfered with, whatever interference there may be
with what have heretofore been deemed political
privileges. For a time we can dispense with the
latter, and ought cheerfully to do so, for the for
mer, in the present destitute condition ot our peo
ple geuerally.demands the most energetic pursuit.
In many sections of our State, famine almost
threatens tlie poor, and who are they, save a few,
that may be called rich? Commerce and trade
languishes; manufacturing interests are suffer
ing; financial ruin stares most men in the tuee;
and general depression is the consequence, affect
ing that energy oucc so characteristic of our peo
ple. We must resist these influences and go to
work. We must quit politics and better ouvfor-
tanes. In this lies the preservation of our peo
ple from political persecutions they dread, and
the sure recovery ot at least a share of their for
mer prosperity. It was so with the Saxons who
bore the Normau yoke so heroically that restora
tion of political rights and participation in the
government followed. And so will it be with
the South, if our people be wise.
The political shadow which now casts a gloom
over tlie South should not produce the despon
dency which it is apparent exists throughout our
State, and, we apprehend, throughout tlie South
ern Stales. Wc caution our people not to yield
to a feeling which will paralyze, to a great ex
tent. their energy and industry in the conduct of
their private affairs. Let them be cheerful under
their disabilities, and the thadotc will sum pass
away!
IdlrnfM and Vagrancy.
The Columbus St/n rf- Timet, noticing the
uiany idlers and vagrants about the towns and
villages, sensibly says: “There is work for all
[comirsicATxn.r | from the polls, and confiscation ot their property ?
Governor Brown’i Letter. Regard to those disqualified bv the amendment
It is impossible for the writer to repress an c-x- 3bou , d induce tbeir f rien ds to vote for that
pression of the sincere pleasure occasioned by a j ainendment . i t j s f. tr belter that they should
perusal of the recent letter of Governor Brown. suffcr even „ p t . rma „ ent disqualification than be
This distinguished citizeu lias been honored with
many high trusts by the people of Georgia. In
the discharge of the duties of his eventful life, he
has not shrunk from assuming grave responsibil
ities. The publication of this letter is the bold
est, bravest act he has yet performed. It 1- a
deed of Roman virtue. lie advises the people of
Gt >rgia to a course which, if adopted, ’loses
against him the door to political prefern ni.—
The letter in question is so clear in its reasoning,
so manly in its utterance, so prudent in its coun
sel, so unselfish in its purpose, that, coming trom
such a source, it must exert a prodigious influ
ence upon the public inind.
A large number ot the people of Georgia have,
for a long time, been satisfied that it would be
wise for the South to adopt the Constitutional
Amendment, as the least of inevitable evils.—
They have hesitated only from doubts as to its
being a finality. These doubts are removed by
the recent action of Congress.
This statement in regard to public opinion in
Georgia, is not made hastily, but altera large op
portunity of ascertaining the sentiments of those
who do not care to give public utterance to them
No reference is here made to those who are called
“ par excellence” loyal men, and who (agreeing in
the main with tlie extreme Radicals,) are opposed
to the amendment, but to our own native, quiet
and true citizens. Tlie letter of Governor Brown,
while it may, from some quarters, provoke severe
censure, will elsewhere meet a response which
will, perhaps,surprise him. All that was necessary
was for some leading man of undoubted fidelity to
the South, to advise publicly "the adoptiou of the
amendment, as a painful but necessary alterna
tive. This Governor Brown has done, boldly,
manfully, unselfishly. The result is inevitable.
It only remains to lie seen if the State will act
with sufficient celerity.
It is desirable that two points should be clearly
understood by the people, in connection with
this most urgent, nay, vital subject.
The adoption of the amendment by the South
does not uflect the question of negro suffrage,
except in a favorable manner. That is otherwise
settled. The negro will vote. No power in the
South can prevent it. It is a detestable necessi
ty ; but none tlie less a necessity because it is de
testable. By the bald action ot Congress, every
male negro twenty-one years old will vote. By
the adoption ot the amendment, our status as a
State is restored, and limitation^ and modifica
tions of tlie rights of suffrage will be in our pow
er, except making a distinction as to race.
The most odious feature ot this amendment is
its excluding from office all those who, before
the war, took the oatli to maintain tlie Constitu
tion of tlie United States, and afterwards en
gaged in tlie rebellion. Tins would exclude, not
only those who held political office, but also,
those who now hold civil office, who took tlie
oath referred to before tlie war and afterwards
violated it. So far as tlie first class is concerned,
the loss is not so material; as while we should
lose, temporarily, tlie services of some of our
best men, we should also get rid of all the mere
politicians—that swarm of hungry flies which
has settled on the body politic, and which no
brush has been, heretofore, able to drive away.
There are many able men among our lawyers,
physicians, clergymen, farmers, and planters, who
have heretofore lived in retirement, who have
never taken the oath of office, who do not come
within the disqualifying clause, and from whom
we can select tit incumbents of office.
But the loss of the second class would serious
ly disturb our affairs—judges and yfagistrates are
not made in a day. But, Governor Brown ex
presses his belief that this difficulty may be met
by a proper appeal to Congress. It is quite cer
tain Hint he would not have expressed this be
lief in a tnannei so public, without good reasons
for it. Congress has made a provision, by which
those who come within the disqualifying clause
may hold office—by a two-thirds vote. The
whole disqualification is so monstrous that it
must be temporary. When a calmer period of
public affairs occurs, it must be removed.
It is objected tliat it is too humiliating by our
owu act to vote this disqualification. It is hu
miliating, but not more so than other acts which
we have done. Our real humiliation began be
fore the surrender, in the desertions, accepted ex
emptions, evasions of active service, and specu
lations which left us but 100,000 men in tlie field
out of more than 600,000 men capable of bearing
arms. When, in all history, was it ever before
proven, that more than a half million of men,
scattered over an immense space, and determin
ed to be free, have been conquered, even by
overwhelming nil libers and resources? From
that point of shame there was a facilis descensus
It was an easy slide to Avernus. Hence, we
promptly swore to obey tlie powers we had been
fighting. When commanded, we abolished slave
ry, made the negro our equal before the law, re
pudiated the State war debt, aud more than this,
delegates lrom all the Southern States, in the
Philadelphia Convention, assumed, voluntarily,
not by command, as a sacred trust, their share in
the maintenance of the w idows and orphans ot
Federal soldiers who had fallen while fighting
us. The record is terribly against us. It is too
late to talk of humiliation, we must simply
do tli e best that we can.
It is said that it will be unmanly and unkind
to shut out from office those who were placed by
us in high military and civil position during the
war. It is indeed painful. But we must con
sider all classes ot our people. Our sentiments
must not blind our judgments. And here, in
order to prevent misconstruction, it is proper i<>
remark, that tlie writer bore arms up to tlie sur
render. and therefore cannot be suspected of
mercenary motives in the views which he is now
expressing. Let us again reflect upon that which
we have already done under the same constraint
which now presses us. Shall we give greater
consideration to those who will be disqualified by
the amendment than we gave to the widows and
pluDged with the mass ot the people, the noble
women and fatherless children of Georgia, in a
common and irretrievable ruin.
The prompt adoption ot the amendment by
the people of the South, while it would be humili
ating, would, nevertheless, be a graud coup d'etat.
It would take the wind out of tlie sails of the
, extreme radicals who expect us to reject it, that
| they may coufi cate and banish. It would proba-
I bly save this whole country’ from convulsion and
: financial ruin. It would relieve the President
| when no other relief offers. It would create a
THE VETO OF THE MILITARY BILL.!military punishment, will be within the range 1 invasion the civil courts are actually closed, and I they can be relieved from martial law.—
— : of choice. Third, the sentence of a commission j it is impossible to administer justice according to Another Congress must first approve the Con-
MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT. |' s not to be executed without approval by the j law, then on the the ater of military operations stitution made iu conformity with the will
Pjlril tit O VI rial* 1 f* it n li 1 ■ It nal.. A m J m mm M K/ima ... . M m ...11 J 1 n * l. A 1 — — ft I rtf ikin f^rtn ai v% .4 mm 1ft d .. M1 m mm At. . ft . .
To the House of Representatives :
i commander, if it affects life or liberty, and a sen- ; where war really prevails, there is a necessity to
■ teuce of death must be approved by the Presi- j furnish a substitute for tlie civil authority thus
I have examined the bill to provide for the ^ en, ‘ This applies to cases in which there has j overthrown, to preserve thfc safety of the army
more efficient government of tlie rebel States l>ee , n a ,1- ial and sentence. I take it to be clear, ; and society, and as no power is left but the mili-
witli the care and anxiety which its transcendent ' unt * er the bill, that the military commander may j tia, it is alone to govern by martial rule until
importance is calculated to awaken. 1 am unu- ! J :omlcn ? 1 ? to death without even the form of trial j laws can have their free course. I now quote
I ble to give it mv assent lor reasons so grave that * & military commission; so that the life of the
I hope a statement ot Hunt may have some in- ! conde mned may depend on the will of two men
fluence on the minds of''be patriotic and en- < ! ns ^ ea d of one. It is plain that the authority
lightened with whom the decision must rest , re S«yen to the military officer amounts to ab-
The bill places all the people of the ten States soI . nte despotism. But to make it still more un-
therein named under the altsolute domination of ^durable, the bill provides that it may be dele-
military rulers, and the preamble undertakes to i gate . to 5 s subordinates as he chooses to
“ • J - - - 1 appoint, for it declares he shall punish or cause
to be punished. Such
give tlie reasons upon which it is justified. It
declares that there exists iu those States no legal
State governments and adequate protection to
life or property, and asserts the necessity of en
forcing peace and good order within their limits.
minority, by our delegation in Congress, so strong j It is true as a matter of fact, it is not denied
who are willing to labor. The cry among the orphans who had invested their all in State secu
owners of farms, is scarcity of labor. In many ! rities and banks,and who were literally ruined by .
instances, the negro has Jeit for other sections, j our repudiation of the war debt? In the one
creating a large vacuum for labor. The formers ! case, it would be simply an exclusion from office,
have teams and provisions, or the means to sup- j Iu ihe other, it was a deprivation of bread, and
ply them. While this is the case, there need be ! of means of education, iu many instances, to the
very little suffering among the poor of our j children of our soldiers who fell in battle. In
section. ! the one case, it would be, in a sense, a painful
In tlie entire South there is work for all who j measure to the strong. In the other, it was a
will lalur. and at remunerating prices. Dispo- j blow inflicted upon women and children. In
sition is all that is wanted. Male and female the one case, the evil would be probably corrigi-
must take hold of the plow and ho until more blc. In the other, it was hopelessly incorrigible,
congenial employment presents itself. This is Every high minded man, affected by this dis-
no time to lie tenacious about the kind of labor. ‘ qualification, will re-echo the noble sentiment ot
The onlv question should be—does it give sup- i Governor Brown, and say to the people: “ Let
port ? | no delicacy towards us prevent a measure which
Every day, tnay be found on our streets. , is tor the creates! good of the greatest number,
youths from eight to tourtcen years of age, j Governor Brown tells us (and the judgments of
l that no measure hostile to us could be passed
| over the President’s veto. It would give such
confidence iu the security of the South that both
capital and labor would flow into it Iu short,
it would cut this knot which no dexterity can
untie. t
Let us, then, listen to the wise counsels of
Governor Brown. Let the people meet at once.
Let them demand the immediate assemblage of
the Legislature, a call of a convention, and the
adoption of the required Constitution. The
State of Georgia lias not nine lives, like a cat,
that she should continue longer this experiment
of suicide. Georgian.
[COMMUNICATED.]
Ex-Governor Brown’s letter has sounded the
tocsin of alarm. It is time, indeed, to inquire
whither we arc drifting. We are not to ask,
whether we have not already done enough ; but
whether we cannot still do more. The happi
ness of millions awaits our action, and if we
choose to subside into a selfish untractabieness
and sceptical indifference to the issues of the
present, we do but stultify ourselves in the eyes
of nations, and heap upon the heads of our pos
terity inconceivable calamity and wrong.
Why remain longer indifferent to the momen
tous issues that threaten to destroy us as a peo
pie? Can we do nothing? Are we iucapable
of averting the doom which radical hate and re
venge would impose? This is not the time for
inaction—let us be up, aud by heroic, though
painful acquiescence iu events beyond our con
trol, endeavor to mitigate the evils which now
encumber us.
The struggle for Confederate independence has
ended—the victory is lost—and let us admit the
fact at once. Disguise it as we may, we are to
day a subjugated people. The results of our de
feats have been accepted—we have sheathed our
swords forever, and promised obedience to the
laws aud Constitution of the United States.—
Under what plea, then, do we, the conquered, die
tate to the conquerors ?
Ought we to accept the constitutional amend
ment ? In its acceptance there is no question of
principle or honor whatever. We bound our
selves to stand by our gallant leaders, military and
political, so long as there was life iu the land;
but is the obligation to last for all eternity ? Are
we to sacrifice all we have, see the last vestige
of property torn from us, witness the poverty
and destitution of our wives and children, and
bring upon the country the horrors of military
rule, anarchy and ruin, simply because it sounds
honorable to say that we stood to the last to our
leaders ? Should we jeopardize the very salva
tion of us all, to secure political freedom to a
mere fraction of our people ? Let honor alone,
for no honor is involved. This is not what we
have to deal with now. It is the stern logic of
events that concern us, and in which, we perceive
the steady and impressible hand of a conqueror
mouldiugthem at will.
Was it honorable to nullify our secession or
dinances, blessed as they were by the prayers of
our holiest men, aud sanctified by the blood and
death of five hundred thousand heroes ? Was
it honorable to repudiate a debt created by the
voluntary sacrifice of a people, and to the pay
ment of which the honor of the States was sol
emnly pledged ? Was it honorable to declare,
by legislative enactment and organic change in
our State Constitution, emancipation of our
slaves? Was it honorable in face of the five
years revengeful hate and bitter denuncia
tions of the Northern people, to once more wel
come them as friends? We have but one an
swer to make. We yielded to the inexorable
law of expediency. With scarcely a murmm,
we branded ourselves as rebels—repudiated our
just obligations—abolished our institutions, and
accepted, because impotent to avoid it the re
sults of subjugation aud defeat.
And ,wliy was all this done ? To save us, we
hoped, from degradation, spoliation and ruin.—
We have not yet paid the full expiation of our
transgression, blit we honestly believe the con
stitutional amendment will close the chapter of
our trials. Come, let the voice of the people be
heard, through its meetings, in every county in
the State, and you, Mr. Editor, whose aim and
duty should be to smooth the rugged path of
misfortune for your unhappy countrymen, by
timely suggestion and advice, let us hear you ap
peal for still further sacrifice, yes, sacrifice, which
may lead to ultimate peace, and a restoration of
joy to our saddened land. “Vindicator.”
State Seenrlties.
The Chronicle d> Sentinel throws out a word
of timely caution in the following article:
We are sorry to see tuat a sort of panic has
seized upon our people in relation to the value
of State securities. The idea seems to be that,
under the operations of the Sherman Bill all
State securities will become valueless, because of
the atwdition of the State governments. This
we think an unwise conclusion. The territorial
condition of the States cannot continue very long,
and in tlie interim Congress will be compelled,
trom the sheer force of circumstances, to recog-
uizethe existing State governments, to a certain
extent at least. The power to levy and raise
taxes for the support of the government, will
most certainly be allowed the Slates, and all acts
of the lie facto Governments not in derogation
ot the power of the Federal Government, will be
tolerated and recognized. Any other coarse
would speedily bring about such a condition of
anarchy as would startle even the Radical ma
jority.
There is no reason—there can be lound none
—in the Sherman Bill which should cause any
very great de#ine in State or railway securities.
We advise those who have such to withhold them
from the market, at least for the present The
prices of such securities must go up. It would
be folly to sacrifice them at present prices. The
only persons who can be benefitted by the pres
ent condition of things are capitalists and brokers.
Withhold from them the chance of purchasing
at the present panic rates, and in a few weeks
prices will regain their foimer level.
Hanging in New York.—The New York
Courier is opposed to hanging as a punishment
for murder. It says of the recent execution of
the wife-murderer, Wagner:
Another murderer has been put out ot the
world, that his hanging may be the seed for more
■;igcd in the disgraceful ending ot beggiug, all thinking men will accord with him] that if j niurders. They hanged George Wagner, on
all of whom, with their parents, might be use- we refuse to adopt the amendment we shall be ' Friday last, at sixteen minutes alter nine. After
tally employed at larm work, earning a comfort- ground down bv military rule; that those ot us J having gone through the hands of Father Dur-
Me subsistence, if they possessed a dispo^on to who took part in the region will not only be ■ ^julf Sea cTifd ^ffraS'and^m^Xf
lat*or. I>i*t so long as such persons can procure excluded trom office, but also from the polls, * ,)j‘ congregation ot the huthful, he was sent
a scanty subsistence, and rags to hide their na- ' only negroes and “ loyal” men voting ; and that j to join his = fellow-saints in heaven. And why
kedness, by Ifgffing, they will not work. This , extensive confiscation of rebel property will lol-1 ■ Had Iraremained, here after his conversion
class are on the increase. Their increase resuits low. Which would be the greater evil to the a c^tk^
from the indiscriminate distribution of public class under consideration, exclusion from office death. “Else wherefore live we in a Christian
charities.” alone, or not only exclusion from office bat also land ?°
that the States in question have each ot them an
actual government, with all the powers, execu
tive, judicial and legislatire, which properly be
long to a free State. They are organized like
the other States ot the Unicn, and like them they
make, administer and excrete the laws which
concern their domestic uSgrrs. An existing de
facto government, exercising such functions as
these, is itself the law of States upon all matters
within its jurisdiction. To pronounce the su
preme law-making power of an established State
illegal, is to say that law itself is unlawful The
provisions which these governments have made
lor the preservation of order, the suppression ot
crime, and the redress of private injuries, are in
substance aud principle the same as those which
prevail in tlie Northern Slates and in other civ
ilized countries. They certainly have not succeed
ed in preventing the commission of all crime, nor
has this beenaccomplisbed anywhere in tlie world.
There, as well as elsewhere, offenders sometimes
escape for want of vigorous prosecution, aud oc
casionally, perhaps, by the inefficiency of courts
or the prejudice of jurors. It is undoubtedly
true that these evils have much increased and ag
gravated both in the North and South by the de
moralizing influence of civil war, and by the ran
corous passions which the contest has engender
ed ; but that these people are maintaining local
governments for themselves, which habitually
defeat the object of all governments, and ren
der their own lives and property insecure, is in
itself utterly improbable; and the argument ot
the bill to that effect is not supported by any evi
dence which has coiiic to my knowledge. All
the information I have on the subject convinces
me that the mass of the Southern people, and
those who control their public acts, while they en
tertain diverse opinions on questions of Federal
policy, are completely united in the effort to re
organize their society on the basis of peace, and
restore mutual prosperity as rapidly and as com
pletely as their circumstances will permit. Tlie
bill, however, would seem to show upon its lace
that the establishment of peace and good order is
not its real object. The fifth section declares that
all tlie preceding sections shall cease to operate in
any State where certain events have happened.
These are: 1st The selection of delegates to a
State convention by election, at which negroes
shall be allowed to vole. 2d. Tlie formation of
a State constitution by tlie convention so chosen.
3d, The insertion into the State constitution of a
provision which will secure the right ot voting at
all elections to Degrees and such while men as
will not be disfranchised for rebellion or felonies.
4th. The submission of the constitution for rati
fication to negroes and white men not disfran
chised and its actual ratification by the vote. oth.
The submission of the State Constitution to
Congress for examination and actual approval ot
it by that body. 6lh. The adoptiou of a certain
amendment to the Federal. Constitution by a
vote of the Legislature elected under the new
Constitution. 7th. The adoption of said amend
ment by a sufficient number, of other States to
make it a part ot the Constitution ol the United
States. All these conditions must be fulfilled
before tlie people of any of these States can be
relieved from bondage and military domain, but
when they are fulfilled then the pains aud penal
ties of the bill are to cease, no matter whether
there be peace and order or not, without refer
ence to tlie security of life and properly. The
excuse given for the bill, in the preamble, is ad
mitted by the bill itself not to be real. The mil
itary rule which it establishes is plainly to be
used not for any purpose of order and for the
prevention of crime but solely as a means of
coercing the people into the adoption of meas
ures to which it is known they are opposed, and
upon which they have an undeniable right to ex
ercise their own judgment. I submit to Congress
whether this measure is not in its whole scope
and object, without precedent and without au
thority; in palpable conflict with the plainest
provisions ot the Constitution, and utterly de
structive to those great principles of liberty and
humanity for which our ancestors on both sides
ot tlie Atlantic shed so much blood aud expend
ed so much treasure.
The ten States named in the bill are divided into
five districts. For each district, an officer of tlie
arm}’ not below the rank of Brigadier General is
to be appointed to rule over the people, aud he
is to be supported by efficient military force to
enable him to perform his duties. Thatauthori-
ty, as defined by the 2d section of Hie bill, is to
protect all persons in their rights of person and
property, to suppress disorder and violence, and
to punish or cause to be punished, all disturbers
of the public peace, or criminals. The power
thus given to tlie commaudiug officer,over all the
people of each State, is that of au absolute mon
arch ; his mere will is to take the place of all
law; the law of the States is only a rule applica
ble to the subject placed under his control, and
that is completely displaced by the clause which
declares that all interference o! the State authority
is to be null aud void. He, alone is permitted to
determine what are the rights of person aud pro
perty. He only protects them in such a way as
in liis discretion may seem proper, and places at
Ills tree disposal all the lands and goods in his
district He may distribute them without let or
hindrance to whom he 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 recorded in history, or he can reserve the
privilege of rating upon the impulse of his pri
vate passions in each case that arises; he is
bound by no rules of evidence. There is, in
deed, no provision by which he is authorized or
required to take evidence at all. Anything is a
crime which he chooses to call so, and ail per
sons are condemned whom he pronounces guilty.
He is not bound to make any report or keep any
record of his proceedings. He may arrest liis
victim wherever he may find him without war
rant, accusation or proof ol probable cause. If he
gives him a trial before he inflicts the punish
ment, he gives ot his grace and mercy, not
because he is commanded so to do.
To a casual reader of tbe bill it might seem
that some kind of a trial was secured to per
sons accused of crime, but sucu is not the case.
The officer may allow the local civil tribunals
to try offenders, but of course this does not re
quire that he shall do so. If any State or Fede
ral court presumes to exercise its legal jurisdic
tion by the trial ot a malefactor without his spe
cial permission, be can break-it up and punish
the judges aud jurors as being themselves male
factors. He can save his friends from justice
and despoil his enemies contrary to justice. It
is also provided that he shall have power to or
ganize military commissions or tribunals, but
this power is not commanded to do it; it is
merely permissive, and is to be used only where,
in his judgment, it may be necessary lor the trial
of offenders. Even if the sentence of a commis
sion were made a prerequisite to the punish
ment of a party, it would be scarcely the slight
est responsibility upon the officer, who has au
thority to organize it as he pleases, to prescribe
its mode of proceedings, appoint its members
from bis own subordinates and revise all its de
cisions. Instead of mitigating the harshness of
his single rale, such a tribunal would be used
much more probably to divide the responsibility
of making it more cruel or unjust Several pro
visions, dictated by the humanity of Congress,
have been inserted in the bill apparently to re
strain the power of the commanding officer, but
it seems to me that they are of no avail for that
purpose. The fourth section provides, first, that
trial shall not be unnecessarily delayed, but, I
think, I have shown that the power is given to
punish without trial, and if so, this provision is
practically inoperative. Gruel or unusal pun
ishments are not be inflicted, but who is to de
cide what is cruel or unusual? The words
have acquired a legal meaning by long
use in the courts. Can it be expected that
military officers will understand it and fol
low a rule in language so purely technical,
and not pertaining in the least degree to their
profession; if not, then such officer may define
cruelty according to his own temper, and if not
usual, he will make it usual. Corporeal punish
ment, the gag, and the ball and chain, and other
almost insupportable forms of torture, invented
a power has not been
wielded by the monarch in England for more
than five hundred years. In all that time no
people who spoke the English tongue have borne
such servitude. It reduces the whole popula
tion 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 abso
lute over bis slaves as this bill gives to military
officers over both white and colored persons.
It may be answered to this that officers of the
army are too magnanimous, just and humane to
oppress and trample upon a subjugated people.
I do not doubt that army officers are as well en
titled to this confidence as any other class of
men, but the history of the world has been writ
ten in vain if it does not teach us that unre
strained authority can never be safely trusted in
human hands. It is almost sure to be more or
less abused under any circumstances; and it has
always resulted in gross tyranny where rulers
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 fully
tried iu Hungary and Poland; and tbe suffering
endured by those people roused the sympathies
of tlie entire world. It was tried in Ireland, and
although at first tempered by principles of Eng
lish law, it gave birth to cruellies so atrocious
that they are never recounted without just
indignation. The French Constitution armed its
deputies with this power, and sent them to the
Southern departments of the Republic. The mas
sacres, the murders, and other atrocities which
they coinmitte I, show what the passions of the
ablest men in tlie most civilized society will at
tempt to do, when wholly unrestrained by law.
The men ot our race, iu every age, have strug
gled to tie up the hands of their governments,
and keep them within the law because their
own experience of all mankind taught them that
rulers could not be relied on to concede those
rights which they were not legally bound to re
spect. The head ot a great empire has some
times governed with a mild and paternal sway;
but kindness ot an irresponsible power never
yields what law does uot extort. Between such
a master, and people subjugated to his domina
tion, there can be Dotbing but enmity. He pun-
lislies them if they resist his authority, and if
they submit to it be hates them lor their servility.
I come now to a question, it possible, still more
important.
Have we the power to establish and carry into
execution a measure like this? I answer, cer
tainly not, if we derive our authority from the
Constitution, and if we are bound by the limita
tions which it imposes, this proposition is per
fectly clear, that no branch of the Federal Gov
ernment, executive, legislative or judicial, can
•have any j ust powers except those which it derives
through and exercises under the organic law of
the Union. Outside the Constitution we have no
legal authority more than private citizens, and
within it we have only so much as that instru
ment gives us. This broad principle limits all
our functions and applies to ail subjects. It pro
tects uot only the citizens of the United States
which are within the Union, but shields every
human being who comes or is brought under our
jurisdiction. We have no right to do in one
place, more than in another, that which the Con
stitution says we shall not do at all. If, there
fore, the Southern States were in truth out of tbe
Union we could not treat their people as the fun
damental law forbids. Some people assume that
the success of our arms, in crashing the opposi
tion which was made in some States to the exe
cution of Federal laws, reduced those States and
all their people, the innocent as well as the guilty,
to a condition of vassalage, and gave us a power
over them which the Constitution does not be
stow, or define, or limit. No fallacy can be more
transparent than'this. Our-victories subjected
the insurgents to legal obedience, not to ilieyoke
of arbitrary despotism. When an absolute sov
ereign reduces his rebellious subjects he may deal
with them according to his pleasure, because he
had that power before, but, when a limited mon
arch puts down a rebellion, be must govern ac
cording to law. If -an insurrection should take
place in one ol our States against the authority
of the State government, and end in the over
throw of those who planned it, would it take
away the rights of all the people of the counties
where it was engaged iu by a part or a majority
of the population ? Could they, for such a rea
son, be wholly outlawed and deprived of their
representation in the legislature. I have always
contended that the Government of the United
States was sovereign within its constitutional
sphere, that it executed its laws like the States
themselves, by employing its coercive powers di
rectly to individuals, and that it conld put down
insurrection with the same effect as a State.
One other opposite doctrine is the worst her
esy of those who advocate secession, and cannot
be agreed to without admitting that heresy to be
right. Iusurrection, rebellion and domestic vio
lence were anticipated when the government
was formed, aud the means of repelling and
suppressing them were wisely provided lor in
the Constitution, but it was not thought neces
sary that tlie States in which they might arise
should be expelled from the Union. Rebellions
which were invariably suppressed occurred prior
to that out of which these questions grew; but
tlie States continued to exist and the Union re
mained unbroken. In Massachusetts, in Penn
sylvania, in Rhode Island, and in New York, at
different periods of our. history, violent and arm
ed opposition to the United States was carried
on, but the relations of those States witli tbe
Federal Government were not supposed to be
interrupted or changed after the rebellions por
tion ol the population were defeated and put
down. It is true that in these earlier cases there
was no formal expression of a determination to
withdraw from the Union; but it is also true
that in the Southern States the ordinances of se
cession were treated by all the friends of the
Union as mere nullities, and are now acknowl
edged to be so by the States themselves.
It we admit that they had any force or valid
ity, 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 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 time of
peace. There is not in any one of the States
brought under its operation either war or. in
surrections. The laws of the State and of the
Federal Government are in undisturbed and har
monious operation. The courts, State and Fed
eral, are open and in the foil exercise of tbeir
proper authority over every State comprising
the five military districts. Life, liberty and
property are secured by the State and Federal
laws, and the National Constitution is every
where obeyed. What, then, is the ground on
which this bill proceeds ?
The title of the bill announces that it is in
tended for the efficient government of these ten
States. It is recited, by way of preamble, that
no legal State governments nor adequate pro
tection for life or property exist in those States,
and that peace and good order should thus be
enforced. The first thing that arrests attention
upon these recitals, which prepare the way for
martial law, is this, that the only foundation up
on which martial law can exist under our form of
government, is not stated or so much as pre
tended. Actual war, foreign invasion, domestic
insurrection, none of these in effect, and none of
thestin fact, exist, and it is not recited that any
sort of war or insurrection is threatened.
Let ns pause to consider npon this question of
Constitutional law, and tbe power ot Congress
in the recent decision of tbe Supreme Court of
the United States in ex parte Milligan. I will
first quote from a majority of the court: “ Mar
tial law cannot arise from threatened inva
sion. The necessity must be actual and present,
the invasion real; such as to effectually close the
courts and depose the civil authorities.” We see
that martial law comes in only when actual war
closes courts and deposes civil authority, but this
bill, in time uf peace, makes martial law operate
as luough we were in actual war, and becomes
the cause, instead of the consequence of the ab
rogation ol civil authority. One more qualifi
cation. It follows, from what has been said on
this subject, that there are occasions when mar
tial law can be properly applied. If in foreign
; front the opinion of the minority ot tlie court,
delivered by Chief Justice Chase: “We by no
means assert that Congress can establish and ap
ply the laws of war where no war has been de
clared or exists Where peace exists the laws of
peace must prevail.” This is sufficiently explicit.
Peace exists in all Hie territor}’ to which this
bill applies. It asserts that after a certain time
of peace it sets aside the laws ot peace aud sub-
stitues the laws of war. The minority, concur
ring with the majority, declares that Congress
does not possess that power.
Again, and, if possible, more emphatically, the
Chief Justice, with remarkable clearness and
condensation, sums up the whole matter as tol
lows: There are, under the Constitution, three
kinds of military jurisdiction—one to be exer
cised both in peace and in war ; another to be
exercised in time of foreign war, without the
boundaries of the United States, or in time of
rebellion and civil war within ihe States of the
district occupied by rebels, treated as bellige
rents ; and a third to be exercised iu time of in
vasion or insurrection, without the limits of the
United States, or during rebellion within the
limits of, States maintaining their adhesion to
the National Government when public danger
requires its exercise. The first of these may be
called into jurisdiction and under military law
and is found in acts of Congress, prescribing the
rules and articles of war, or otherwise providing
for the government of the national forces. 2d,
It may be distinguished as a military govern
ment by superseding, as far as ntay be tleemed
expedient, the local law, and exercised by the
military commander under tlie direction of the
President, with the express or implied sanction
ot Congress. 3d. It may be denominated mar
tial law proper, and is called into action by Con
gress, or temporarily when the action of Con
gress cannot be united, and iu case of justifying
or excusing peril, by the President, iu times ol:
insurrection or invasion, of civil or foreign war
within the districts or localities where ordinary
law is no longer adequately secure for public
safety. It wiil be observed that, of the three
kinds of military jurisdiction which can be ex
ercised 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 Con
gress for the government of the national'
forces. That body of military law Las
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 pgrt of that sort of
military law, for that applies only to the soldier,
and not the citizen: while contra-wise, the mili
tary law, provided by this bill, applies only to
the citizen and not the soldier. I need Dot say
to the Representatives of the American peopie,
that their Constitution forbids the exercise of ju
dicial law in any way but one that is ordained
by the established courts. It is equally well
known that in all criminal cases a trial by jury
is made indispensable by the express words ol
that instrument. I will not enlarge on the in
estimable value of tlie right, thus secured to
every freeman, or speak of the danger to public
liberty in all parts of the country, which mu3t
ensue lrom a denial of it anywhere, or upon any
pretense. A very recent decision of the Supreme
Court hits traced the authority, vindicated the
dignity, and made known tlie value of this privi
lege so clearly, that nothing more is needed to
show to what extent a violation may be excused.
In time of war or public danger this may admit of
discussion, but we are providing now for a
lime of profound peace, when there is not an
armed soldier within our borders, except those
who are in tlie service of the Government. It is
in such a condition that an act of Congress is
proposed, which, if carried out, would deny a
trial by lawful courts aud juries, of nine millions
of American citizens, and to their posterity for
an indefinite period. It seems to be scarcely
possible that any one should seriously believe
this consistent with a Constitution which declares
in simple, plain and unambiguous language that
all persons shall have that right, and that no
person shall ever, in any case, be deprived of it.
The Constitution also forbids the arrest of citi
zens without judicial warrant, foundation or pro
bable cause. This bill authorizes arrest without
warrant at the pleasure of the military comman
der. The Constitution declares that no person
shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise
infamous crime, unless on presentment by a
rand jury. This bill holds any person, not a
soldier, answerable for all crimes and all charges,
without any presentment. Tlie Constitution de
clares 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 answerable in his person and property
to the will of one man, and his life to the will ot
two. Finally, the Constitution declares that the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not
be suspended unless when, ith case of rebellion
or invasion, the public safety may require it;
whereas, this bill declares martial law, which of
itself suspends this great writ, in time of peace,
and authorizes the military to make the arrest,
and gives the prisoner only one privilege, and
that is a trial without unnecessary delay. He
has no hope of release from custody, except the
hope, such as it is, of release by acquittal before
a military commission.
The United States 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 ot republi
can government in ten States, and puts tbe life,
property, liberty and honor of all tlie people in
each ot them under the domination of a single
person, clothed with authority ?
The Parliament ot Eugland, exercising the
omnipotence which it claimed,was accustomed to
pass bills of attainder, that is to say, it would
convict men of treason aDd other crimes by le
gislative enactment. The person accused had a
hearing, sometimes a patient and fair one, but
generally party prejudices prevailed instead ot
justice, and it often became necessary for Par
liament to acknowledge its error and reverse its
own action. The fathers of our country de
termined tiiat no such thing should occur here;
they withheld the power from Congress, and thus
forbade its exercise by that body, and they pro
vided in the Constitution that no State should
pass any bill of attainder. It is, therefore, im
possible for any person in tin's country to be con
stitutionally convicted or punished for any crime
on a legislative proceeding of any sort. Never
theless here is a bill of attainder against nine
millions of people. It is based u]>on au accusa
tion so vague as to be scarcely credible, and found
to be true upon no credible evidence. Not one
of the nine millions was heard in his own de
fense. The representatives of the doomed par
ties were excluded from all participation in the
trial. The convinction 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 not guilty, from
freemen to the condition of slaves. The pur
poses and objects of the bill, Hie general intent
which pervades it from beginning to end, is to
change the entire structure and character of the
State governments and to compel them, by force,
to the adoption of organic laws and regulations
which they are unwilling to adopt if left to them
selves.
The negroes have not asked for privileges of
voting. Tlie vast majority of them have no idea
ot what it means. This bill not only thrusts it
in their hands, but compels them, as well as the
whites, to use it in a particular way. If they do not
form a constitution with prescribed articles in it,
and afterwards electa Legislature which will act
upon certain measures in a prescribed way; nei
ther blacks nor whites can be relieved lrom tlie
slavery which this tjjll imposes on them. With
out pausiDg here to consider the policy or im
policy ot Africanizing the Southern part of our
territory, I would simply say, aud ask the
attention ot Congress to tiiat manifest, well-
known and universally acknowledged bit of con
stitutional law, which declares that the Federal
Government 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 negroes in
an arbitrary violation of this principle. This
bill imposes martial law at once, and its opera
tion will be begun so soon as the Generai aack
his troops can be placed. Tlie dread alternative
between its harsh rule, and compliance with the
terms of this measure, is not suspend. :!, nor are
the people afforded any time for ft ee delittcruiions.
The bill says to them, take martial law firs!, then
deliberate, and when they have done all that
this measure requires them to do, other condi
tions and contingencies over which they have
no control, yet remain to be fulfilled before
of this Congress, and must declare those States
entitled to representation in both Houses. The
whole question remains open and unsettled, and
must again occupy the attention of Congress,
aud, in the meantime, the agitation which now
prevails will continue to disturb all portions of
the people. The bill also denies the legality of
the governments of ten States which participated
in the rebellion. The amendment to the Fede
ral Constitution abolishing slavery forever within
the jurisdiction of the United States, practically
excludes them from the Union. If this assump
tion of the bill be correct, their concurrence can
not be considered as having been legally given,
and the important fact is made to appear that the
consent of three-fourths of the States, the requi
site number, has not been constitutionally ob
tained to the ratification of that amendment, thus
leaving tbe question of slavery, as it stood before
the amendment was officially declared to have
become a part of the Constitution; that the
measure proposed by this bill violates the Con
stitution in the particular mentioned, and in
many ways which, to enumerate, is too clear
to admit of tbe least doubt. It only re
mains to consider whether the injunctions
of tbe instrument ought to be obeyed or
not. I think they ought to be obeyecWor reasons
which I will proceed to give as briefly as possi
ble. In the first plaee, it is the only system ot
free government which we can hope to have as
a nation. When it ceases to be the rule of our
conduct, we may perhaps take our choice be
tween complete anarehy, or a consolidated mon
archy and a total dissolution of the Union; but
national liberty regulated by law will have pass
ed beyond our reach. It is the best form of gov
ernment the world ever saw. No other is or can
be so well adapted to the genius, habits or wants
of the American people, combining the strength
of the great empire with the unspeakable bless
ings ot local self-governments, having a central
power to defend the general interests, and recog
nizing the authority of the States as the guardi
ans ot industrial rights. It is the sheet-anchor of
our safety abroad and our peace at home, and
was ordained to form a more perfect Union, es
tablish justice, insure domestic tranquility, pro
mote the general welfare, provide lor the com
mon defense, and secure the blessings of liberty
to oursel ves and our posterity. These great ends
have been attained heretofore and will be again
by a faithful obedience to it; but they are certain
to be lost if we treat with disregard its sacred ob
ligations.
It was to punish the gross crime of defying
the Constitution, and to vindicate its supreme
authority; that we carried a bloody war of four
years’ duration. Shall we now acknowledge
that we sacrificed a million of lives, and expend
ed billions of treasure, to free a Constitution
which is not worthy of respect and preserva
tion ? Those who advocated the right of seces
sioD, alleged in their own justification that we
had no regard for law, and that their rights of
property aud liberty would not be safe under the
Constitution as administered by the United
States, and we now verify their assertion; we
prove that they were in truth and in fact fighting
for their liberty, and instead of branding their
leaders with the dishonoring name ot traitor,
against a righteous and legal government, we
elevate them in history as self-sacrificing
patriots; consecrate them to the admiration of
the world, and place them by the side of Wash
ington, Hampden and Sidney. No, let us leave
them to the infamy they deserve. Punish them
is they should be punished, according to law,
and take upon ourselves no share of the odium
which they should bear alone. It is a part of
our public history, which can never be forgot
ten, that both Houses of Congress, in July, 1861,
declared, in form of a solemn resolution, that war
was and should be carried on for no purpose of
subjugation, but solely to enforce the constitution
and laws, aud that when this was yielded by the
parties in rebellion the contest should cease,
with the constitutional rights of the States and
individuals unimpaired. This resolution was
adopted and sent forth to the world unanimously
by the Senate, and with only two dissenting
voices in the House. It was accepted by the
friends ot the Union in tbe South as well as in
the North as expressing honestly and truly the
object of tbe war, and on the faith of it made
thousands in both sections give their lives and
fortunes to the cause. To repudiate it now by
refusing to the Stiftes and individuals within
them tlie rights which the Constitution and laws
of the Union would secure to them, is a breach
of our plighted honor, for which I can imagine no
excuse, and to which I cannot voluntarily become
a party. The evils which spring from the un
settled state of our government will be acknowl
edged by all. Commercial intercourse is sus
pended, capital is in constant peril, public secu
rities fluctuate in value, peace itself is not secure,
and the cause of moral and political duty is im
periled. To avert these .calamities from the
coumry, it is imperatively required that we
should immediately decide upon some course of
administration which can be steadfastly adhered
to. I am thoroughly convinced that any settle
ment, or compromise, or plan of action which is
inconsistent with the principles of the Constitu
tion, will not only be ana vailing, bnt mischievous;
that it but multiplies the present evils, instead
ot maintaining the Constitution in its whole in
tegrity and vigor throughout the length and
breadth of the land as best of all compromises.
Besides, our duty does not, in my judgment,
leave us a choice between that and any other.
I believe that it contains tbe remedy that is so
much needed; and it the co-ordinate branches
of the government would unite upon its pro
visions, they would be found broad enough and
strong enough to sustain, in time of peace, a na
tion which they can bear through the ordeal ot a
protracted civil war. The most 3acred guaran
tees ot that instrument are those which declare
each State shall have at least one representative,
and that no State, without its consent, be de
prived of equal suffrage in the Senate; each
House is made judge of election, returns and
qualifications of its own members, and may,
with concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.
Thus, as heretofore urged, in the admission of
Senators and Representatives from any and all
States, there can be no just ground of appre
hension that persona who are disloyal will be
clothed with powers of legislation, for this could
not happen when the Constitution and laws are
enforced by a vigilant and faithful Congress.—
When a Senator or Representative presents his
certificate of election, he may be at once admit
ted or rejected; or should there be any question
of his eligibility his credentials may be referred
for investigation to an appropriate committee. If
he is admitted to a seat, it must be npon evidence
satisfactory to the House ot which he thus be
comes a member that he possesses the requisite
constitutional and legal qualifications, ana if re
fused admission as a member for want of due
allegiance to tbe government, and returned to his
constituents, he is admonished that none but per
sons loyal to the United States will be allowed a
voice in the legislative councils of the nation,
and the political power and moral influence of
Congress are thus effectively exerted in the in
terests of loyalty to the Government and fidelity
to the Union. And is it not far better tbe work
of restoration should be accomplished by a sim
ple compliance with the plain reqirements of tiie
Constitution, than by a recourse to measures
wltich, in effect destroy the States aBd threaten
subversion of the General Government? All
that is neceesary to settle this simple, but impor
tant question, without further agitation or delay,
is a willingness on the part of all to sustain the
Constitution and carry its provisions into practi
cal operation. If to-morrow either of the
Houses of Congress would declare that, upon the
presentation ot their credentials, members con
stitutionally elected and loyal to the General
Government would be admitted to seats in Con
gress, while others would be excluded and
their places remain vacant until the election
by the people of loyal and qualified per
sons, and it, at the same time, assurance
were given that this policy would be continued
until all the States were represented, it would
send a thrill ol joy throughout the entire land,
as indicating the inauguration of a system which
must speedly bring tranquility to the public
mind. While we are legislating upon subjects
which are of great importance to the wboie peo
ple, and which must effect all parts of the coun
try, not only during the life ot the present gener
ation, but for ages to_come, we should remem
ber that all men are entitled at least to a bearing
in councils which decide upon the destiny of
themselves and children. At present ten States
are denied representation, and when the Fortieth
Congress assembles on the 4th day of the present
month, sixteen Slates will be without a voice in
the House of Representatives. This grave fact,
with the important questions before us, should in
duce us to pause in a course 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 institutions it imperils.
[Signed.] Andrew Johnson,
W ashington, March 3,1867.