Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1861-03-20


I'm the senate of the United states
March G, 1861, on the Resolution Of
Mr.. Dixon TO Print the Inaugural
Address of President Lincoln.
Mr.. Douglas said
Mr.. President: cannot assent to the con
struction which the Senator from North Carolina
(Mr. Clingman) has placed upon the President
Inaugural. have read it carefully, with view
of ascertaining distinctly what the policy of the
Administration is to be. The inaug gurai is char
acterized by ability, and by directness on certain
points but with such reservations and qualifaca-
tions require critical analysis to arrive at its
true construction on other points. have made
such an analysis, and come to the conclusion that
it is peace offering rather than a war message
Having examined it critically, l think / can de-
monstrate that there is no foundation for the ap-
prehension which has been spread through the
country that this message is equivalent to q de-
claration of war; that it commits the President OF
the United States to recapture the forts in the
seeded States and to hold them at all hazards,
to collect the revenue under all circumstances
and to execute the laws in all the States no mat
ter what may be the circumstances that surround
him. | do not understand that to be the char
acter of the message On the contrary, | under
stand it to contain distinct pledge that the pol
icy of the Administration shall be conducted with
exclusive reference TO peaceful solution of our
national difficulties. True, the President indi-
Gates a certain line of policy which he intends to
pursue. 80 far as it may be consistent with the
peace of the country, but he assures us that this
policy will be modified and changed whenever
necessary to peaceful solution of these Difficult
ties
The address is not as explicit as / could desire
on certain points: certain other points il is
plicit The message Is explicit and certain upon
the point that the President will not, directly or
indirectly interfere with the institution of slavery
within the States-is specific upon the point that
he will do everything in his power to give faith
full execution to the Constitution and the laws for
the return of fugitive slaves-is explicit upon the
point that he will not oppose such amendments to
the Constitution as may be deemed necessary to
settle the slavery question and restore peace to
the country. Then, it proceeds to indicate a line
of policy for his administration. He declares
that, in-lview of the Constitution and laws, the
Union remains unbroken. | do not suppose any
man can deny the proposition. that in contempla-
ton of law, the Union remains intact, no matter
what the fact may be. There may be a separa-
ton de facto, temporary or permanent, as the
sequel NAV prove; but in contemplation of the
Constitution and the laws, the Union does remain
unbroken. | think no one can deny the correct
ness of the proposition. constitutional princi
ple Let 60 further and what there is in
the address that is supposed to pledge the Presi
dent to coerciye policy He SAYS: al shall
take care, as the Constitution itself expressl,
enoins upon me, that the laws of the Union bt
faithfully executed in all the States" This
declaration is relied upon as conclusive evi
dence that coercion is to be used in the
seeding States; but take the next sentence
Doing this deem to be only simple duty OF
nv part. / shall perform it, far Is prdctica
BILE, unless"-unless what? Let us see what tn,
condition is on the happening of which he vii
not enforce the laws-"unless my rightful mas
| tiers, the American people, shall withhold th
requisite means, or in some other authoritatv,
manner direct the contrary
This condition, on which he will not enforce tn
laws in the seeding States, is not as explicit as
could desire When he alludes to his "rightfu
masters, the American people," / suppose h
means the action of Congress in withholding tn
requisite means. Query: Does he wish to be un
derstood as saying that the existing laws confe
upon him "the requisite means?" or, does h
mean to say that inasmuch as the existing law
do not confer the requisite means, he can not ex
ecute the laws in the seeding States unless thos
means shall be conferred by Congress? The Ian
guage employed would seem to imply that tn
President was referring to the future action 0
Congress as necessary to give him the requisit
means to enforce obedience to the laws in the sc
ceding States. Doubtless the President was nc
uninformed of the fact that his friends in tn
House of Representatives had prepared fore
bill, comforting these requisite means to coerc
obedience in the seeding States, and that tha
bill was defeated in the House He must
aware, historically, that in 1882, General Jackso
deemed additional legislation necessary to enforc
the revenue laws at Charleston, and that a fore
bill was then passed, which expired by its ow
limitation in a short time, think two years, ar
is not now in force. Does Mr.. Lincoln conside
that he has any more power to coerce the collec
ton of the revenue in Charleston harbor withou
further legislation than General jackson had
1892? When he pledges himself to collect tn
revenue and to enforce the laws in those States
unless Congress withholds the requisite means I
enable him to do so, is he not to be understoo
that whether he does enforce them or not depend
upon the future action of Congress? think ths
is the proper construction of his language.
In a subsequent paragraph he says: 9Th
power confided to me will be used to hold, occup
and possess the property and places belonging I
the Government. and to collect the duties an
imposts." What power? Does he mean ths
which has been confided, or that which may
confded? Does he mean that he will exercis
the power unless Congress directs the contrar,
or that he will exercise it when Congress confer
it? / regret that this clause is understood b
some persons as meaning that the President wi
recapture the forts, and other places, which hay
been seized without the assent of Congress.
such was his meaning, he was unfortunate in til
selection of words to express the idea. He dos
not say that he will recapture or retake, hol
and occupy the forts and other places. Nor doc
he say that he will recommend to Congress I
furnish him men and money for such purpos'
but "the power confded TO me will be used I
hold, occupy, and possess the property and plac,
belonging to the Government" To say II
least of il, this is equivocal language. / nj
not going to condemn him for il; my preseI
object is not to censure, but to ascertain the tru
meaning of the inaugural, in order TO lear
whether the Administration is committed to a
, aggressive policy, which must inevitable invol,
us in civil war, or toa peaceful solution of o,
national troubles. Hesays further, "but beyon
, what NAV be necessary for these objects, ther
will be no invasion, no using of force against I
among the people anywhere" He will use Il
power confded to him to hold, occupy. and po
, sess the forts and other property, and to cole
, the revenue; but beyond these objects he wi
, not use that power. / am unable to understar
the proprety of the distinction between enforcir
the revenue laws and all other laws. Ii it h
, duty to enforce the revenue laws, why is it m
his duty to enforce the other laws of the lant
What right has he to say that he will enfort
those laws that enable him to raise revenue,
levy and collect taxes from the people, and tn
{ he will not enforce the laws which protect Il
, rights of persons and property to the extent tn
I the Constitution confers the power in tho
, Statesg | reject the distinction; it cannot
justified in law or in morals II taxes are to
4 collected and the revenue laws to be e
forced, the laws that offord protection,
compensation for the taxes must also be enforce
f The next paragraph is also Objectionable.
will read it:
e Where hostility to the United States in any iRtet'i
locality shall be great and universal prevent
peent resident citizens from holding the Federal oc
there will be attempt to force obnoxious strange
among the people for that object While the strict les
right may exist in the Government enforce the
of these Offices, the attempt do would be rrit
ting, and nearly mpracticable wihal, deem il bett
TO forego, for the time the Of such Offices
rejoice TO know that he will not attempt
force obnoxious strangers to hold Office in Il
interior places where public sentiment is hostil
but why draw the distinction between "interi
{ localities" and exterior placesg Why the di
tinction between the States in the interior al
those upon the sea board? If he has the pow
!, in the one case, he has il in the other; If it
his duty in the case. it is his duty in the csht
There is no provision of the Constitution or Il
laws which authorizes distinction between d
places upon the sea-board and the places in Il
interior.