Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1861-10-04
Fremont, journal.
mn Presidont nnd Congrcss,


There are few ''peaco men" in Iowa,
who make handle Of the neglect of Con.
gress to pass the resolution formally ap.
proving of the acts Of the President during
the carly stages Of tho rebellion. A letter
from Senator Grimes, of that State, dated
at Burlington, September 16, thus etfectu-
ally disposcs of this csval;
al know il is urged by some--but most
iy, It not entirely, by those opposed to
tho vigorous prosecution Of tho present
war-that it was also necessary to confirm
the acts Of the President, suspeuding, in
somo cases, the writ of 6a6eaS corpus. II
must be appearant I think, to every one
who will reflect upon the subject, that to
have attempted such confirmation would be
to inferentially admit that, as commander
in-chief of the army and navy Of the United
States, tho President had no power to sus.
pond the operation of that writ without
Congressional authority. Very few if any
loyal members Of Congress were willing to
admit that They did not doubt but that
he had complete power in the premises, and
they choose to leave him to exercise his au-
tborty under the Constitution according to
bis own judgment and as the exigencies Of
the country might require. They did not
believe that his acts in this regard needed
confirmation, and therefore confined theii
ratification approval to such acts as re-
quired legal enactments for their basis, and
in the initiation Of which they have beer
anticipated by him.
"There may be some who honestly be
lieve that the Senate refused to support the
President because Of their failure to pas:
certain resolutions presented by Mr.. Wilson
of Massachusetts. The facts in regard tC
those resolutions were these: They were in
troduced at an early day in the session, and
were put aside from day to day to make
room for what was considered more import.
ant business, until just at the close of the
session, when they had reached that stage in
parliamentary proceedings whom it was i'm
possible to amend them without unanimous
consent, and that could not be obtained, -
The objection urged by some gentlemen
against them as they stood, without amend
ment, wasthat they were improperly drawn,
inasmuch as the phraselogy was in the past
tense, and declared that the acts of the
President Vere legal and valid whereas, as
they insisted, they ought to have declared
that those acts should be legal and valid as
though done under the sanction of law 1t
was question of grammatical construction.
This, ifmy memory serves me correctly, was
the position of Mr.. Sherman of Ohio, whose
action has been much criticized in this
State as well as elsewhere. He declared
his Willingness, nay his anxiety, to justify
and approve the acts of the President, but
he was unwilling to say that those acts were
legal at the time they were performed
Although not agreeing with him in his con-
struction Of the phraseology of the resolu-
tions, it is due to him to say that no man
in America was more anxious than he to
give the administration honest, hearty and
patriotic support, and when the legalizatior
OF It's proceedings were put in what he be
lievcd to be proper language, he cordially
sustained it.
1t was simply on account of this obiec
ton in the minds of few Senators thai
the resolutions, which it was impossible tc
amend, were dropped, and the substance
of them Incorporated into a law"