Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1862-02-12
SPEECH OF HON DAVID wILMOT,
OF PENNSYLVANIA,
In the U. S. Senate, Thursday, Jan. 80, 1862

| Whereas, Hon. Jesse D. Bright heretofore
on the lst day of March, 1861, wrote n letter
OF which the following is copy:
'WAsHINGToN, March l, 1861.
| "My Dear Sir Allow me to introduce to
your acquaintance my friend Thomas B. Lin
coin, OF Texas. He visits your capital mainly
to dispose of what he regards a great improve
| ment In fire arms. recommend him to your
favorable consideration as gentleman of the
hrst respectability, and reliable ir every re-
spect. JESSE D. BR1GHr.
'sTo His Excelency, JEFFERSON DAVIS,
''Prestdent Of the Confederation Of States.
find Whereas, We believe the said letter is
evidence of disloyalty to the United States.
and is calculated TO give aid and comfort to
the public enemies: Therefore Be ii Resoived,
! That the said jesse ID. Bright is expe He'd from
his seat in the Senate Of the United States.
Mr.. Wimot. Mr.. President, shall be brief
In what have to say this case. To me it
seems to lie in very narrow compass.
Before proceeding to speak of the case,
desire to say that my relations with the Sena-
! tor from Indiana of such character that [
| shall with pain vote to expel him from his seat
! In this body. Seventeen years ago we met in
inns capitol; both young men, and both mem
| oerS OF the then dominant party. Since then
we have differed widely, touching public men
and measures; yet through all the heat and
bitterness of political warfare for the past tif-
teen years, have remembered with pleasure
onr early acquaintance and intercourse. |
sincerely regret the position in which the SEN
ator is placed. y sense of public duty alone,
constrains me to vote for his expulsion from
the Senate.
What is the case presented against the SEN
ator from Indiana 1t rests upon no disputed
or doubtful facts. Every important fact in the
case is admitted-ful confession is made in
open Senate. The Senator from Indiana tells
n ur1n 4 ita
ces, do again the act complained of. Mr.
President, the Senator's views of duty and my
own differ so widely, that what he regards as
innocent and natural, as proper courtesy to
an old friend, to me has the features of disoy-
alty-not to give it the harsher name of trea-
What, sir, the facts and circumstances
of this case The shareholders of the nation,
relying on human slavery as the bond of their
unity and strength, unwilling that the free men
of the Republic should assume the manage
ment of Government affairs, set on foot re-
be lion in the southern and Slaveholding States
OF the Union. w hen this letter written
it had been carried forward to the organization
of an independent government /; the machinery
of that government was in active operation.
Armies were being organized, disciplined. and
equipped, to maintain the rebellion by the
power OF the sword. Every reasonable hope
of a settlement was past. The Senator from
Indiana knew all this man knew it better.
1t is true, from the timdity-I might almost
say comp'icity-of the late Administrations
no blow had been struck at this formidable re-
bcllion; still those concerned in it were no
less traitors for this cause. The cowardice or
even treachery of Mr.. Buchanan could in no
degree excuse Davis and his co-workers in
treason. The torbearance of the Government
towards the traitors cannot be pleaded by them
in extcnuation of their crime nor can their
aiders and abettOrs shield themselves behind
the weakness or treachery Of those then in
power. Yet here rests one of the strong
grounds of defense taken by and for he Sena-
tor fl ON Indiana. The Government had done
nothing ag ainSt the rebellion 1t had brought
no armies in the field had fought no battles
GA fear that betrayed like treason'' had para
lyzed the executive arm, and the Government
was sinking into imbecility and contempt |
How does all this change the character of the |
rebellion, or extenuate the crime of those in |
volved in it The Senator from Indiana adj |
mts that be could not have written the letter |
with innocence after the proclamation of Pres |
ident Lincoln calling for seventy-fve thousand |
men. Why not. if he could do so before ?
Did the proclamation change the position of |
Davis towards this Government? Did it in
volve any one in guilt who, up to that time, |
was innocent Was it innocent for Lincoln |
to go upon his errand with an improved fire. |
arm to the confederate government before the |
and reasonable to go after |
wards 1t is Idle to look here for any extern
uation of the case whatever. The proclama- |
tion Of the President in way affects it.
Jefferson Davis was the chosen chief of the
rebel government He was every inch trail
tor. The Senator from Indiana knew the
damning treason of his friend and former as
sociate. HIS crime was a wicked one-the
most so of any of which man can be guilty
the deepest dyed and blackest in the catalogue
of crime.
To me it seems that many gentlemen of the |
late Democratic party are afflicted with NOR
al obliquity in the view they take OF this wick
Ell rebellion and its authors. The leading
traitors so long dominated over the Democratic
party that the fragment that remains
seem to connect the rebellion with a struggle
for Democratic ascendency, and the leading
traitors as friends having strong claims on their
sympathy. Evidently the Senator from In
diana was strongly possessed Of this view of
the treason and the traitors.
To judge rightly of the act of the Senator,
we must look at the rebellion and its chief as
they truly are-the one reasonable revolt
against a just Government, and the other as
the chief of traitors. He was no other than a
rank traitor, a great State criminal, that the
Senator addressed on the 1st of March as sshis
excellency, the president of the confederated
States, {" commencing TO his confidence as sFre
liable in every respect one who sought the
rebel government a reasonable erraud.
What was the errand on which the Senator
from Indiana commended his friend to the
nsurper and traitor at Montgomery 1t was
no other than the sale of an alleged improved
ire-arm. Have | stated the case too strongly
against the Senator from Indiana l would
aot do so. To me, sir, it has the complexion
Of agreat crime. l will not call it treason,
although it might be difficult to find a more
appropriate name for it.
1t was we'll said by the Senator from New