Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1864-04-16

most capac10uS, ana there was no need to
override it-that If such a time ever should
come that the powers Of the Constitution
were not sufficient to sustain the Union, II
that impossible .supposltion should ever
prove true, laughter from the Democratic
side of the House. then / would say that
we have right to do our solemn duty un-
der God and 60 beyond the Constitution to
save the creators Of the Constitution.
Mr.. cox. am informed by the mem
bers around me, and think that the report
of my colleagues remarks will show if in
The Globe, that he put no condition like
that he makes now. l ask gentlemen on
both sides whether my colleague ever quail
flied his remarks by saying that it would
be forever impossible in the future for the
Cor stitution to be infringed by making
war. Why make the statement of over
leaping the Constitution If it be forever
| impossible to do it in carrying on this war?
Mr.. GARFIELD. Win the gentleman
allow me?
Mr.. cox. Certainly.
Mr.. GARFIELD, | said SO in answer to
the question or my colleague now upon the
| floor. | said so secondly, in answer to the
| gentleman from Illinois, and put the same
question to him. / explained it in the same
way. The gentleman is at liberty to look
at the manuscript, which / have not yet
seen, and may quote from it.
Mr.. cox. l have only The Chronicles
report of the debate of yesterday. Perhaps
it is good authority for the members on the
other side. l will quote from its report:
Mr.. Garfield then controverted his colleagues posi-
| tion The issue was now made up. We should use
! the common weapons Of war. If with these we
should not succeed, he would take MEANS as he would
against the savage who attacked himself or family.
lie would resort to any element of destruction and
# necessary. he would fling all constitutional sane
tions to the winds rather than lose his country.
Is there anything about impossible" con-
ditions there?
Mr. GARFIELD. "If necessary" there
is the condition.
Mr. cox. There is nothing about the
impossibility of the Constitution proving
insufficient to put down the rebellion, and
in which case alone he would overleap it.
Overleap an impossibility! would like to
see the performance. g.
Another question. / remember that nv
colleague, on the cOnfiscation bill, said that
he would under certain circumstances over
leap the Constitution. What did he mean
then by that? In that debate his language
was precisely this:
would not break the Constitution at all, unless
it should beceme necessary to overeap its barriers
| to save the Government and the Union.
Nothing about the impossibility of ever
breaking the Constitution, not a word or
| syllable, for he contemplates its breach for
certain purposes. My colleague cannot es-
cape from the dilemma in which he is
| placed. And yet he undertakes to make
political capital out of the speech of my
colleague from the second district after such
declarations If he does not, gentlemen
on that side of the House do. They are,
learn, subscribing for that speech by hun
dreds and thousands to distribute it for par
tisan purposes; and yet they have advocated
the very heresies upon which they ground
the present accusation, and give them cir
culation by sending out the speech of my
colleague. j want it understood that the
Republican members who have favor d
recognition and favored the men who IA
vored it, are now striving to .expel MEM
Der for the same license of speech which
they have indulged; that at home they
have favored for high offices public
character who took ground in favor of
recognizing the rebellion if it should main
tain itself 'fOr year or two." l might
well ask my colleague, in view of his posi-
tion, whether he did not know that those
were the sentiments of Gov. Stanton when
he would have voted for him if he had been
at home? To come to the questions; was he
not thus committed to the policy of dissolv-
ing the Union if the rebellion could sustain
itself for year or two? Then | ask him.
how much better is he than the member
whom he seeks to expel? Wherein does he
differ from that member upon this subject
of recognizing lawlessness? More than
that the gentleman's party in Ohio favored
Benjamin Stanton for Lieutenant Governor
knowing his sentiments to be similar to
those attributed to my colleague. More
than that; they elected man Senator from
Ohio who had uttered the same sentiments
as the sentiments of that party. He is the
personal and political friend of my col
league. mean Senator Wade. ] will send
his remarks to the Clerks desk to be read,
that we may know who are in favor of dis
solution and recognition.
The Clerk read as follows, from the Con-
gressional Globe of the third session of the
Thirty-Fourth Congress, page 25:
But Southern gentlemen stand here and, in al
most all their speeches, speak of the dissolution of
the Union as an element of every argument as
though it were peculiar condescenson on their
part that they permitted the Union to stand at ALL
they do not feel interested in uphoding this Union
II II really trenches on their rights if IL endangers
their institutions to such an extent that they cannot
feel secure under it, if their interests violently
assaied by means Of this Union, l am not one Of
those who expect that they will long continue under
it. lam not one Of those Uho toould ask them to
continue IN such a Union. 10 s0ould be doing pio-
lence TO the platform of the party TO 1Rich belong
We have adopted the old Declaration of lndepend-
ence as the basis Of our political movement, which
declares that any people when their Government
ceases to protect their rights. when 1t subverted
from the true purposes OF government as to oppress
them. have the right to recur to fundamental prnci-
pies, and, need be, TO destroy the Government ua
der achich they lire and TO erect s ruins another
more conduciUe TO their aoeifdre hold that they
hdUe this right. I aoiN not blame any people
for erercisin0 it. schenecer they think the contin-
0ency hds come. certainly shall be the adyo-
principles of this Government shall become so op-
pressve to the section to which belong that free
people ought not longer to endure it, You will not
then find me backward in being the advocate of dis
union; but that contingency never having come, /
bave, never yet opened my mouth in opposition to
the Union. ] have never entertained thought dis
loyal to this Union. But .ay, for Heavens sake
act, not talk; am tired of this eternal din of dis
occasions and thrust into our faces as though we Of
the North had some peculiar reasons for maintaining
the Union that the Southern States have not. !
hope the Union will continue forever. believe it
which think should dissolve it; but If the gentle
men see it, say again that they have the same in
terest in maintaining this Union, in my judgment,
that we Of the North have. If they think they have
Union; for the attempt to do SO, it seems to me,
would subvert the first principles of the Govern
ment under which VIC live. H
Mr.. cox. Now, there is the broadest
doctrine laid down in favor Of the right of
revolution and against the right of coer-
cion. "It would be doing violence to the
platform of the party to which I belong"
says the Republican leader of Ohio, ITO ask
the South to continue in such Union."--
"Yot cannot forcibly hold men in this