, 1865-12-25

they were before the war. The military in the
field has given us the means Of doing this.
VIC can now re-est4blish the practical relation
Of those States to the Government, and the
actual Jurisdiction over them, which they
vainly attempted to throw OF, is alreadY re-
Stored. The conquest We hare achieved, Is
conquest over the rebellion not conquest
oTerthe states whose authority the rebel
hon had for the time subverted. For these
reasons, think, the views submitted by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania {Ar. Stevens)
upon this point, are unsound.
Mr. RATAofD was here interrupted By 1fr.
JkScKEs, with whom he had q long colloquy
On this point.
Mr. RAYMOND then proceeded: Now, sir,
l have dwclt On these points longer THAI In
tended to do. do not think the doctrine
have been combating is held by any number
Of the people Of this country, or, indeed, by
any considerable number of the emn1bera Of
States are TO he dealt with ty na as provinces,
az simply so much territory held to us by no
other Tics than those of conquest. think wc
are to deal with them as States having State
Governments still subject to the jurisdiction
Of the United States, still under the Constitu-
tional control Of the National Government,
and that in our dealings with them We are to
be guided and governed not simply By our
sovereign will and pleasure rs conqucrors,
but BY The restrictions and limitations Of the
Constitution Of the United States necessarily
as We are restrained and limited In our deal
Union.
Mr. JEscks-1 have no doubt OF it--not
the slightest l do not think that the treason
Of Jefferson Davis has nythlng to do with the
inlunan treatment Of our prisoners Of war.
merely Aliude to the matter. might have
c1abotatc II when said that becausc We had
granted 10 these States, as a power waging
II lad IN ~
war, We were not therefore excluded from
proceeding against them rs traitors- The de-
cisfou OF the Supreme Court, to which hare
once referred, II I understand It azight, asserts
that we hare the right TO proceed against
tlcm as traitors, or rather that We hare the
tile power of sovercigns and Of bellins-
e1ents; that the one did not exclude
the other. Now, If according to the view
have presented, we are 10 deal with these
States Is States still within the Union, the
next question TINT 1ccurs Is, how are we to
deal with them. The gentleman from Ohio,
tMr. FinckJ who preceded me, took the
ground that they Ind only to resume their
places and their powers In the National Gov
c1nment-thnt their Representatives have
only to come into the hall and take their
seats, without question and without condi-
tions Of any sort. l cannot concur, sir, in
that view. I do not think that these States
have auy such rights. On the contrary, /
think we have full and perfect right to
require cerfatn conditions IN the nature If
guarantees for tie future, and that right rests
principally and Technically on the sur1en-
der We may and must require Mt their hands.
The rebellion has been defeated, and defeat
always implies surrender, and in political
sense surrender implies more than transfer
OF the arms used on the field Of battle; It
implies, in the case Of ciyil war, surrender
of the principles aud doctrines, of ali the
weapons and agencies By which the war has
been carried on. The military surrender was
made on the field Of battle to our Generals,
as the agents and representatives ofthe Com
n,andt1-in-Chief Of the armies Of the United
States, But this Is not all they have still to
surrender.
Mr.. .RA1s1oSD.-Well, ifit seems important
to the gentleman from Rhode Island, or to
anybody else, I am quito willing to make the
addition 10 MY remark which be suggests. I
will say. then, that In surrendcring on the
tt]d Of battle, they surrendered to fhc Gen.
erals who were In command of the armies as
agents Of the President Of the United States.
himself the agent and representative oi
lhe American people If that expla-
obliged to him for having cnab1ed me
to state 1t little more specifically and
accurately than did at first. Now, there
must he at the end Of the war similar sur
Eender On the political field OF controversy,
That surrender Is due as an act OF Justice from
the defeated party to the victorious party.
It Is due, also, and We have right to exact
It, as guarantee for the future. Why do
VIC demand d surrender Of their arms By the
Tanqufshed In every battle We do it that they
may not renew the contest. Why do We seek
IN their fall a surrender of the principles On
which they fought: 1t is that they may
never again be made the basis Of controversy
and rebellion against the Government Of the
United States. Now, what are the principles
which should thus be surrendered. The prln-
ciplc Of State sovereignty is one Of them. 1t
was the cornerstone Of tho rebellion, at once
its animattrG spirit and its fundamental basis.
Deeply inEEalned as it wns in the southern