Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-01-19

boldly UP to the exercise of the power now
asserted by my colleague Mr.. Ashley in
one case and denied by my other colleague
M. Pendleton] in the other.
Gentlemen have heard Of the committee
of thirteen. 1t consisted of men of every
shade of political opinion: Messrs. Powell,
Seward, Collamer, Bigler, Hunter, Toombs,
Doolittle, and Grimes. They agreed upon
no plan. But many plans were proposed,
and all under the amendment clause. Do
gentlemen tell me that these propositions
were unconstitutional? Were they usur-
pations of power never conceded? Strange
that Mr.. Hunter, the biographer of CAL
houn, and Mr.. Davis, his follower and dis
ciple, did not discover it! Strange that Mr.
Hunter should have proposed that Congress
should pass no law in relation to slavery,
except by the consent Of majority of the
Senators and Representatives of the slave
holding ard non-slaveholding States, thus
yielding the power with qualifications =
Can this be yielded and yet the power over
slavery in the States be above all amend
ment? Or must my colleague take refuge,
as he did, in higher law? Strange that
Douglas should have proposed to punish
conspiracies against shareholders and their
property! Strange that Davis should have
proposed, by amendment of the Constitu-
tion, to recognize slavery as property in
transit or sojourn!
But why weary the House with these re-
citals? They prove this, that the strictest
sect of southern statesmen acknowledged
the power by amendment over this subject
and sought to exercise it, and sought furth-
er by amendment to prevent its exercise
when it might impair or destroy their in
stitution! Is my colleague better States
rights man than Jefferson Davis? Or, to
drop the other extreme, does he, nstnc pro
tune, join my other colleague Mr.. Ashleyl,
who then denied and yet denies the power
by amendment to establish slavery as unre-
publican? 1t was with some amusement
that / listened to my two colleagues
Messrs. Pendleton and Ashley yesterday.
How adroitly the Democratic member
thought to catch the Republican! How
he piled him to admit the power to establish
slavery! How shrewdly my colleague
over there evaded! On the other hand,
gle my colleague Mr.. PendletOnl with some
of his former votes! How both shirked
the issues presented in their former posi-
tions! while the humble member who now
addresses you, sir, sat cOmplacently con-
sistent amid the melodramatic performance,
ready to admit the power of amendment
unlimited to change the fundamental law,
under the guards and modes prescribed,
even to the establishment of slavery or
monarchy-of entire freedom or entire de-
mocracy. Both of my friends deny this as
extreme and heterodOX; the one because he
would have nothing but limited republican,
ism as the form of our Government. That
is my Democratic colleague who is so re-
publican. The other because he would
have nothing but sweeping democracy as
the basis of our Constitution. That is my
Republican colleague who is so democratic.
The wishes of each color their present ar
guments as to the power. When slavery is
to be guaranteed, my colleague from Gin
cinnati believes with me in the power to
amend, and my colleague from Toledo de-
nies it. When it is to be abolished my col
league from Toledo believes with me in the
power to amend, and the other denies it
Both deny the power when slavery is to be
affected, and both admit it when slavery is
to be affected. have them both on either
side and each on both sides and both with
me. accept the power in either case as
they claim it, but go beyond them both; for
stand on a principle. They are enamored
of the power only when one case is absent.
Like the fond lover of two maidens, they
love the one "when the other dear charm
er's away" Laughter.l Yet they are un-
faithful to both because they are so attach
ed to either-unfaithful because they are
not upon the principle. | can extend to
them Gas member from New York used
to say here in olden times), from the serene
Olympian heights of my cerulean consis-
tency, the eternal principle of republican,
ism and democracy which will reconcile
them both to duty and the Constitution.
Laughter.]
Both my colleagues hold that to concede
the power and exercise it in certain cases
is to subvert the Constitution. If slavery is
to be protected, the member from Toledo
believes the Government destroyed. His
only appeal is to the sword of revolution.
Never would he consent that the power to
amend should include the power to establish
slavery in Ohio; never. He would sound
the tocsin OF inevitable resistance. If
slavery is to be abolished by the same
power, the other member blows the trum-
pet and beats the drum to revolutionary
defiance. Both march to the same discord-
ant music, when, If they would take CAL
houn, Story, or their own practice and prin-
ciples, only changing the time of theif APP
plication, they would find in the granted
power to amend, an unlimited authority as
to the matter and only limited as to the
mode. | follow no such counsels. s'You
can change, but cannot subUeft, by amend
ment," says my friend before me. All!
pray who is to judge of what is subversion
and what Is change? If Ileave the question
to my colleagues, one will regard the guar
antee and the other the abolition of slavery
as subversion and not merely change. My
colleague Mr.. Pendleton] derives, uncon-
sciously, his Language from the South Caro-
lima declaration of Independence of Decem-
Der "a, 1850. 1t says: -'i s.oI-
"Observng the forms of the Constitution, a sec
tona party has found within that article establish
ing the executive department the means Of s9bUert-
ing the Constitution itself. f."'sn.J Ef
Again: .-. .,,.,i,
the Constitution has been aided by the elevation Of
the blacks" w l' -.,il ~ ,e'
The other member Mr.. Ashley regards
the denial by South Carolina OF President
Lincoln as the legal President, as the very
essence of subOersion, and the denial Of
franchise to the blacks as subversive of re-
publicanism. He therefore strikes out the
word sohite in his reconstruction bills.
Where gentlemen so eminent disagree as TO
what is subversion and what is change or
amendment, where is the tribunal to de-
eide? / answer, in Congress by two-thirds
of both Houses and in the States by three
fourths of the Legislatures, and in the In
telligent sovereignty of the, people of each
State who have, IN !ip,ine, consented to this
mode Of amendment III .eps s.tt 80, -,
Believing in the power of amendment,
am willing to judge of the wisdom of the
propositions before ] vote to submit them,
This discretion is q part of the discretion of
the Congress. 1t is one of the checks which
The minority have against the passion and
checks against the exercise of this power
y, !, ora fhraafold frat fuo fbfrfo of