The Lansing state Republican. [volume] (Lansing, Mich.) 1855-1874, 1866-03-28
Speech Of Hon. Thaddeus Stevens, on
Reconstruction.
Delivered in the House, March, 10. Isl

Mr. Speaker. j must apologize 10 this
House for the tamencss OF the remarks
which | am about 10 make, and especially
for their untimeliness. lt viii be remem-
bered that at the opening OF the session /
made some remarks upon the condition Of
the country. and that | was replied 10 by
the gentleman from New York. Nh. Ray
mOnd, and by the able gentleman from
Ohio [Nr. Finck.
A recess Of Congress followed. When
Congress reassembled for business on the
sth OF January, had prepared some reply
10 their remarks, aud had obtained the
floor for the purpose Of delivering them.
but the respectable gentleman from West
Virginia Mr.. Lathanl desired To make a
speech on that occasion. and a he was a
young member | yielded the floor 90 him,
and have never since had an opportunity
10 deliver those remarks, which l did not
consider important at any time; and they
have lain by I'LL now.
Now, as this ls Il school for debate, and
as il has been intimated 10 me that my
turn 10 speak had come ] have dug up the
old manuscript. which Is consequently tame,
as the most oi il has been since said by
myself OF others. and not being willing To
lose the paper, laughter. | have come
here for the purpose OF saving now what
had intended 10 say then. lt Is pretty
much "a follows.
Since had the honor 90 SPEAK on the
questions contained ln the Presidents mes
sage relative 90 reconstruction. the gentle
man from Ohio. Mr.. Finck. and The zen
tleman from New York. lMr Raymond, J
have replied 10 IL; 100 a few plain remarks
will show with how much effect They
have very property directed their efforts 10
refuting a single proposition. is on that de-
pended all subsequent questions asser-
ted that the late confederate States Of
America had occupied position which
entitled them according % the law OF IA
lions 10 be considered and treated as a be
ligerent. entitled 10 all the rights and sub
ject [ o all the liabilities of belligerent ell
gagged in public war, and that they had
been so acknowledged and treated both 10y
ourselves and all the civilized nations OF
the world that they formed a regular GOV
ernment, raised armies fitted ont vessels
Oi-war aud issued commissions 10 com
manders both by sea and land which were
accepted by Us and by the civilized world
az protecting those who fought under them
from the charge OF piracy and murder, and
gave them precisely the same standing u
with each other; that for four years they
claimed to be a foreign, independent nation,
and made war TO maintain that declaration.
/ argued from this state OF facts that the
people and States within the jurisdiction Of
the confederate government had severed
their former connection with tho United
States, and broken the ties which bound
them together, not justly or legally, but IN
rFef nit "a rafn oil al
this formidable power, and as their con-
querer had right to dispose Of them as they
deemed for their own interest. always duly
regarding the law Of nations
To prove the laws arising from the facts.
/ cited several authorities both from ele-
mentary works of celebrated pnblicists, and
adiu1icated cases OF courts of the last re-
sort. ] think no one will deny that priBla
fdcie these authorities made out my posi-
tiOns Now. when learned gentlemen came
TO reply 10 an argument founded on legal
authorities, and which is not pretended TO
be based on or even fortified by the opinion
or judgment OF the speaker, il WAS certain
" to be expected that il would be met by
other iegdk authorities, either modifying,
contracting, or Overruling those already
cited Legal questions are TO be decided by
authority, 10y judicial decisions, or by the
works of distinguished elementary writers.
The mere unwritten opinion or Judgment OF
no man or set Of men delivered in debate
can weigh 4 straw against such standard
authority / have looked through the
speech of the distinguished gentleman from
New York, (Which | was not SO fortunate
as to hear, and do net find that he has
cited single authority on this point to
contradict or explain those which pro-
duced. Why not produce some authority
He does not deny the facts from which |
reasoned. But he does deny that the civil
war broke the bands of the Union, or dis
solved the original condition of the nation.
| had quoted Nattel where he says:
" Civil war breaks the bands Of society AMI gov
orRment" They stand pre-
cisely in the same predcam mt as two nations who
engage in a contest" The
state is dissolved and the war between the two par
ties stands on the same ground Al evey respect As
war between different nations" "
Now, sir, this, without multiplying au-
thOrities. makes ont my main substantive
proposition from which all the Others are
corOllaries.
The gentleman denies the correctness O
| Vatters doctrine, and says the war did not
dissolve the States" but he gives Us nc
authority but his own. I admit the gravity
of the gentleman's opinion, and with TIE
| slightest cOrrObOrating authority should
| yield the case. But without some such aid
l am not willing that the sages Of the law
whom have been accustomed to revere
Grotius, Rutherford, Vattel, and a Ions
line of cOmpeers, sustained by the verdict
of the civilized world, and armed with the
panOply of ages, should be overthrOwn anC
demolished 10y the single arm of the gentle
man from New York.
The gentlemen say that this admits tn,
doctrine Of secession aud the efficacy of tn,
secession ordinances. The gentlemen ar,
too shrewd 10 believe this stereOtyped in
ference, Int they may hope that others vii
believe IT, The ordinances OF secession
amounted 10 nothing either in law or il
fact. Ii was the formation OF A regular
hostile government, and the raising an,
supporting of large armies, and for lon.
time maintaining their declaration OF in
dependence. that made them Il belligeren
and the contest 4 war. Had there bee
nothing but secession ordinances It wOul
have been "barren thunder" Who is stu
pld enough TO believe that the assertion c
fact is the Justification Of il. Does tn
gentleman believe that the people are nc
aStute enough TO discern between the rigl
and the fact
The gentlemen in one place says "tha
individuals, not States. made this war
Phillim0re as | quoted, says individual
cannot make war The Supreme COul
says that this war was made bV States.
pray the gentleman to quote authority
not TO put too heavy a load upon his ow
judgment; he might sink under the weight
Give US your author. The gentleman say,
"The gentleman from PENNSYLVANIA say
they forfeited their State existence by tn
fact of rebellion That Is not my doctrine
but as others hold that doctrine. argue
that, il true. still my view Of the prOpt
, power to recOnStruc- was the same. 10 vi
Congress. | never held 10 the suicide
States, though think ii possible: but it IN
not happen in the present case. The gel
tleman in his collOQuy with my cOleagu,
Mr.. Kelley. stated the true doctrine
the existence Of States, though il SCENE
10 me wholly inconsistent with his 9th,
4 position, that this was war Of individual
e and not OF States. His position is. ID.
the rebel states have never been disOrgal
= lied, but have been always under stat
government; aud that their relation 10 Il
e United States did not affect that question
! So say /: and so said two years ag,
While others cQQtenlel thar the loval Dp,