Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1867-07-24

S OF SENATOR FEssENDEN,

REMARKS OF SENATOR FESSENDEN,
On tie message Of The President, July 10Th,
Suggesting that the Reconstruction doctrine Of
Congress discharges the Rebel States from debts
incurred before the Rebellion g.
have got a word or two 10 say on this subject.
| regret very much, with other Senators, that the
President has brought this subject before us in the
shape that he has will not call what he says
moonshne. as il has been designated by my friend
from Michigan; but it is so exceedingly falacious
in my Judgment. and has very little foundation,
that do not think the President is justified in
making this suggestion, even under the circum-
stances, thus perhaps producing an effect iujuri-
Gus to our credit.
I accede to the correctness of the doctrone laid
down by the honorable Senator from ludianna
(llendricks, dem, who defended the PresdentD
but as he states IT, and with the inference he draws
from il, it seems to me TO be quite fallacous when
applied 10 the existing state OF facts What is the
foundation Of the doctrine il is that il one nation
absorbs conquered country into ITSELF It deprives
it of all revenues, depriyes it Of government, de-
prives il of responsibility, and therefore, having
thus deprived it Of all power in every way, it
makes itself the heir orsuccessor to its obligations
That | take to be the principle on which the rule
is founded
Now. sir what sort Of application has a doctrine
Of that kind thus founded, to the existing state OF
facts When a nation makes war upon another
and protect its own rights; and if, in enforcing
and protecting its own rights, it interieres with
the obligations that people have assumed toward
another and independent nation, it is by no means
ground Of complaint on the part of that nation
whose obligations thus interfered with because
every nation has right to enforce its claims,
II they are Just claims against another and II,
from the necessity Of the case, claims of a third
party are interfered with postponed, delayed, it
gives no just cause Of oiiense against the nation
seeking to enforce its own; and If it becomes nee
essary, even in the case OF independent peoples,
to hold them in subsection for a time in order TO
complete the claim which the conquering nation
has on the nation thus conquered, il has right to
do So, and it does not, by taking that course sub
ject itself to be called upon by third parties to
meet their claims. The question is, whether the
conquering nation carries further than is necessary,
and for such length of time and under such cir
cumstances as show that they not satisfied with
enforcing their just claims, but mean to absorb
and deprive Of all power Of meeting claims upon
it, by the nation thus conquered
We stand even in better situation than that
The obligation that State of the Uuion could as
sumo was perfectly understood by all the world,
either toward an individual or toward a foreign
corporation That obligation is totally independ-
eut of the United States; it is like the obligation
of an individual; it takes it upon itself, The
United States is in no way bound to carry it out
is in no way bound to enforce it, is in no way
bound to do anything except not TO intcicre im-
properly to prevent the payment by State OF its
obligations. If it does thus improperly interfere
It might lay the foundation, undoubtedly, Of an
equitable claim upon itself. Now, what the
condition Of thingsP Here were States over which
the United States had certain right That right
was denied; that right was violated that obhgR-
ton was broken. What aid the United States do
as people? Simply attempted to enforce, and
succeeded in enforcing its own rights Of govern
ment and its own rights of property. To that cN-
tent we went-no further. That was the occasion
of the war, and with the occasion ends the war. 49,
But the question is whether we have absorbed
these people, whether we have deprived them Of
their power as States improperly, whether we have
done anything TO prevent the enforcement and col
lection Of any Just claims that might exist against
them outside Of and beyond the proper enforce
ment of our own Just claims upon them connec-
ted with the United States. That is the simple
question. And do gentlemen pretend, can the
President or anybody else say that by the exercise
OF our fair judgment in obtaining our rights of em-
pire, if you please TO call it so, rights under
the Constitution-tbe rights Of the United States,
| mean, as against State thus setting up its
thority in opposition to tive have made ourselves
liable to place ourselves in a condition
where are bound TO discharge all their obliga-
tions2
Sir, the pretense seems TO me to be an idle one,
having foundation whatever in fact and afford
ing no just ground for the suggestion that is made
in the message TO that effect. When the time
comes that we have oblterated them when the
time comes that we have so conducted as to show
that mean that they never shall exist as States
again, that we mean to deprive them of their pow
to carry out and discharge the obligations into
which they have entered, that have destroyed
them as government, and mean to do SO, it will
be time enough then for any claimants upon these
States, whether private or public, TO say that
have assumed their obligations. Until that time
comes, any suggestion of this sort is in my iudg-
ment perfectly uncaled for, and ought not TO be
considered for moment as having weight enough
TO alarm even those most likely and most liable to
have against the ten eleven States formerly in
rebellion.