The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1871-03-17
UNIVERSAL AMNESTY.
SPEECH OF HON. JAMES H. PLATT.

HouSe OK representatives LOT tne removal
of political disabilities, Hon. j. II. Plat
of Virginia, made the following speech, a
brief synopsis of which we published
yesterday:
Mr.. Beck-I now yield five minutes to the
gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Platt.]
Mr.. Platt-In voting for the bill offered by
the gentleman from Kentucky Mr.. Beck for
the removal of disabilities from those on whom
they are yet imposed in the South, with the
amendment offered by the gentleman from
Vermont, Mr.. Poland, l am only endeavor-
ing to carry out the principles which have
constantly advocated in Virginia since the for.
nation there of the Republican party. am
carrying out the instruc tions of the Republican
party of the State of Virginia. / am carrying
out the instructions of the platform on which
l was nominated by Republican constituent
cy in that State. / am carrying out the wishes
and feelings not only of the white men whom
have the honor to represent, but also almost
without exception those of every colored man
who lives in the district represent in Virginia.
And let me say, sir, to my friend from South
Carolina Mr.. Elliott that l believe he will
find there, as we have found in Virginia, that
If he will adopt the same principles and the
same platform there for his political party
which we have adopted in my State, he will
find the same beneficial results flowing from
LlHL pUllCy as we nave experienced.
Let me call the attention of my friend from
South Carolina to the position Of matters in
my district to-day. l do not do this for the
purpose of contrasting my district particularly
with that of any other gentleman, but for the
purpose of showing--and / have facts and
figures to show for my statement and for my
belief-that the policy we advocate, and have
carried out, will go further to give loyal men
and colored men all over the South all the
rights and liberties guaranteed to them than
the policy which is advocated by the gentleman
from South Carolina.
l do not agree with the gentleman from
South Carolina in what he has said in regard
to the character of the men who are affected
by these acknowledgements. The men who are
laboring under disabilities in South Carolina
may comprise the class the gentleman has re-
ferred to, but in Virginia they do not com
prise that class. But we have in every COM
munity this class of cases. we have men who
were loyal men all their lives. Most of them
were adherents of the old Wing party; men
who did all they could to keep the State from
going into secession, and who fought that
heresy up to the time the State was precipi.
tated into war by the men who carried Vir-
ginia into rebellion, and who, am thankful
to be able to say, belonged almost without ex.
ception to the Democratic party.
Those men fought secession almost to the
last moment, and after the State was precipi-
tated into secession they only. yielded in part.
Many OF them were old men, who took no ac-
tive part or participation in the rebellion. Still
they are unable to swear that they did not |
sympathize with those who took an active |
part. Perhaps they held some little office, or
in other ways gave aid directly or Indirectly |
to men who were in armed rebellion against |
the Government of the United States. Now,
these men are not disfranchised because Of |
their participation in rebellion against the
Government. They are dsfranchised not for
any crime, but because they held office before
the war, which was no crime. And alongside |
ofthese men will be found others who were orig
inal secessionists, who did all they possibly |
could to force Virginia into rebellion and after
wards did all they possibly could to destroy the
government of the United States and make the
rebellion success, and wEo to-day are as re-
bellious in their hearts as they were when the
disfranchised. And why? Because they
never held any offices before the war. l say,
therefore, that the disabilities imposed by the Il
fourteenth amendment are unjust in principle,
because that amendment does not disfranchise
a man for crime, but allows the man who com.
mitted the crime to 60 without any punish
nent, without any responsibility, and only Il
says that where the man held an Office before
the war he shall be disfranchised. re1 /
Now, sir, the Republican party in my dis 1
trict have for four years-and that is the point
TO which wish to call the attention of the
gentleman from South Carolina consistently
advocated the removal of all political disabili.
ties, and that the removal OF political disabili-
Ties should go hand in hand with all the rights
and privileges that are conferred upon the
colored people by the amendments to the con.
stitution of the United States. We cay, in
other words, to these gentlemen, "Here are
certain rights and privileges conferred by the
constitution of the United States, as amended,
and by the Congress of the United States,
through the Republican partvH-
Here the hammer fell.
Mr.. Platt-I ask the gentleman from Ken
lucky to allow me five minutes more.
Mr.. Beck-How much time have l left?
The Speaker-The gentleman has twenty
minutes. 1880
Mr.. Beck-I yield three minutes more to the
gentleman.
Mr.. Platt-We say to these gentlemen,
There are certain rights and privileges which
we claim for ourselves, and certain rights and
privileges which we claim for every colored
nan in this State and country. These rights
nave been guaranteed to them by the consti-
ution of the United States. We are going to
have those rights if it takes the last drop of
blood in our veins to secure them; we are
going to have them if we have to fight four
years more for them, as we have fought four
years for them already. But when we demand
hese, rights of you, we demand nothing for
ourselves that we are not willing to confer
upon you; we are willing to give to every man
The same rights we ask for ourselves, provided
ne has not forfeited his rights by some viola
ion of the statute laws of the State or Of the
country in which he lives"
Z Now, say that it is too late to attempt to
punish men for what they did in the rebellion.
That time has passed. 1t is too late to demand
retribution or punishment for the past If
Congress intended to punish men for participa-
ion in the rebellion they should have done it
1t the time Of the rebellion, or at the close of
The rebellion. But they did not see fit to do it;
and l say to-day that it is too late to
attempt to do it now, and, that the true
policy of the Republican party and of this
Congress is to extend to all men at the South
all the rights of citizenship, and to secure to
ali men of the South all the rights of citizen
,hip, If it takes as large force to do it as it
took to put down the original rebellion. l will
vote with the gentleman from South Carolina
and other gentlemen on this side of the House,
md hope with many on the other side of the
House, for such measures as shall give protec,
lion to life and property in the South and
secure to every man the rights which the con-
,titution has guaranteed to him. II
| hope that these two measures may go to-
yether. And in answer to the question asked
by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr.
De Large], who stated his purpose to vote for
the bill, / desire to say that, while l am in
favor of the bill of the gentleman from Ken
lucky Mr.. Beck ], with the amendment of the
gentleman from Vermont Mr.. Poland | will
gladly, upon the first opportunity, vote for any
measure that may be brought up here to pro-
mote peace and tranquility in the South and
protect the lives of LOYAL men. sa4 |