Year: 1864

Mr. Speaker, had not intended to ask


the attention of the House, or to occupy


its time on this question of confscatior
at all, but some things have been saiC


touching its military aspects which make
it proper for me to trespass upon the pa


tience of the House even at this late pc
riod of the discussion. Feeling that, il
some small degree, | represent on thii
floor the Army of the Republic, am the
more emboldened to speak to this subject
before me. have been surprised that in
so lengthy and able discussion so little
reference has been made to the merits oi
debate has had reference to questions
which believe, with all Difference TO the
better judgment and maturer experience
of others, are not germane TO the subject
before the House. In the wide range ol
discussion the various theories of the lie.
gal and political status of the rebellious
States have been eXamined-whetheI
they exist any longer as States, whether
they ale in the Union or out of il. 1t is
perhaps necessary that we take ground
upon that question rs preliminary to the
discussion of the resolution itself. Two
theories, differing widely from each other,
have been proposed: but | cannot con-
slider either of them rs wholly correct.
cannot agree with the distinguished gen.
tleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.. Stevens, J
who acknowledges that these States are
out of the Union and now constitute a
foreign people. Nor can |, On the other
hand, agree with those who believe that
has Rnf ONllu IN he
Union, but have lost none of their rights
under the Constitution and laws of the
Union.


Our situation affords singular parallel
to that Of the people of Great Britain in
their great revolution of the seventeenth
century. From time immemorial it was
the fiction of English law that the king
ship was immortal, hereditary, and in
alienable; that the king was "king by the
grace of Cod" he could do no wrong. and
his throne could never be vacant. But
the logic of events brought these ques-
tions TO practical test.


James left the throne, threw the great
seal of the nation into the Thames, and
fleeing from his own people took refuge
in France. The great statesmen of the
kingdom took counsel together on some
of the very questions which we are dis
cussing to-day. One said, "The king has
abdicated, and we will put another in his
place" Another said, 1.-THE crown is he
Teditary, and we must put the heir in his
place." The men of books and black let
ter learning answered, memo est hGres
eiesndi;" ''the king is alive, and can have
no heir" Another said, 1--WE will ap-
point regent, and consider the kingship
in allegiance until the king returns" The
people said, "We will have king, but
not James"


Through all this sstruggle two facts were
the throne was vacant; and
their king was unworthy to fill it; and
they filed it with the man of their choice.
We are taught By this that whenever a
great people desire to do thing which
ought to be done, they will find the means
of doing it. In this Government we have
thrown off the kingly fiction, but there is
another which we are following as slav-
ishly as ever England following that
Here, corporations are more than kings.
1t is the doctrine of our common law (if
we may be said TO have a common law
that corporations have neither souls or
consciences; that they cannot be pun
ished, and that they are immortal. These
propositions are being applied to the rebel
States. They are corporations of polit-
ical character, bodies corporate and
polite; they are,immortal; and cannot be
touched by the justice of law, or by the
powero of an outraged Government. They
hover around our borders like malignant,
bloody fends, carrying death in their
course and yet we are told they cannot
be punished or their ancient rights in
vaded.


The people of the South, under the di-
rectiongof those phantom States, are NOV
ing the powers of earth and hell to des-
troy this Government. They plead the
order of their States as their shield from
and the States plead the
of soulless corporations.


But the American people will not be
deluded by these theories nor waste time
in discussing them. They will strike
through all shams with the sword, and
find practical solution as England did.
And what is that practical solution? The
Supreme Court of the United States has
helped US at this point in one of the prize
cases decided March 3, 1863. 1t is there
decided in effect


THAT since July l3, 1861, the United
states have full belligerent rights against
all persons residing in the districts de-
clared by the Presidents Proclamation 20
be in rebellion"


THAT the laws of war, whether that
war be civil or enter gentes, covert every
citizen of the hostile State into a public
enemy, and treat him accordingly, what
ever may have been his previous con-
duct"


THAT all the rights derived from the
laws of war may now, since 1861, be law
fully and constitutionally exercised
against all citizens of the districts in re-
bellion."


They decided there that the same laws
of war which apply TO hostile foreign
States are to be applied TO this rebellion.
But in so deciding they do not decide that
the rebellious States are therefore for
eign people. | do not hold it necessary
to admit that they are a foreign people.
do not admit it. | claim on the contrary
that the obligations of the Constitution
still hang over them; but by their own
act of rebellion they have cut themselves
off from all their rights and privileges un-
der the Constitution.


When the Government of the United
States declared that we were in a state of
war, the rebel States came under the laws
of war. By their acts of rebellion and
war they swept away every vestige of
their civil and political rights under
the Constitution of the United States
Their obligations still remained; but the
reciprocal rights which usually accompa-
nv obligations, they had forfeited.


The question then lies open before US
In a state of war, under the laws of war,
is this resolution legal and politicl | in
sist, Mr.. Speaker, that the question in
volyed in the resolution before this House
is whether this Goyernmeut. in its exer.