Year: 1864

ereign character of the several States by
which it was ratified. But is it beyond
the power Of a State, like an individual,
to yield portion of its sovereign rights
to secure the remainder? In the language
of Madison, who has been called the faith
er Of the Constitution, it was formed by
the States that is, by the people in each
Of the States acting in their highest sover-
eign capacity; aud formed, consequently,
by the authority which formed the State
Constitutions.


Nor is this Government of the United
States created by the Constitution less a
Government in the strict sense ofthe term
within the sphere Of its powers, than the
government created by the Constitutions
of the States are within their several
spheres"


Now, Mr.. Speaker does this sound like
secession Could there possibly be a
stronger argument against that iniquitous
heresy? The Democ ratio party to-day,
with one unanimous voice, denounce the
doctrine. They all deny any such right,
as they have, ever since it was broacbed,
condemned and abhorred it and its con.
sequences. The Democratic party never
gave coantenance to such doctrine. But,
sir, your President of the United States
did SO. lie conceded to the Southern re-
bells the largest possible right in this res
pect that they could claim. lie told them
that they might at any time secede--they
might at any time revolutionIze-throw
off the existing government and establish
new one that would suit them better.
have no doubt that our form of govern
i (, H., I,ol, 4, IL
not have attempted to threw ifoff and es-
tablish a new COnfeieracy.


Now, sir with what grace comes this
charge Of disloyalty against the Democrat.
ic party from members on the other side
: OF this House, who are to-day cheek by
iowl with those who never breathed u syl-
liable Of loyalty or love for the Union an
terror to the period when the policy OF
their party drove the entering wedge for
its total dissolution and destruction. Not
one single man of them, | venture to say,
ever breathed one loyal sentiment lem.
ploying the term loyal in the sense in
which they now use it, anterior to the
Time when the Misunderstanding teuden.
} cies and their policy became manifest, and
it was necessary for them to shield them
selves from public condemnation by pro
fessions of love for the Union. In 1856
and in 1860 they called us in derisiou 'Un
ion savers Union shrie kers.' They urged
that we were too much in love with this
Union. To-day when they have driven
this Union to the brink of obstruction,
and when they are pierced by the com
FUNCTIONS OF their guilty consciences, they
feel the necessity of protesting devotion
ITt,1. I,,t 81. . l,,l / { 4 LII.
party tell them again and again that they
must not be too excessively loyal They
ring into our ears the declaration which
the gentleman from Washington has re-
peated upon this floor, that they are not
in favor Of the Union as it was. They do
not want the Union as it was. What then
do they want? To what new feast do they
invite us to day? Is there to be inaugu-
rated a new doctrine of which we know
nothing? Are we to fall down and wor-
ship as a destiny some black image which
they may choose to erect? Let them tell
US what is the new Union which they
wish to erect upon the ruins of the old
one.


As l understand, they want a Union
without slavery, BECAUSE as they maintain,
slavery has brought on this war. In the
name of God what have we to do with sla-
very? Whose fault is it that they have
slaves in the South? is it the fault ofthe
Republican party, of to-day No, it is
not the fault the Republican party, and
they are not responsible for the matter.
They did not take slavery there. Penn
syIvania did not force slavery upon the
South Pennsylvania emancipated her
slaves after a certain length of time, and
when she made all Of the money out OF
the system that she could; she was very
patriotic So it was with all the other
States that emancipated the slaves from
time to time. suppose that the State
which had most to do with the freeing sla-
very in the Southern States, is to-day the
most "loval" State in this Union-Massa-
chusetts "a State whose Governor announ-
ced that the roads should swarm with
troops in response to the calls Of the Pres
dent provided he would adopt tho policy
which that State dictated.


Now, let us see what Thaddeus Stevens
says. He is one Of the leaders of the Re-
pu blican party and he does not wish the
/ Union restored. Mr.. Stevens said, not
very long ago, in Congress


81 will not stultify myself by supposing
that we have any warrant in the ConsLiLu-
ton for this proceeding"


This talk Of restoring the Union as il
was, under the Constitution as it is, is one
of the absurdties which have heard re.
peated until have become about sick oi
it. The Union can never be restored as il
was"


We are aware of il. The revolutionary
party of the North, when they created 9
new State, down in Virginia established
that fact conclusiyely, that you never car
restore the Union as it was.


"There are many things which render
such an event impossible. The Union
never shall, with my consent, be restored
under the Constitution as it is, with slave
ry to be protected by it,"


Now, sir it thus appears that the Union
will never be restored with the consent OF
Mr. Stevens; and ! believe he is the ac'
knowledgeJ leader Of the Abolition party
in Congress to-day.
Tb;s narty ara loud in their professions