Year: 1867

such state of case would be that it was to
apply to all the States, and not be restrict-
ed to portion only, not named in the act
ITSELF = rt.iH 1cu p Lj.i -faR .


The honorable gentleman seemed to be in 3
spired with the spirit ofprophecy as to what
will be the decision of the supreme judicial
tribunal of the land upon the question
whether that law was righttully and con-
stitutionally presented to the States then
lately in rebellion by the Secretary of
State for their ratification or rejection.
Sir, am neither prophet nor the son of
a prophet, nor am at all of kin to any of &
the astrological race; but 1 have no fears
as to what that decision will be, after the
late determination of the Georgia and Mis-
sissippi cases in the Supreme Court of the
United States, if 1 rightfuily apprehend
the true ground of those decisions. The d
point OF those decisions, as understand it,
is that a State has no legal capacity to sue
the United States; or perhaps it may be
more correctly stated that the Supreme
Court has no original jurisdiction when a
State undertakes to sue the United States.
Now, sir, if this is the true statement of the
question involved in those cases, 1t follows
that the most essential principle first to be
disposed of by the court was to determine
whether Georgia and Mississippi acere States
or not. The court, therefore, must have
assumed that they were States in the Union,
or the question of jurisdiction would not
have been raised or passed upon. 1t is
also not unworthy OF remark that the At
torney General of the United States, who
argued those cases, and who is known to
be one of the most able and distinguished
lawyers in the country, made no ques-
ton as to the constitutional status
of Georgia or Mississippi. I am,
therefore, satisfied with the indiea-
tions of the great judicial tribunal of the
n tioO if the gentleman from PRnOgVlVania
is. But the honorable gentleman has, in
nv humble opi$liOn, put himSelfi in dilem-
ma he did not at all anticipate. Suppose
it to be true that the Secretary of State had
no authority to present this law of Con-
gress 10 the Southern States for ratifca-
ton or rejection and suppose, ityou please,
that it was clearly the original purpose of
Congress that the Southern States should
have, under the law, no power or right of
ratification or rejection, and that this legls-
lative purpose was clearly exp. essed in the
law itself; what then? Is the honorable
gentleman from Pennsylvania or is Con-
gressy going to pass a law and impose Con-
stitution upon whole people in no wise
entitled to suffrage either as to its enact


ment or amendment? In other words, can
Constitution or any amendment thereto


be made to exist and exert itself over an


entire people who have been denied any


participation either in its original enact


ment or its subsequent amendment?


Sir, such state of case is a new problem
| in the theory of constitutional Government


think it would be extremely difficult for
my honorable friend to find, in the whole


range of the history of free Government,


any precedent for so grotesque and anom-


alous q proceeding. The truth is, Mr..
| Speaker, Congress did intend that this law


should be passed upon by the legislative


authorities of the Southern States. We


all know with what intense anxiety


the whole Northern mind, Republican and
| Democratic, looked to the action OF the


Southern States upon the question. If this
| is true, sir, and it cannot be successfully
controVerted, then we have this most un-


precedented political or legislative spec
! tacle presented to our observation: the


Congress of the United States most


solemnly declaring that the conquered


Southern people, subdivided, as it is claim
ed, into nothing more than some sort of


municipal or quasi political communities,


are good and valid enough as States invest
ed with the sovereign power of legislation,
| to ratify a Constitution which was pro-


posed to be amended under the provisions
i of law passed by federative Congress in


which they were denied representation,


and dictated to them by their conquerors !;


and that same federative Congress now
propose to hold and declare that they are
I'no States at all, when the great right of
petition is interposed in their behalf, if the


precedent established last year in the case
of the petition of the Governor OF North
/ Carolina shall be followed.


sir, if this great wrong shall be perpet-


uated, if the blindness of party zeal shall


prevail, and all law and justice shall be


disregarded. the only consolation which


we in the minority shall feel or realize


will be the fact that your action will go


to the country for its affirmance or con-


demnation along with the many other vio-
. lations of the laws and Constitution, to be


passed upon by the final arbitra ment OF


public opinion. We are not aware of the


fact that you still feel secure in your


strength, and are still confident in the


powers of party organization but we shall
bide our time; we shall patiently wait un-


til reason shall resume her empire over the
popular mind and when that time comes,
as come it must we know that the fate of


the Republican party will be crushing
, public odiunl. and loss of power never to


be regained SO long as its long catalogue Of
wrongs and outrages shall exist in the re-
membrance of the American people.


Mr.. Speaker, feel no other interest ir
the question now before the House, than
what is naturally felt by every lover OF


liberty and law. l feel such interest, MOI
as partisan, but as an American citizen


and L have raised my voice in behalf of the
: constitutional privilege which it involves
not with the vain hope of possessing the
, slightest influence in its determination, but
, in the simple discharge of a duty which
f owe to my constituents and to the country
: l know very well, sir, how futile it is tC


oppose the power of dominant party


which deems nothing unlawful which it il
: able to accomplish, and esteems nothing sa
cred or inviolable which it wishes to de-