Chapter VIII: The Senate and the Veto Message (1)

Mr. Trumbull on the amendments of the House -- Mr. Guthrie
exhibits feeling -- Mr. Sherman's deliberate conclusion --
Mr. Henderson's sovereign remedy -- Mr. Trumbull on patent
medicines -- Mr. McDougall a white man -- Mr. Reverdy
Johnson on the power to pass the bill -- Concurrence of the
House -- the Veto Message -- Mr. Lane, of Kansas -- His
efforts for delay -- Mr. Garrett Davis -- Mr. Trumbull's
reply to the President -- The question taken -- Yeas and
Nays -- Failure of passage.

On the 7th of February the amendments of the House to the Freedmen's Bureau Bill were presented to the Senate, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

On the following day Mr. Trumbull, chairman of this committee, reported certain amendments to the amendments made by the House of Representatives. Mr. Trumbull said: "The House of Representatives have adopted a substitute for the whole bill, but it is the Senate bill _verbatim_, with a few exceptions, which I will endeavor to point out. The title of the bill has been changed, to begin with. It was called as it passed the Senate 'A bill to enlarge the powers of the Freedmen's Bureau.' The House has amended the title so as to make it read, 'A bill to amend an act entitled "An act to establish a Bureau for the Relief of Freedmen and Refugees," and for other purposes.' Of course, there is no importance in that.

"The first amendment which the House has made, and the most important one, will be found to commence in the eighth line of the first section. The House has inserted words limiting the operation of the Freedmen's Bureau to those sections of country within which the writ of _habeas corpus_ was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866. As the bill passed the Senate, it will be remembered that it extended to refugees and freedmen in all parts of the United States, and the President was authorized to divide the section of country containing such refugees and freedmen into districts. The House amend that so as to authorize the President to divide the section of country within which the privilege of the writ of _habeas corpus_ was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866, containing such refugees and freedmen, into districts. The writ of _habeas corpus_ on the 1st day of February last was suspended in the late rebellious States, including Kentucky, and in none other. The writ of _habeas corpus_ was restored by the President's proclamation in Maryland, in Delaware, and in Missouri, all of which have been slaveholding States.

"As the bill passed the Senate, it will be observed it only extended to refugees and freedmen in the United States, wherever they might be, and the President was authorized to divide the region of country containing such refugees and freedmen, and it had no operation except in States where there were refugees and freedmen. The House has limited it so that it will not have operation in Maryland, or Delaware, or Missouri, or any of the Northern States."

After Mr. Trumbull had stated the other and less important amendments made by the House, the Senate proceeded to consider the amendments proposed by the Judiciary Committee, the first of which was to strike out the words "within which the privileges of the writ of _habeas corpus_ was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866."

Mr. Trumbull said: "I wish to say upon that point that the bill as it passed the Senate can have no operation except in regions of country where there are refugees and freedmen. It is confined to those districts of country, and it could not have operation in most of the loyal States. But it is desirable, as I am informed, and it was so stated by one of the Senators from Maryland, that the operations of this bill should be extended to Maryland. It may be necessary that it should be extended to Missouri, and possibly to Delaware. I trust not; but the authority to extend it there ought to exist, if there should be occasion for it. The only objection I have to limiting the operation of the bill to the late slaveholding States is, that I think it bad legislation, when we are endeavoring to break down discrimination and distinction, to pass a law which is to operate in one State of the Union and not in another. I would rather that the law should be general, although I am fully aware that there is nothing for the law to operate upon in most of the States of the Union. I do not feel quite willing to vote upon Kentucky, for instance, a law that I am not willing to have applicable to the State of Illinois, if such a state of facts exists as that the law can operate in Illinois. I prefer, therefore, to have the bill in the shape in which it passed the Senate, and such was the opinion of the Committee on the Judiciary."

Mr. Guthrie, of Kentucky, spoke with much feeling upon the bearings of the bureau upon his State: "You will have to acknowledge these States or you will have to do worse. The passage of this system of bills is a dissolution of the Union, and you can not help it. It will be impossible for you to carry on this Government under any such system. When the Union is not to be restored, when there is nothing of that feeling to make the people endure, do you suppose they will endure forever? Do you suppose this bill will attach the people in these eleven States more thoroughly to the Union than they felt when they reörganized their State governments, passed laws manumitting their slaves, electing their Legislatures, and doing all that was indicated as necessary to be done? Do you suppose that there will ever come a time, under this bill, that they will desire to become members of this Union once more? I see in this bill exactly how Kentucky is tolerated here; for as to having part in this legislation, when she is charged openly with being ruled at home by rebels, our counsels can be of no good here; but still we are not to be driven from the Union, and from raising our voice in favor of it, and raising it in favor of conciliation and confidence from one section to the other. Gentlemen do not get these doctrines of hatred and vengeance from the Gospel. These are not the doctrines taught by the Savior of the world. While you cry for justice to the African, you are not slow to commit wrong and outrage on the white race.

"Sir, there were rebels in all the States, and will be again if you drive these people to desperation. The Senator from Massachusetts, if I understood his language aright, threatened us with war or worse if we did not yield to his suggestions, and the Senator from Indiana intimated very strongly the same thing. You have strength enough to carry these measures, if it is the sentiment of the nation; but we are not a people to be alarmed by words or threats."

Mr. Sherman had been, as he said, "during this whole debate, rather a spectator than a participant." Not desiring to commit himself too hastily, he had reserved his opinion that he might act and vote understandingly, without feeling, or prejudice, or passion. It was after full reflection that he voted for the bill so harshly characterized by the Senator from Kentucky, who had evinced a degree of feeling entirely uncalled for. Mr. Sherman said further: "I look upon the Freedman's Bureau Bill as simply a temporary protection to the freedmen in the Southern States. We are bound by every consideration of honor, by every obligation that can rest on any people, to protect the freedmen from the rebels of the Southern States; ay, sir, and to protect them from the loyal men of the Southern States. We know that, on account of the prejudices instilled by the system of slavery pervading all parts of the Southern States, the Southern people will not do justice to the freedmen of those States. We know that in the course of the war the freedmen have been emancipated; that they have aided us in this conflict; and, therefore, we are bound, by every consideration of honor, faith, and of public morals, to protect and maintain all the essential incidents of freedom to them. I have no doubt that in doing this we shall encounter the prejudices not only of rebels, but of loyal men; but still the obligation and guarantee is none the less binding on us. We must maintain their freedom, and with it all the incidents and all the rights of freedom."

Mr. Henderson, of Missouri, like the Senator from Ohio, had hitherto taken no part in the discussion. He was opposed to the limitations placed upon the bill by the House of Representatives. "I would not have voted for it if it had not been carried to my own State; and if this amendment of the House of Representatives is to be adopted, I will not vote for the bill. I want the bill to be made general. If it is to be made special, if it is to be applied to Kentucky only, I appreciate the feeling that drove my friend from Kentucky to make the most unfortunate remark that has been made upon the floor of the Senate since 1861. I sincerely hope, for the good of the country, that the distinguished Senator may see fit to take back what he said a few moments ago.

"Sir, we have had enough of disunion. I hope that no Senator in the future will rise upon this floor and talk, under any circumstances whatever, of another war of rebellion against the constituted authorities of this country. My God! are we again to pass through the scenes of blood through which we have passed for the last four years? Are we to have this war repeated? No Freedmen's Bureau Bill, no bill for the protection of the rights of any body, shall ever drive me to dream of such a thing."

Mr. Henderson thought a better protection for the negro than the Freedmen's Bureau would be the ballot. He said: "I live in a State that was a slaveholding State until last January a year ago. I have been a slaveholder all my life until the day when the ordinance of emancipation was passed in my State. I advocated it, and have advocated emancipation for the last four years, at least since this war commenced. Do you want to know how to protect the freedmen of the Southern States? This bill is useless for that purpose. It is not the intention of the honorable Senators on this floor from Northern States, who favor this bill, to send military men to plunder the good people of Kentucky. It is an attempt to enforce this moral and religious sentiment of the people of the Northern States. Sir, these freedmen will be protected. The decree of Almighty God has gone forth, as it went forth in favor of their freedom originally, that they shall be endowed with all the rights that belong to other men. Will you protect them? Give them the ballot, Mr. President, and then they are protected."

In reference to the remarks by Mr. Henderson, Mr. Trumbull said: "The zeal of my friend from Missouri seems to have run away with him. Having come from being a slaveholder to the position of advocating universal negro suffrage as the sovereign remedy for every thing, he manifests a degree of zeal which I have only seen equaled, I confess, by some of the discoverers of patent medicines who have found a grand specific to cure all diseases! Why, he says this bureau is of no account; give the negro the ballot, and that will stop him from starving; that will feed him; that will educate him! You have got on your hands to-day one hundred thousand feeble indigent, infirm colored population that would starve and die if relief were not afforded; and the Senator from Missouri tells you, 'This is all nonsense; give them the right of suffrage, and that is all they want.' This to feed the hungry and clothe the naked! He has voted for these bills; but if you will only just give the right of suffrage, you do not want to take care of any starving man, any orphan child, any destitute and feeble person that can not take care of himself! It is the most sovereign remedy that I have heard of since the days of Townsend's Sarsaparilla."

Referring to the feeling manifested by Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Trumbull said: " God forbid that I should put a degradation on the people of Kentucky. I never thought of such a thing. I would sooner cut off my right hand than do such a thing. What is it that so excites and inflames the mind of the Senator from Kentucky that he talks about the degradation that is to be put upon her, the plunder of her people, the injustice that is to be done her inhabitants? Why, sir, a bill to help the people of Kentucky to take care of the destitute negroes, made free without any property whatever, without the means of support, left to starve and to die unless somebody cares for them; and we propose in the Congress of the United States to help to do it. Is that a degradation? Is that an injustice? Is that the way to rob a people?"

Mr. McDougall having subsequently obtained the floor, made the remark: "I, being a white man, say for the white men and white women that they will take care of themselves. This bill was not made for white women or white men, or white men and women's children."

This brought out the following statistical statement from Mr. Trumbull: "I have before me the official report, which shows the consolidated number of rations issued in the different districts and States during the month of June, July, August, September, and October, 1865. In June there were issued to refugees three hundred and thirteen thousand six hundred and twenty-seven rations, and thirty six thousand one hundred and eighty-one to freedmen. In August, in Kentucky and Tennessee, there were issued to refugees eighty-seven thousand one hundred and eighty rations, and to freedmen eighty-seven thousand one hundred and ninety-five--almost an equality."

Mr. Johnson, of Maryland remarked: "The object of the bill is a very correct one; these people should be taken care of; and as it is equally applicable to the whites and to the blacks, and the whites in many of the States requiring as much protection as the blacks, I would very willingly vote for the bill if I thought we had the power to pass it; but on the question of power I have no disposition now or perhaps at any time in the present stage of the bill to trouble the Senate."

The bill soon after passed the Senate as amended in the House, and reämended in the Senate, by a vote of twenty-nine to seven.

On the following day, the amendments of the Senate were concurred in by the House without debate, and the Freedmen's Bureau Bill was ready to be submitted to the Executive.

Ten day's after the final passage of the bill, the President sent to the Senate a message, "with his objection thereto in writing."

The Senate immediately suspended other business to hear the VETO MESSAGE, which was read by the Secretary, as follows:

"_To the Senate of the United States:_

"I have examined with care the bill which originated in the
Senate, and has been passed by the two houses of Congress,
to amend an act entitled 'An act to establish a Bureau for
the relief of Freedmen and Refugees,' and for other
purposes. Having, with much regret, come to the conclusion
that it would not be consistent with the public welfare to
give my approval to the measure, I return the bill to the
Senate with my objections to its becoming a law.

"I might call to mind, in advance of these objections, that
there is no immediate necessity for the proposed measure.
The act to establish a Bureau for the relief of Freedmen and
Refugees, which was approved in the month of March last, has
not yet expired. It was thought stringent and extensive
enough for the purpose in view in time of war. Before it
ceases to have effect, further experience may assist to
guide us to a wise conclusion as to the policy to be adopted
in time of peace.

"I share with Congress the strongest desire to secure to the
freedmen the full enjoyment of their freedom and property,
and their entire independence and equality in making
contracts for their labor; but the bill before me contains
provisions which, in my opinion, are not warranted by the
Constitution, and are not well suited to accomplish the end
in view.

"The bill proposes to establish by authority of Congress,
military jurisdiction over all parts of the United States
containing refugees and freedmen. It would, by its very
nature, apply with most force to those parts of the United
States in which the freedmen most abound; and it expressly
extends the existing temporary jurisdiction of the
Freedmen's Bureau, with greatly enlarged powers, over those
States 'in which the ordinary course of judicial proceeding,
has been interrupted by the rebellion.' The source from
which this military jurisdiction is to emanate is none other
than the President of the United States, acting through the
War Department and the commissioner of the Freedmen's
Bureau. The agents to carry out this military jurisdiction
are to be selected either from the army or from civil life;
the country is to be divided into districts and
sub-districts; and the number of salaried agents to be
employed may be equal to the number of counties or parishes
in all the United States where freedmen and refugees are to
be found.

"The subjects over which this military jurisdiction is to
extend in every part of the United States include protection
to 'all employés, agents, and officers of this bureau in the
exercise of the duties imposed' upon them by the bill. In
eleven States it is further to extend over all cases
affecting freedmen and refugees discriminated against' by
local law, custom, or prejudice.' In those eleven States the
bill subjects any white person who may be charged with
depriving a freedman of 'any civil rights or immunities
belonging to white persons' to imprisonment or fine, or
both, without, however, defining the 'civil rights and
immunities' which are thus to be secured to the freedmen by
military law. This military jurisdiction also extends to all
questions that may arise respecting contracts. The agent who
is thus to exercise the office of a military judge may be a
stranger, entirely ignorant of the laws of the place, and
exposed to the errors of judgment to which all men are
liable. The exercise of power, over which there is no legal
supervision, by so vast a number of agents as is
contemplated by the bill, must, by the very nature of man,
be attended by acts of caprice, injustice, and passion.

"The trials, having their origin under this bill, are to
take place without the intervention of a jury, and without
any fixed rules of law or evidence. The rules on which
offenses are to be 'heard and determined' by the numerous
agents, are such rules and regulations as the President,
through the War Department, shall prescribe. No previous
presentment is required, nor any indictment charging the
commission of a crime against the laws; but the trial must
proceed on charges and specifications. The punishment will
be, not what the law declares, but such as a court-martial
may think proper; and from these arbitrary tribunals there
lies no appeal, no writ of error to any of the courts in
which the Constitution of the United States vests
exclusively the judicial power of the country.

"While the territory and the classes of actions and offenses
that are made subject to this measure are so extensive, the
bill itself, should it become a law, will have no limitation
in point of time, but will form a part of the permanent
legislation of the country. I can not reconcile a system of
military jurisdiction of this kind with the words of the
Constitution, which declare that 'no person shall be held to
answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless upon
a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases
arising in the land and naval forces, or in the militia when
in actual service in time of war or public danger;' and that
'in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of
the State or district wherein the crime shall have been
committed.' The safeguards which the experience and wisdom
of ages taught our fathers to establish as securities for
the protection of the innocent, the punishment of the
guilty, and the equal administration of justice, are to be
set aside, and for the sake of a more vigorous interposition
in behalf of justice, we are to take the risk of the many
acts of injustice that would necessarily follow from an
almost countless number of agents established in every
parish or county in nearly a third of the States of the
Union, over whose decisions there is to be no supervision or
control by the Federal courts. The power that would be thus
placed in the hands of the President is such as in time of
peace certainly ought never to be intrusted to any one man.

"If it be asked whether the creation of such a tribunal
within a State is warranted as a measure of war, the
question immediately presents itself whether we are still
engaged in war. Let us not unnecessarily disturb the
commerce and credit and industry of the country by declaring
to the American people and to the world, that the United
States are still in a condition of civil war. At present
there is no part of our country in which the authority of
the United States is disputed. Offenses that may be
committed by individuals should not work a forfeiture of the
rights of whole communities. The country has returned, or is
returning, to a state of peace and industry, and the
rebellion is in fact at an end. The measure, therefore,
seems to be as inconsistent with the actual condition of the
country as it is at variance with the Constitution of the
United States.

"If, passing from general considerations, we examine the
bill in detail, it is open to weighty objections.

"In time of war it was eminently proper, that we should
provide for those who were passing suddenly from a condition
of bondage to a state of freedom. But this bill proposes to
make the Freedmen's Bureau, established by the act of 1865
as one of many great and extraordinary military measures to
suppress a formidable rebellion, a permanent branch of the
public administration, with its powers greatly enlarged. I
have no reason to suppose, and I do not understand it to be
alleged, that the act of March, 1865, has proved deficient
for the purpose for which it was passed, although at that
time, and for a considerable period thereafter, the
Government of the United States remained unacknowledged in
most of the States whose inhabitants had been involved in
the rebellion. The institution of slavery, for the military
destruction of which the Freedmen's Bureau was called into
existence as an auxiliary, has been already effectually and
finally abrogated throughout the whole country by an
amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and
practically its eradication has received the assent and
concurrence of most of those States in which it at any time
had an existence. I am not, therefore, able to discern, in
the condition of the country, any thing to justify an
apprehension that the powers and agencies of the Freedmen's
Bureau, which were effective for the protection of freedmen
and refugees during the actual continuance of hostilities
and of African servitude, will now, in a time of peace and
after the abolition of slavery, prove inadequate to the same
proper ends. If I am correct in these views, there can be no
necessity for the enlargement of the powers of the bureau,
for which provision is made in the bill.

"The third section of the bill authorizes a general and
unlimited grant of support to the destitute and suffering
refugees and freedmen, their wives and children. Succeeding
sections make provision for the rent or purchase of landed
estates for freedmen, and for the erection for their benefit
of suitable buildings for asylums and schools, the expenses
to be defrayed from the Treasury of the whole people. The
Congress of the United States has never heretofore thought
itself empowered to establish asylums beyond the limits of
the District of Columbia, except for the benefit of our
disabled soldiers and sailors. It has never founded schools
for any class of our own people, not even for the orphans of
those who have fallen in the defense of the Union; but has
left the care of education to the much more competent and
efficient control of the States, of communities, of private
associations, and of individuals. It has never deemed itself
authorized to expend the public money for the rent or
purchase of homes for the thousands, not to say millions, of
the white race, who are honestly toiling from day to day for
their subsistence. A system for the support of indigent
persons in the United States was never contemplated by the
authors of the Constitution, nor can any good reason be
advanced why, as a permanent establishment, it should be
founded for one class or color of our people more than
another. Pending the war, many refugees and freedmen
received support from the Government, but it was never
intended that they should thenceforth be fed, clothed,
educated, and sheltered by the United States. The idea on
which the slaves were assisted to freedom was that, on
becoming free, they would be a self-sustaining population.
Any legislation that shall imply that they are not expected
to attain a self-sustaining condition must have a tendency
injurious alike to their character and their prospects.

"The appointment of an agent for every county and parish
will create an immense patronage; and the expense of the
numerous officers and their clerks, to be appointed by the
President, will be great in the beginning, with a tendency
steadily to increase. The appropriations asked by the
Freedmen's Bureau, as now established, for the year 1866,
amount to $11,745,000. It may be safely estimated that the
cost to be incurred under the pending bill will require
double that amount--more than the entire sum expended in any
one year under the administration of the second Adams. If
the presence of agents in every parish and county is to be
considered as a war measure, opposition, or even resistance,
might be provoked, so that, to give effect to their
jurisdiction, troops would have to be stationed within reach
of every one of them, and thus a large standing force be
rendered necessary. Large appropriations would therefore be
re-required to sustain and enforce military jurisdiction in
every county or parish from the Potomac to the Rio Grande.
The condition of our fiscal affairs is encouraging, but, in
order to sustain the present measure of public confidence,
it is necessary that we practice not merely customary
economy, but, as far as possible, severe retrenchment.

"In addition to the objections already stated, the fifth
section of the bill proposes to take away land from its
former owners without any legal proceedings being first had,
contrary to that provision of the Constitution which
declares that no person shall 'be deprived of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law.' It does not appear
that a part of the lands to which this section refers may
not be owned by minors or persons of unsound mind, or by
those who have been faithful to all their obligations as
citizens of the United States. If any portion of the land is
held by such persons, it is not competent for any authority
to deprive them of it. If, on the other hand, it be found
that the property is liable to confiscation, even then it
can not be appropriated to public purposes until, by due
process of law, it shall have been declared forfeited to the
Government.

"There is still further objection to the bill on grounds
seriously affecting the class of persons to whom it is
designed to bring relief; it will tend to keep the mind of
the freedman in a state of uncertain expectation and
restlessness, while to those among whom he lives it will be
a source of constant and vague apprehension.

"Undoubtedly the freedman should be protected, but he should
be protected by the civil authorities, especially by the
exercise of all the constitutional powers of the courts of
the United States and of the States. His condition is not so
exposed as may at first be imagined. He is in a portion of
the country where his labor can not well be spared.
Competition for his services from planters, from those who
are constructing or repairing railroads, and from
capitalists in his vicinage or from other States, will
enable him to command almost his own terms. He also
possesses a perfect right to change his place of abode; and
if, therefore, he does not find in one community or State a
mode of life suited to his desires, or proper remuneration
for his labor, he can move to another, where that labor is
more esteemed and better rewarded. In truth, however, each
State, induced by its own wants and interests, will do what
is necessary and proper to retain within its borders all the
labor that is needed for the development of its resources.
The laws that regulate supply and demand will maintain their
force, and the wages of the laborer will be regulated
thereby. There is no danger that the exceedingly great
demand for labor will not operate in favor of the laborer.

"Neither is sufficient consideration given to the ability of
the freedmen to protect and take care of themselves. It is
no more than justice to them to believe that, as they have
received their freedom with moderation and forbearance, so
they will distinguish themselves by their industry and
thrifty and soon show the world that, in a condition of
freedom, they are self-sustaining, capable of selecting
their own employment and their own places of abode, of
insisting for themselves on a proper remuneration, and of
establishing and maintaining their own asylums and schools.
It is earnestly hoped that, instead of wasting away, they
will, by their own efforts, establish for themselves a
condition of respect, ability, and prosperity. It is certain
that they can attain to that condition only through their
own merits and exertions.

"In this connection the query presents itself, whether the
system proposed by the bill will not, when put into complete
operation, practically transfer the entire care, support,
and control of four million emancipated slaves to agents,
overseers, or taskmasters, who, appointed at Washington, are
to be located in every county and parish throughout the
United States containing freedmen and refugees? Such a
system would inevitably tend to a concentration of power in
the Executive which would enable him, if so disposed, to
control the action of this numerous class and use them for
the attainment of his own political ends.

"I can not but add another very grave objection to this
bill: The Constitution imperatively declares, in connection
with taxation, that each State shall have at least one
Representative, and fixes the rule for the number to which,
in future times, each State shall be entitled. It also
provides that the Senate of the United States shall be
composed of two Senators from each State, and adds, with
peculiar force, 'that no State, without its consent, shall
be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.'. The
original act was necessarily passed in the absence of the
States chiefly to be affected, because their people were
then contumaciously engaged in the rebellion. Now the case
is changed, and some, at least, of those States are
attending Congress by loyal Representatives, soliciting the
allowance of the constitutional right of representation. At
the time, however, of the consideration and the passing of
this bill, there was no Senator or Representative in
Congress from the eleven States which are to be mainly
affected by its provisions. The very fact that reports were
and are made against the good disposition of the people of
that portion of the country is an additional reason why they
need, and should have, Representatives of their own in
Congress to explain their condition, reply to accusations,
and assist, by their local knowledge, in the perfecting of
measures immediately affecting themselves. While the liberty
of deliberation would then be free, and Congress would have
full power to decide according to its judgment, there could
be no objection urged that the States most interested had
not been permitted to be heard. The principle is firmly
fixed in the minds of the American people that there should
be no taxation without representation.

"Great burdens have now to be borne by all the country, and
we may best demand that they shall be borne without murmur
when they are voted by a majority of the Representatives of
all the people. I would not interfere with the
unquestionable right of Congress to judge, each house for
itself, 'of the elections, returns, and qualifications of
its own members,' but that authority can not be construed as
including the right to shut out, in time of peace, any State
from the representation to which it is entitled by the
Constitution. At present, all the people of eleven States
are excluded--those who were most faithful during the war
not less than others. The State of Tennessee, for instance,
whose authorities engaged in rebellion, was restored to all
her constitutional relations to the Union by the patriotism
and energy of her injured and betrayed people. Before the
war was brought to a termination, they had placed themselves
in relation with the General Government, had established a
State government of their own; as they were not included in
the Emancipation Proclamation, they, by their own act, had
amended their Constitution so as to abolish slavery within
the limits of their State. I know no reason why the State of
Tennessee, for example, should not fully enjoy 'all her
constitutional relations to the United States.'

"The President of the United States stands toward the
country in a somewhat different attitude from that of any
member of Congress. Each member of Congress is chosen from a
single district or State; the President is chosen by the
people of all the States. As eleven are not at this time
represented in either branch of Congress, it would seem to
be his duty, on all proper occasions, to present their just
claims to Congress. There always will be differences of
opinion in the community, and individuals may be guilty of
transgressions of the law; but these do not constitute valid
objections against the right of a State to representation. I
would in nowise interfere with the discretion of Congress
with regard to the qualifications of members; but I hold it
my duty to recommend to you, in the interests of peace and,
in the interests of union, the admission of every State to
its share in public legislation when, however insubordinate,
insurgent, or rebellious its people may have been, it
presents itself, not only in an attitude of loyalty and
harmony, but in the persons of Representatives whose loyalty
can not be questioned under any existing constitutional or
legal test.

"It is plain that an indefinite or permanent exclusion of
any part of the country from representation must be attended
by a spirit of disquiet and complaint. It is unwise and
dangerous to pursue a course of measures which will unite a
very large section of the country against another section of
the country, however much the latter may preponderate. The
course of emigration, the development of industry and
business, and natural causes will raise up at the South men
as devoted to the Union as those of any other part of the
land. But if they are all excluded from Congress--if, in a
permanent statute, they are declared not to be in full
constitutional relations to the country--they may think they
have cause to become a unit in feeling and sentiment against
the Government. Under the political education of the
American people, the idea is inherent and ineradicable that
the consent of the majority of the whole people is necessary
to secure a willing acquiescence in legislation.

"The bill under consideration refers to certain of the
States as though they had hot 'been fully restored in all
their constitutional relations to the United States.' If
they have not, let us at once act together to secure that
desirable end at the earliest possible moment It is hardly
necessary for me to inform Congress that, in my own
judgment, most of these States, so far, at least, as depends
upon their own action, have already been fully restored,
and»are to be deemed as entitled to enjoy their
constitutional rights as members of the Union. Reasoning
from the Constitution itself, and from the actual situation
of the country, I feel not only entitled but bound to assume
that, with the Federal courts restored, and those of the
several States in the full exercise of their functions, the
rights and interests of all classes of the people will, with
the aid of the military in cases of resistance to the laws,
be essentially protected against unconstitutional
infringement or violation. Should this expectation unhappily
fail--which I do not anticipate--then the Executive is
already fully armed with the powers conferred by the act of
March, 1865, establishing the Freedmen's Bureau, and
hereafter, as heretofore, he can employ the land and naval
forces of the country to suppress insurrection or to
overcome obstructions to the laws.

"In accordance with the Constitution, I return the bill to
the Senate, in the earnest hope that a measure involving
questions and interests so important to the country will not
become a law unless, upon deliberate consideration by the
people, it shall receive the sanction of an enlightened
public judgment.

"ANDREW JOHNSON."

The majority of the Senate was in favor of proceeding immediately to the consideration of the message, and to have a vote as to whether the bill should be passed, "the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding." To this Mr. Lane, of Kansas, was opposed. He said: "There are several Senators absent, and I think it but just to them that they should have an opportunity to be present when the vote is taken on this bill. I can not consent, so long as I can postpone this question by the rules of the Senate, to have a vote upon it to-night." Mr. Lane accordingly made four successive motions to adjourn, in each of which he called for the yeas and nays. Finally, the motion for adjournment having been made for the fifth time, it was carried, with the understanding that the bill should be the pending question at one o'clock on the following day.

On that day, February 20th, the bill and the message came duly before the Senate. Mr. Davis obtained the floor, and made a long speech in opposition to the bill and in favor of the Veto Message. He expressed his aversion to the bill, and the objects sought to be attained under it in very emphatic terms, but added nothing to the arguments which had already been adduced.

Mr. Trumbull replied to the objections urged against the bill in the President's Message. The President said, "The bill, should it become a law will have no limitation in point of time, but will form a part of the permanent legislation of the country."

"The object of the bill," replied Mr. Trumbull, "was to continue in existence the Freedmen's Bureau--not as a permanent institution. Any such intent was disavowed during the discussion of the bill. It is true, no time is expressly limited in the bill itself when it shall cease to operate, nor is it customary to insert such a clause in a law; but it is declared that the bill shall operate until otherwise provided by law. It is known that the Congress of the United States assembles every year, and no one supposed that this bill was to establish a bureau to be ingrafted upon the country as a permanent institution; far from it. Nor is it a bill that is intended to go into the States and take control of the domestic affairs of the States."

"There is no immediate necessity for the proposed measure," said the President; "the act to establish a Bureau for the Relief of Freedmen and Refugees, which was approved in the month of March last, has not yet expired. It was thought stringent and extensive enough for the purpose in view in time of war."

Mr. Trumbull replied: "By the terms of the act, it was to continue 'during the present war of rebellion and for one year thereafter.' Now, when did the war of rebellion cease? So far as the conflict of arms is concerned, we all admit that the war of rebellion ceased when the last rebel army laid down its arms, and that was some time in the month of May, when the rebel army in Texas surrendered to the Union forces. I do not hold that the consequences of the war are over. I do not understand that peace is restored with all its consequences. We have not yet escaped from the evils inflicted by the war. Peace and harmony are not yet restored, but the war of rebellion is over, and this bureau must expire in May next, according to the terms of the act that was passed on the 3d of March, 1865, and according to the views of the President as expressed in his Veto Message."

"The bill," said the President, "proposes to establish by authority of Congress, military jurisdiction over all parts of the United States containing refugees and freedmen."

"I would like to know," said Mr. Trumbull, "where in that bill is any provision extending military jurisdiction over all parts of the United States containing refugees and freedmen? The bill contains no such clause. It is a misapprehension of the bill. The clause of the bill upon that subject is this:

"'And the President of the United States, through the War
Department and the commissioner, shall extend military
jurisdiction and protection over all employés, agents, and
officers of this bureau in the exercise of the duties
imposed or authorized by this act or the act to which this
is additional.'

"Is not the difference manifest to every body between a bill that extends military jurisdiction over the officers and employés of the bureau and a bill which should extend military jurisdiction over all parts of the United States containing refugees and freedmen? This bill makes the Freedmen's Bureau a part of the War Department. It makes its officers and agents amenable to the Rules and Articles of War. But does that extend jurisdiction over the whole country where they are? How do they differ from any other portion of the army of the United States? The army of the United States, as every one knows, is governed by the Rules and Articles of War, wherever it may be, whether in Indiana or in Florida, and all persons in the army and a part of the military establishment are subject to these Rules and Articles of War; but did any body ever suppose that the whole country where they were was under military jurisdiction? If a company of soldiers are stationed at one of the forts in New York harbor, the officers and soldiers of that company are subject to military jurisdiction; but was it ever supposed that the people of the State of New York were thereby placed under military jurisdiction? It is an entire misapprehension of the provisions of the bill. It extends military jurisdiction nowhere; it merely places under jurisdiction the persons belonging to the Freedmen's Bureau who, nearly all of them, are now under military jurisdiction."

"The country," objected the President, "is to be divided into districts and sub-districts, and the number of salaried agents to be employed may be equal to the number of counties or parishes in all the States where freedmen and refugees are to be found."

Mr. Trumbull replied: "A single officer need not be employed other than those we now have. I have already stated that it is in the power and discretion of the President to detail from the army officers to perform all the duties of the Freedmen's Bureau, and, in case they are detailed, the bill provides that they shall serve without any additional compensation or allowance. But, sir, is it necessary, or was it ever contemplated, that there should be an officer or agent of the Freedmen's Bureau in every county and every parish where refugees and freedmen are to be found? By no means. What is the bill upon that subject? Does it make it imperative upon the President to appoint an agent in each county and parish? It authorizes him 'when the same shall be necessary for the operations of the bureau;' not otherwise. He has no authority, under the bill, to appoint a single agent unless it is necessary for the operations of the bureau, and then he can only appoint so many as may be needed. Sir, it never entered the mind, I venture to say, of a single advocate of this bill, that the President of the United States would so abuse the authority intrusted to him as to station an agent in every county in these States; but it was apprehended that there might be localities in some of these States where the prejudice and hostility of the white population and the former masters were such toward the negroes that it would be necessary to have an agent in every county in that locality for their protection; and, in order to give the President the necessary discretion where this should be requisite, the bill authorized, when it was necessary for the operations of the bureau, the appointment of an agent in each county or parish. In order to vest the President with sufficient power in some localities, it was necessary, legislating by general law, to give him much larger power than would be necessary in other localities.

"Sir, the country is not to be divided, I undertake to say, into districts and sub-districts unless the President of the United States finds it necessary to do so for the protection of these people; and if the law should be abused in that respect, it would be because he abused the discretion vested in him by Congress, and not because the law required it. It makes no such requirement."

"This military jurisdiction," said the President, "also extends to all questions that may arise respecting contracts."

"So far," replied Mr. Trumbull, "from extending this military jurisdiction over all questions arising concerning contracts, and so far from extending military jurisdiction anywhere, it is expressly provided, by the very terms of the bill, that no such jurisdiction shall be exercised except where the President himself has established, and is maintaining military jurisdiction, which he is now doing in eleven States; and the very moment that he ceases to maintain military jurisdiction, that very moment the military jurisdiction conferred over freedmen by this act ceases and terminates.

"Sir, the whole jurisdiction to try and dispose of cases by the officers and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau is expressly limited to the time when these States shall be restored to their constitutional relations, and when the courts of the United States and of the States are not interrupted nor interfered with in the peaceable course of justice. So far, then, from the bill establishing a military jurisdiction, upon which the Senator from Kentucky and other Senators have so much harped, it confers no jurisdiction to try cases one moment after the courts are restored, and are no longer interrupted in the peaceable administration of justice. Let me ask by what authority is it that military tribunals are sitting to-day at Alexandria, Virginia? By what authority is it that the writ of _habeas corpus_ is suspended to-day in eleven States, when the Constitution of the United States says that the writ shall not be suspended except when, in cases of rebellion and invasion, the public safety may require it. By what authority does the President of the United States object to the exercise of military jurisdiction by that part of the army charged with the execution of the provisions of the Freedmen's Bureau when he exercises that military jurisdiction himself by other portions of the army? But a few days since a military commission was sitting in Alexandria, trying persons charged with crimes--and they are held all over the South--and yet that part of the army connected with the Freedmen's Bureau can not exercise any such authority because it is unconstitutional--unconstitutional to do by virtue of a law of Congress what is done without any law!

"Where does the Executive get the power? The Executive is but the Commander-in-chief of the armies, made so by the Constitution; but he can not raise an army or a single soldier, he can not appoint a single officer, without the consent of Congress. He can not make any rules and regulations for the government of the army without our permission. The Constitution of the United States declares, in so many words, that Congress shall have power 'to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces' of the United States. Can it be that that department of the Government, vested in express terms by the Constitution itself with authority to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces, has no authority to direct that portion of the land and naval forces employed in the Freedmen's Bureau to exercise this jurisdiction instead of department commanders? Sir, it is competent for Congress to declare that no department commanders shall exercise any such authority; it is competent for Congress to declare that a court-martial shall never sit, that a military commission shall never be held, and the President is as much bound to obey it as the humblest citizen in the land."

The President said: "The trials having their origin under this bill are to take place without the intervention of a jury, and without any fixed rules of law or evidence."

"Do not all military trials take place in that way," asked Mr. Trumbull. "Did any body ever hear of the presentment of a grand jury in a case where a court-martial set for the trial of a military offense, or the trial of a person charged with any offense cognizable before it? This Freedmen's Bureau Bill confers no authority to do this except in those regions of country where military authority prevails, where martial law is established, where persons exercising civil authority act in subordination to the military power, and where the moment they transcend the proper limits as fixed by military orders, they are liable to be arrested and punished without the intervention of a grand jury, or without the right of appeal to any of the judicial tribunals of the country. I would as soon think of an appeal from the decision of the military tribunal that sat in the city of Washington, and condemned to death the murderers of our late President, to the judicial tribunals of the country! Where military authority bears sway, where the courts are overborne, is it not an absurdity to say that you must have a presentment of a grand jury, and a trial in a court."

"I can not reconcile a system of military jurisdiction of this kind with the words of the Constitution," said the President.

"If you can not reconcile a system of military jurisdiction of this kind with the words of the Constitution, why have you been exercising it," asked Mr. Trumbull. "Why have you been organizing courts-martial and military commissions all over the South, trying offenders, and punishing some of them with death? Why have you authorized the present Freedmen's Bureau to hold bureau courts all through the South? This has all been done by your permission, and is being done to-day. Then, sir, if you are still in the exercise of this power now, if you have been exercising it from the day you became President of the United States, how is it that you can not reconcile a system of jurisdiction of this kind with the words of the Constitution?