war of sections, but of ideas; and we need and must have military leaders who will conduct it in the light of this truth. To the want of such leaders must be attributed the delays and disasters of the struggle thus far. General Sigel says:

"It is an enormous crime to expose our devoted soldiers to the fury of a united, determined, and vigorous enemy, on account of any hesitancy to use the right means at the right time, or by placing men in high and responsible positions who, on account of their former associations and pledges, can never be trusted as sincere friends of the Republic, nor expected to strike a fatal blow at treason and rebellion."

Sir, we must have commanders who will fight, not simply as the stipendiaries of the government, but as men whose whole hearts are in the work, and who believe, religiously, in the Rights of Man.

"It is the heart, and not the brain,

That to the highest doth attain.”

I believe you may search the history of the world in vain for such armies as we now have in the field. Their heroism upon every battle-field, often under incompetent commanders, and always under the most appalling disadvantages, must be the theme of everlasting praise. They have seemed to understand this quarrel from the beginning. They have fought as only men could fight who counted their lives as nothing in comparison with the life of the Republic, and the imperiled cause of liberty on earth. The battle of Fredericksburg, where thousands marched into the jaws of certain death without the wavering of a hair, affords but a single example of the spirit which has so ungrudgingly offered up so many heroic lives during the war. Sir, I honor our patriot soldiers as I honor no men, titled or untitled, who walk the earth. Their example, looming above the general profligacy and faithlessness of mere politicians, has already made humanity sublime, and anchored the final triumph of our cause to the very throne of the Eternal. In their name do I speak when I plead that they shall be allowed to fight our battles under competent and worthy leaders, whose souls are on fire with a quenchless zeal for our cause. In our war with Mexico, as I am advised, no man was allowed to hold the office of major-general of volunteers or brigadier-general, who was not a member of the Democratic party. I believe this policy was extensively carried out also as to the subordinate places in our army, at least nine-tenths of which were conferred upon the party in power. General Scott and General Taylor were Whigs, but they held their positions before the war, and during its

progress had to encounter a fierce and formidable opposition from the administration and its friends. I am not finding fault with this policy, which I refer to as simply showing that the government, at that time, dispensed its favors among its friends, and intrusted the command of our armies to men who believed in the war. This the government should do to-day. This is a war of freedom and free labor against a mighty aristocracy based upon the ownership of men. Our aim is the overthrow of that power, and the reorganization of Southern society on a republican basis; and it should require no argument to prove that men who believe in this aristocracy are not the most fit commanders in such a contest. On this subject history is not wanting in lessons to guide us. As early as the year 1388 the cities of Germany, which had formed four leagues in self-defense against the aristocracy that lived only by its plunder of commerce, were engaged in deadly conflict for their rights. They made two mistakes, which paved the way for their ruin. They lost the sympathy of the peasantry, because they fought only for the privileges of the cities; and they appointed nobles to command their armies who cared more for their property in the cities than for the rights of the people. These nobles counseled " moderation," and one of them proved a traitor on the field of battle. Afterwards, city after city fell into the hands of the aristocracy, and the people became the prey of a swarm of petty monarchs, who annihilated the external power of the country, which groans under their oppression to this day. The same principle was illustrated in our Revolutionary War by the State of South Carolina, which swarmed with Royalists and Tories, who, like the rebels now in arms against us, loved slavery more than they loved their country. It is not possible to put down. one privileged class through the leadership of another, unless their interests are antagonistical.

Mr. Chairman, the fatal consequence of losing sight of the principle I am now urging has been seen in the recall of General Fremont from his command of the Western Department. In the year 1856, his name had been conspicuously identified with the great political conflict which finally culminated in a conflict of arms. He was known to the country less as a politician than as a patriot, and a man of genius and dauntless courage; and there was a romance about his life and name which kindled the popular enthusiasm in his behalf to a very remarkable degree. He entered upon his command at the end of July with less than twenty-five thousand effective men, poorly armed and equipped; and of these, ten thousand

were three-months' men, whose time expired in ten days from his arrival. At the end of October he held sixty thousand square miles of the enemy's country, and had succeeded in organizing and equipping an army which was everywhere successful along the whole extent of his lines. He had restored quiet and comparative peace to the State of Missouri, while the enemy was in full retreat before him. Believing the revolutionary measures of the rebels could only be put down by revolutionary energy, and that all moderation in dealing with them was the expedient of weak men or of traitors, he impressed his strong will and earnest purpose upon every feature of his administration. He saw then, what the President has finally discovered and told us in his late message, that "the dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present;" that "as our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew;" and that “we must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." I believe no commander in the public service has thus far shown more military genius, or been more successful, considering the circumstances of his command; and it should be remembered to his credit that the victories of our arms in the West, early in last year, were achieved upon the exact lines of march which he planned and published in September of the preceding year. When he issued his proclamation of freedom the military enthusiasm of the people was unchilled. With gladness and thanksgiving they received it as a new sign of promise. Even such Democratic papers as the " Boston Post," "Detroit Free Press,"

Chicago Times," and "New York Herald," approved of it, while it stirred and united the people of the loyal States during the ten days of life allotted it by the government, far more than any other event of this war. The President, in an evil hour, annulled it; and the boiled-down malice and meanness which it provoked, and which were poured out so copiously through Adjutant-general Thomas, finally effected the intended change in the command of this department. From this conduct of the government toward General Fremont dates the pro-slavery reaction which we now witness. Beginning then, it has gained force and volume every hour since. It balked the popular enthusiasm, which else would have drawn along with it even multitudes of conservative men. It caused timid and halting spirits to become cowards outright. It gave new life to the Slave Power, and encouraged fiercer assaults upon "abolitionism." The Democratic party, which the war had pretty effectually driven into retirement, began to assume its former prerogatives, and manifest its sympathy for treason. Sir, I

can never think of the woes and sorrows with which this war has deluged our country within the past twelve months, without deploring the malign influences which led the administration to strike down a Republican Major-general in the midst of a glorious career, and in defiance of the sentiment of the people, while Democratic generals who were lauded by every rebel sympathizer throughout the country, and whose incapacity or disloyalty could not have been unknown to the government, have been persistently kept at the head of our great military departments.

Mr. Chairman, while the past is beyond our control, its lesson for the future should not go unheeded. The government cannot "escape history;" but it can atone, in some degree, for the great wrong it has done the country and General Fremont, by restoring him without further delay to active service, with a command befitting his rank and merits. Every consideration of justice and patriotism pleads for this. He has been the victim of the most cruel injustice and the most unmerited and mortifying humiliation. The President knows this. The military conduct of General Fremont will bear the most rigid scrutiny, while his character is without a stain. The policy of his proclamation has been vindicated by time, and more than vindicated by the administration itself. Let this policy be committed to the hands of its undoubted friends. The restoration of General Fremont would at once signalize the earnestness and sense of justice of the President, and win back to him the confidence of the people. It would be a conspicuous milestone in the progress of the government, and most fitly follow the grand message which proclaimed freedom to millions on the first day of the new year. In the name of the country let it be done; and let restitution be made to every other officer in our armies who has been the victim of Democratic policy. The government, which at first sought to spare slavery, now seeks to destroy it. At last it has a policy; and I hold that no man is fit to lead our armies, or to hold any civil position, who does not sustain that policy. Our only hope lies in a vigorous prosecution of the war, and the overthrow of Democratic rule. I care little for mere names. For such generals as Rosecrans, Butler, Bayard, Rosseau, Wallace, Dumont, and Corcoran, and such civilians as Stanton, Bancroft, Owen, and Dickinson, I have only words of praise. They are heartily for their country, and as heartily despise the Democratic leaders who gabble about compromise with rebels. The recognized leaders of the Democratic party, judged by their avowed policy, are disloyal in spirit and purpose. They

talk about the "Constitution as it is," while conniving at its destruction by rebels, and offering them peace on the basis of a reconstructed government and another Constitution. They clamor for "the Union as it was," and mean by this the Union more completely than ever under the domination of slavery. I know what I hazard by this freedom of speech. I know that should Democratic policy continue to sway this administration, still further disasters may overtake our arms. I know that the people may finally reel and sicken under the prolonged spectacle of blood and treasure poured out in vain; and that the restoration of the Democratic party to power may be the result, followed by a compromise inaugurating a "reign of terror" in the free States far more relentless than that which prevailed in the South prior to the war. Demagogues, pointing the people to the desolation and ruin of the country caused by a profitless" abolition war," and stimulated by Southern leaders hungering and thirsting for revenge, may usher in an era of lawlessness and blood scarcely paralleled in history. The leaders of Republicanism, whose counsels, if followed, would have saved the country, may be confronted by dungeons, gibbets, and exile, under the new policy which the Slave Power, maddened by success, would dictate.

Sir, it is because of the remorseless despotism which Democratic policy would certainly establish that I denounce it, and plead with the President to smite it with all the power of the government, if he would save either his country or himself. The Republic of our fathers at this moment swings in horrid alternation between life and death. To falter or hesitate now is self-destruction. Rosewater statesmanship will not meet the crisis. Nothing can save us but the earnestness which finds its reflex in the rebels, and the courage which gathers strength from despair. A wise policy of the war is not enough. Proclamations of freedom will, of themselves, accomplish little. What we need is action, instant, decisive, defiant action, scourging faithless men from power, sweeping away obstacles, and kindling in the popular heart the fires of a new courage and hope. The government should arm the colored men of the free States as well as the slaves of the South, and thereby give effect to the proclamation of freedom. It should at once organize a bureau of emancipation, to take charge of the great interests devolved upon it by the extinction of slavery. While paying a fair assessment for the slaves of loyal owners, it should digest an equitable homestead policy, parceling out the plantations of rebels in small farms for the enjoyment of the freed