EMPLOYMENT OF NEGRO SOLDIERS.

267

The ever faithful Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, said:

"The Senator from Delaware, as he is accustomed to do, speaks boldly and decidedly. He asks if American soldiers will fight, if we organize colored men for military purposes. Did not American soldiers fight at Bunker Hill with negroes in the ranks, one of whom shot down Major Pitcairn as he mounted the works? Did not American soldiers fight at Red Bank, with a black regiment from your own State sir? (Addressing Senator Anthony, of Rhode Island, then in the Chair.) Did they not fight on the battle-field of Rhode Island, with that black regiment, one of the best and bravest that ever trod the soil of this continent? Did not American soldiers fight at Fort Griswold with black men? Did they not fight with black men in almost every battle-field of the Revolution? Did not the men of Kentucky and Tennessee, standing on the lines of New Orleans, under the eye of Andrew Jackson, fight with colored battallions whom he had summoned to the field, and whom he thanked publicly, for their gallantry in hurling back a British foe? It is all talk, idle talk, to say that the volunteers who are fighting the battles of this country, are governed by any such narrow prejudice or bigotry. These prejudices are the results of the teachings of demagogues and politicians, who have for years, undertaken to delude and deceive the American people, and to demean and degrade them."

Garrett Davis, of Kentucky, said:

"In my own State, I have no doubt that there are from eighty to a hundred thousand slaves, that belong to disloyal men. You propose to place arms in the hands of the men and boys, or such of them as are able to handle arms, and to manumit the whole mass, men, women, and children, and leave them among us. Do you expect us to give our sanction and our approval to these things? No, no! We would regard their authors as our worst enemies; and there is no foreign despotism that could come to our rescue, that we would not joyously embrace, before we would submit to any such condition of things as that. But before we had invoked this foreign despotism, we would arm every man and boy that we have in the land, and we would meet you in a death struggle, to overthrow together, such an oppression and our oppressors."

The wise, sedate, and conservative Mr. Collamer said:

"I never could understand, and do not now understand why the Government of the United States has not the right to the use of every

man in it, black or white, for its defense; and every horse, every particle of property, every dollar in money of every man in it. * * The second section of the amendment provides, that when any man or boy of African descent, who, by the laws of any State, owes service or labor to any person, who, during the present rebellion, has borne arins against the United States, or adhered to their enemies, by giving them aid or comfort, shall render to the United States any such service as is provided in the preceding section, he, his mother, and his wife and children, shall forever thereafter, be free, any law or usage to the contrary notwithstanding. I have a word to say about that. I am constrained to say, whether it is to the honor or dishonor of my country, that, in the land of slavery, no male slave has a child; none is known as father to a child; no slave has a wife, marriage being repudiated in the slave system. This is the condition of things; and wonderful as it may be, we are told that that is a Christian institution!"

Mr. Ten Eyck, a republican Senator from New Jersey, moved to strike out the words "military and naval," before "service," fearful of offending the sensitiveness of the public, in regard to employing negroes in the military service. Honest Preston King said, "we may as well meet this question directly, and that he had done talking in such a manner as to avoid giving offence to our enemies in this matter." He related an incident, "that, in March, 1861, the Captain of the watch at the Capitol, desired permission to omit hoisting the National flag over the Senate chamber, because it hurt the feelings of some people to look at it!"

John Sherman, of Ohio, moved that the provisions, giving freedom to the slave and his family, as a reward for military service, should apply to those only, who are owned by rebel masters! He said:

"When we take the slave of a loyal man and make him work for us, I do not for that reason, wish to deprive the master entirely of what he regards as his property, or what is regarded by local law as his property. If we inflict injury on him by taking his property and using it for the time being, we certainly should not in addition to that, deprive him of his property altogether. The slave is in no worse condition than he was before, and I think it would be grossly unjust and improper now, or at any time, to deprive the owner of a slave of the legal right to the

service of his slave, if he is a loyal and true man, and has done his duty in the emergency. I certainly would not vote for such a proposition."

Mr. King, in reply said:

"When we take a slave to serve the country in this emergency, my own opinion is, that he should be made free, whether he belongs to a rebel or not. I should like to have a division on this amendment, so as to have an opportunity to record my vote upon it. It is so plain a proposition, that it does not need any discussion."

Mr. Browning, of Illinois, moved to amend so that the mother, wife, and children of the slave fighting for the country, should be free, only in those cases where they were owned by rebels. This proposition received in the United States Senate, 17 votes. Rough and blunt James Lane, Senator from Kansas, said:

"After this war is over, a soldier, perhaps covered with scars, his mother, wife and children around him, having escaped, or their masters escaped from them, are in Washington City. I say that the Government that would restore that mother, that wife and those children to slavery, after that father and husband has been covered with wounds in defence of the country, deserves to be damned. God himself would turn his face against a Government that would commit a crime like that: Let me tell the Senator from Illinois, the bill provides that if the mother, wife and children, belong to a loyal person, he is to get remuneration from the Government, as the Senator or I would for our property. I deny that this Government cannot take the slaves of the loyal and disloyal, and that they are estopped from making any use of them that they choose for the suppression of this rebellion; and having made use of them, I say it would be a crime before God to return them to slavery."

Senators Sherman, and Browning, and all who voted for these amendments, have lived, I think, to blush for these votes, and wish that the record could be obliterated.

Senator Howard, of Michigan, said:

"I do not care how lowly, how humble, how degraded a negro may be, if he takes his musket or any other implement of war, and risks

his life to defend me, my countrymen, my family, my Government, my property, my liberties, my rights, against any foe, foreign or domestic, it is my duty under God, it is my duty as a man, as a lover of justice, to see to it that he shall be free."

Senator Wilson called attention to the fact, that while thousands of negroes would have gladly sought refuge in the lines of our armies, and labored for low wages, they were repelled; and that thousands and thousands of the young men of New England, and the North, had been broken down by the labor of the spade in ditching and entrenching, which labor the fugitive slave would gladly have relieved them from.

The bill finally passed, giving freedom to all who should perform military service, but restricting liberty to the families of such only as belonged to rebel masters.

The bill passed the House on the 16th of July, 1862, and on the 17th, it received the sanction of the President, and became a law.

The measure thus sanctioned by Congress was the inauguration of a system which resulted in bringing into the service of the United States, 186,057 soldiers, nearly two hundred thousand! The loss by wounds, disease, and all causes, of the negro soldiers during the war, was sixty-eight thousand one hundred and seventy-eight. This was the contribution of the negro towards the preservation of the Union, and the acquisition of liberty for his race!

The good, faithful, and just Lincoln said, in this connection:

"Negroes, like other people, act upon motives. Why should they do anything for us, if we will do nothing for them. If they stake their lives for us, they must be prompted by the strongest of motives, even the promise of freedom. And the promise being made must be kept." The job' of saving the Nation, was a great National one, and let none be slighted who bore an honorable part in it. There are some negroes living who can remember, and the children of some who are dead, who will not forget, that some black men with steady eye and well poised bayonet, helped mankind to save liberty in America."

EMPLOYMENT OF NEGRO SOLDIERS.

271

This measure was as important and effective in aiding in the overthrow of slavery, as in crushing armed resistance to the Union. To the accomplishment of both of these great objects, the President was anxiously but cautiously looking. Measures were immediately taken to enroll negro soldiers as well in the rebel territory, as in the border and free States, and this was a powerful agency in redeeming Maryland, Missouri, and Tennessee, from the curse of slavery.