Doc. 151. INAUGURAL OF GOVERNOR GAMBLE, gentlemen of the convention, no better idea of my devotion to what I believe to be the interest of the State, than I do now, if you could only understand the reluctance with which I accept the election with which you were pleased to honor me. But yet, gentlemen, with all that has been said of the good result to be accomplished by me, it is utterly impossible that any one man can pacify the troubled the commotion now running throughout our borders. No man can do it. You, as you go forth to mingle with your fellow-citizens throughout the land, look back upon this election as an experiment that is about to be tried to endeavor to pacify this community, and restore peace and harmony to the State. It is an experiment by those whose interests are with your interests, and who are bound to do all in their power to effect this pacification of the State. Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Convention:-I feel greatly oppressed by the circumstances under which I now stand before you. After a life spent in labor, I had hoped that I would be permitted to pass its evening in retire-waters of the State; that any one man can still ment. I have never coveted public office, never desired public station. I have been content to discharge my duties as a private citizen, and I hoped such would be my lot during the remainder of my life. Circumstances seemed to make it a duty for me, when the convention was first elected, to agree to serve as one of its members, because the condition of the State and country at large seemed to demand that every citizen of the State should throw aside his own preferences, choice, and even his own scheme of life, if necessary, in order to serve the country. In accordance with what I regarded as an obligation every citizen owes to the community of which he is a member, I allowed myself to be chosen as a member of this body. I came here and endeavored, as far as I could, to serve the best interests of the State, and you now have chosen to put upon me a still more onerous and still more distasteful duty-a duty from which I shrink. Nothing but the manner in which it has been pressed upon me ever would have induced me to yield my personal objections to it. The members of this body, in the present distracted state of the country, have come to me since it was clearly manifest that the office of Provisional Governor would be made, and have urged that I should allow myself to fill that position. Nor was it the action of any political party-inen of all parties have united in it. Those who have belonged to the parties that have all departed in the midst of the present difficulties and trials of the country have united in making this application to me. They have represented that my long residence in the State and the familiar acquaintance of the people with me would insure a higher degree of confidence, and better secure the interests, the peace, and order in the community than would be consequent on the selection of any other person. I resisted. God knows there is nothing now that I would not give within the limits of any thing reasonable, in order to escape being appointed. But when it was said to me by those repesenting the people of the State that I could contribute, by assuming this public trust, to secure the peace of Missouri, in which I have lived for more than forty years, that I might secure the peace of those who are the children of fathers with whom I was intimate, I thought it my duty to serve. It is, therefore, an entire yielding up; it is the yielding of all my own schemes, of all my own individual wishes and purposes, when I undertake to assume this office. I could give you, It may be we have not adopted the best plan or the best mode of securing the object which we desire; but we have done what seemed to us in our maturest judgment best calculated to accomplish it. And now, gentlemen, when you go forth to mingle with your fellow-citizens, it must depend upon you what shall be the result of this experiment. If you desire the peace of the State-if you earnestly desire it-then give this experiment a fair trial; give it a full opportunity of developing all its powers of restoring peace. I ask you-I have a right to ask of every member of this convention-that he and I should so act together as will redound to the common good of our State. I feel that I have a right to ask, when you have by your voice placed me in such a position, that you shall unite with me your efforts and voice, instead of endeavoring to prevent the result we all desire. Unite all your efforts so that the good which is desired may be accomplished; and with the blessing of that Providence which rules over all affairs, public and private, we may accomplish the end for which we have labored, and which shall cause all the inhabitants of the State to rejoice. Gentlemen of the convention, what is it that we are now threatened with? We apprehend that we may soon be in that condition of anarchy, in which a man when he goes to bed with his family at night does not know whether he shall ever rise again, or whether his house shall remain intact until morning. This is the kind of danger, not merely a war between different divisions of the State, but a war between neighbors, so that when a man meets those with whom he has associated from childhood, he begins to feel that they are his enemies. We must avoid that. It is terrible. The scenes of the French revolution may be enacted in every quarter of our State, if we do not succeed in avoiding that kind of war. We can do it if we are in earnest, and endeavor with all our power. So far as I am concerned, I assure you that it shall be the very highest object—the sole aim of every official act of mine-to make sure that tions to the Constitution and laws of their the people of the State of Missouri can worship country, and I am free to say that I know of no their God together, each feeling that the man reason why they should not so act. Whatever who sits in the same pew with him, because might be said by citizens of other States, cerhe differs with him on political questions, is not tainly Missourians have no right to complain his enemy-that they may attend the same com- of the general course of the Government of the munion and go to the same heaven. I wish United States. I believe it to be a fact that for every citizen of the State of Missouri that, there is no law of a general character upon when he meets his fellow-man, confidence in your statutes that has been enacted since Mishim may be restored, and confidence in the souri came into the Union, but had received the whole society restored, and that there shall be votes and support of the Representatives of the conversations upon other subjects than those people of this State. Whatever we have asked of blood and slaughter; that there shall be from the Government of the United States has something better than this endeavor to encour- been given to us most cheerfully. We asked a age hostility between persons who entertain liberal land policy, and we got it; we asked different political opinions, and something more grants for our railroads, and we got them; we and better than a desire to produce injury to | asked for a fugitive slave law, and it was given those who may differ from them. to us; we asked that our peculiar views in reference to the finances of the country should be regarded, and even that was granted. In short, I feel, I may safely say, that if the people of this State had had the whole control of the Federal Government, if there had been but one State in the Union, the very policy which has been adopted by the General Government would have been adopted as best calculated to advance the interests of the State. Gentlemen, if you will unite with me, and carry home this purpose to carry it out faithfully, much can be accomplished, much good can be done; and I am persuaded that each one of you will feel that it is his duty, his individual duty-for in this case it is the duty of every American citizen to do all he can for the welfare of the State. I have made no elaborate preparations for an address to you on this occasion, but I have come now to express to you my earnest desire that we shall be found cooperating for the same common good in which each one of us is equally interested; that, although differing as to modes and schemes, we shall be found united in the great work of pacification. Mr. Hall, the Lieut.-Governor, on taking the official oath, remarked as follows: Gentlemen of the Convention, I appreciate highly the honor conferred upon me, by my election to the office of Lieutenant-Governor of the State. When I reflect upon the embarrassments and difficulties which surround that position, I cannot but regret that your choice has not fallen upon another individual. I concur with the gentleman who has been elected Governor, and who has just addressed you, in deprecating the state of things which now exist in the State of Missouri. We are in the midst of a civil war, and I can only say that I will unite my energies with him to do all that we can to mitigate its horrors and shorten its duration. It is true, gentlemen, that, owing to divisions among us, private and sometimes public rights have been violated; but I believe I cannot be mistaken as to the real cause of the troubles which are now upon us. I believe there is no need, and there never has been any need, of a civil war in this State. I believe we should have had none, if the views of this Convention, as expressed in March last, had been carried out; and I believe if we will return to these views, civil war will cease within our borders. It shall, therefore, gentlemen, be my duty, my pride, as well as my pleasure, to do all that I can for both the success and prevalence of those views in this State, while I have the honor to hold the position which you have conferred upon me. Notwithstanding the denunciations we sometimes hear against the Government of the United States and the assaults made upon it, I am free to admit that, when I reflect upon the history of this State, when I remember its humble origin, when I look upon the proud and exalted position that it occupied but a few months ago, my affections do cluster around the Government of my country. As a Missourian, I desire no change in the and the Government of the United States, and least of all do I desire such a change as will throw her into the arms of those who have proved unfaithful to the high trust imposed upon them by a generous and a confiding people. Mr. President, I am ready to take the oath. Gentlemen, it is scarcely necessary for me to say that my opinion as to the causes of our domestic difficulties has been sufficiently exem-political relations that exist between this State plified by my acts and words since I have been a member of this body. It can scarcely be necessary for me to say that, in my opinion, our difficulties have been produced almost solely, if not entirely, by an effort upon the part of certain of our officers and citizens to dissolve our connection with the Federal Government. I believe, gentlemen, that to Missouri union is peace, and disunion is war. I believe that today Missouri could be as peaceful as Illinois, if her citizens would have recognized their obliga Mr. Oliver, Secretary of State elect, followed in a few remarks of similar import as those of Messrs. Gamble and Hall. Doc. 152. DEBATE IN THE U. S. SENATE ON THE BILL FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF INSURRECTION, AUGUST 1, 1861. THE bill to suppress insurrection and sedition being taken up: Mr. Cowan (of Pa.) moved that it be postponed till December. Mr. Bayard (Del.) thought that was the best disposition that could be made of the bill. He thought it unconstitutional. Mr. Harris (N. Y.) also spoke in favor of its postponement, and thought it very important. The bill was too important to be matured this session in the temper of the Senate and the temperature of the place. He was inclined to think that necessities of a case give a military commander all the power needed. Mr. Breckinridge (Ky.) said he should vote for its postponement. He was glad to see the Senate at last pause before one bill. He wished it were published in every newspaper in the country. He thought it would meet with universal condemnation. He thought this would abolish all State Government and destroy the last vestige of political and personal liberty. Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, contended that some bill of the kind was necessary from the exigencies of the times. The Constitution is in danger, and we have voted men and money to carry on the war to save the Constitution, and how can we justify ourselves without maturing a bill so much needed? Give the bill the goby, and let the Constitution be violated every day because we would not pass it, but leave the military to do as they please without restriction. Mr. Breckinridge (Ky.) said the drama was beginning to open, and the Senators who are urging on the war are quarrelling among themselves. The Senate had already passed a General Confiscation bill, and also a General Emancipation bill. The Police Commissioners of Baltimore were arrested without any law, and carried off to an unknown place, and the President refused to tell the House what they were arrested for and what had been done with them. Yet they call this liberty and law! Gentlemen mistake when they talk about the Union. The Union is only a means of preserving the principles of political liberty. The great principles of liberty existed long before the Union was formed. They may survive it. Let gentlemen take care that they do not sever all that remains of the Federal Government. These eternal principles of liberty, which lived long before the Union, will live forever somewhere. They must be respected. They cannot with impunity be overthrown, and if you force the people to the issue between any form of government and these priceless principles of liberty, that form of government will go down. The people will tear it asunder as the irrepressible forces of nature rend asunder all that opposes them. The Senator from Verinont de clares that this conflict must be carried on under the rules of war, and admits that some things must be done contrary to the Constitution. I desire that the country should know the fact that constitutional limitations are no longer to be regarded, and let the people once get the idea that this is a war, not under the principles of the Constitution, but a conflict in which two great people are against each other, for whom the Constitution is not, but for whom the laws of war are, and I venture to say that the brave words we hear now about subjugation and conquest, treason and traitors, will be glibly altered the next time the Representatives of States meet under the dome of the Capitol. Then if the Constitution is really to be put aside, and the laws of war are to govern, why not act upon it practically. I do not hold that the clause of the Constitution which authorizes Congress to declare war applies to any internal difficulties; nor do I believe that the Constitution of the United States ever contemplated the preservation of the Union by one-half of the States warring on the other half. It provides for putting down insurrection, but it does not provide for the raising of armies by one-half of two political communities of this Confederacy for the purpose of subjugating the other half. If this is a case of war, why not treat it like war? Practically it is treated so. The prisoners are not hung as rebels. It is a war, and, in my opinion, not only an unhappy war, but an unconstitutional war. Why, then, does the Administration refuse to send or receive a flag of truce, and all those acts which might at least ameliorate the unhappy condition in which we are placed? So much, then, we know. We know that admitted violations of the Constitution have been made, and are justified, and are, by legislation, proposed still further to confer the authority to do acts not authorized or warranted by the Constitution. We have it openly avowed that the Constitution, which is a bond at least between those States that adhere to it, is no longer to be regarded as that bond of Union. It is not enough to tell me that it has been violated by seceded States. It has not been violated by those States that have not seceded, and if the Constitution is thus to be put aside, these States may pause to inquire what is to become of their liberties. Mr. President, we are on the wrong track, and we have been from the beginning, and the people are beginning to see it. We have been hurling hundreds to death. The blood of Americans has been shed by their own hands, and for what? They have shown their prowess and bravery alike, and for what? It has been to carry out principles that three-fourths of them abhor. For the principles contained in this bill, and continually avowed on the floor of this Senate, are not shared, I will venture to say, by three-fourths of your army. I said, sir, we have been on the wrong track. Nothing but utter ruin to the North, to the South, to the East, and to the Mr. Baker-Pick out that one which is in your judgment most clearly so. Mr. Breckinridge-They are all, in my opinion, so equally atrocious that I dislike to discriminate. I will send the Senator the bill, and I tell him that every section except the last, in my opinion, violates the Constitution of the United States; and of that last section I express no opinion. Mr. Baker-I had hoped that that respectful suggestion to the Senator would enable him to point out to me one, in his judgment, most clearly so, for they are not all alike—they are not equally atrocious. West will follow the prosecution of this contest. | I would propose, with my habitual respect for You may look forward to innumerable armies him, (for nobody is more courteous and more and countless treasure to be spent for the pur- gentlemanly,) to ask him if he will be kind pose of carrying on this contest, but it will end enough to tell me what single particular proviin leaving us just where we are now; for, if sion there is in this bill which is in violation of the forces of the Union are successful, what on the Constitution of the United States, which I earth will be done with them after they are have sworn to support-one distinct, single conquered? Are not gentlemen perfectly satis- proposition in the bill. fied that they have mistaken a people for a fac- Mr. Breckinridge-I will state, in general tion? Have they not become satisfied that it terms, that every one of them is, in my opinis necessary to subjugate, conquer, even to ex-ion, flagrantly so, unless it may be the last. terminate a people? Don't you know it? I will send the Senator the bill, and he may Don't everybody know it? Does not the world comment on the sections. know it? Let us pause, then, and let the Congress of the United States respond to the uprising feeling all over this land in favor of peace. War is separation, in the language of an eminent Senator, now no more. It is disunion,-eternal, final disunion. We have separation now, and it is only much worse by war, and the utter extinction of all those sentiments which might lead to reunion. But let the war go on, and soon in addition to the moans of the widows and orphans all over this land, you will hear the cry of distress from those who want for food, and the comforts of life. The people will be unable to pay the grinding taxes which a fanatical spirit will attempt to impose upon them. Let the war go on, and the Pacific slope, now doubtless devoted to the Union, when they find the burden of separate conditions, then they will separate. Let it go on, until they see the beautiful pictures of the Confederacy beaten out of all shape and coneliness by the war, and they will turn aside in disgust. Fight for twelve months, and this feeling will develop itself. Fight for twelve months more, and you will have three Confederacies instead of two. Fight for twelve months more, and we will have four. But I will not enlarge upon this. I am quite aware that what I say will be received with sneers of disgust by gentlemen from the North-west and the East, but the future will determine who is right and who is wrong. We are making a record here. I am met by the sneers of nearly all those who surround me. I state my opinions with no approving voices, and surrounded by scowls; but the time will come when history will put her private seal upon these proceedings, and I am perfectly willing to abide her final judgment. Mr. Breckinridge-Very nearly. There are ten of them. The Senator can select which he pleases. Mr. Baker-Let me try then, if I must generalize as the Senator does, to see if I can get the scope and meaning of this bill. It is a bill providing that the President of the United States may declare, by proclamation, in a certain given state of fact, certain territory within the United States to be in a condition of insurrection and war; which proclamation shall be extensively published within the district to which it relates. That is the first proposition. I ask him if that is unconstitutional? That is a plain question. Is it unconstitutional to give power to the President to declare a portion of the territory of the United States in a state of insurrection or rebellion? He will not dare to say it is. Mr. Breckinridge-Mr. President, the Senator from Oregon is a very adroit debater, and he discovers, of course, the great advantage he would have if I were to allow him, occupying the floor, to ask me a series of questions, and then have his own criticisms made on them. When he has closed his speech, if I deem it necessary, I may make some reply. At present, however, I will answer that question. The State of Illinois, I believe, is a military district; the State of Kentucky is a military district. In my judgment, the President has no authority, and, in my judgment, Congress has no right to confer upon the President authority, to declare a State in a condition of insurrection or rebellion. Mr. Baker-Mr. President, it has not been my fortune to participate in at any length, indeed, not to hear very much of the discussion which has been going on-more I think in the hands of the Senator from Kentucky than anybody else upon all the propositions connected with this war; and, as I really feel as sincerely as he can an earnest desire to preserve the Constitution of the United States for everybody, South as well as North, I have listened for some little time past to what he has said, with an earnest desire to apprehend the point of his Mr. Baker-In the first place, the bill does objection to this particular bill. And now-not say a word about States. That is the first waiving what I think is the elegant but loose answer. declamation in which he chooses to indulge— Mr. Breckinridge-Does not the Senator know, in fact, that those States compose mili- 66 It is our duty to advance, if we can; to suppress insurrection; to put down rebellion; to dissipate the rising; to scatter the enemy; and when Mr. Baker-I do; and that is the reason we have done so, to preserve in the terms of the why I suggest to the honorable Senator that bill, the liberty, lives, and property of the peothis criticism about States does not mean any ple of the country, by just and fair police reguthing at all. That is the very point. The ob- lations. I ask the Senator from Indiana, (Mr. jection certainly ought not to be that he can Lane,) when we took Monterey, did we not do declare a part of a State in insurrection and it there? When we took Mexico, did we not not the whole of it. In point of fact the Con- do it there? Is it not a part, a necessary and stitution of the United States, and the Congress indispensable part, of war itself, that there shall of the United States acting upon it, are not be military regulations over the country contreating of States, but of the territory com- quered and held? Is that unconstitutional? prising the United States; and I submit once I think it was a mere play of words that the more to his better judgment that it cannot be Senator indulged in when he attempted to anunconstitutional to allow the President to de-swer the Senator from New York. I did not clare a county, or a part of a county, or a understand the Senator from New York to town, or a part of a town, or a part of a State, mean any thing else substantially but this, that or the whole of a State, or two States, or five the Constitution deals generally with a state of States, in a condition of insurrection, if, in his peace, and that when war is declared, it leaves judgment, that be the fact. That is not wrong. the condition of public affairs to be determined In the next place, it provides that that being by the law of war, in the country where the so, the military commander in that district war exists. It is true that the Constitution of may make and publish such police rules and the United States does adopt the law of war as regulations as he may deem necessary to sup- a part of the instrument itself, during the conpress the rebellion and restore order and pre- tinuance of war. The Constitution does not proserve the lives and property of citizens. I sub- | vide that spies shall be hung. Is it unconstitumit to him, if the President of the United tional to hang a spy? There is no provision States has power, or ought to have power, to for it in terms in the Constitution; but nobody suppress insurrection and rebellion, is there denies the right, the power, the justice. Why? any better way to do it, or is there any other? Because it is part of the law of war. The ConThe gentleman says, do it by the civil power. stitution does not provide for the exchange of Look at the fact. The civil power is utterly prisoners; yet it may be done under the law overwhelmed; the courts are closed; the judges of war. Indeed the Constitution does not probanished. Is the President not to execute the vide that a prisoner may be taken at all; yet law? Is he to do it in person or by his mili- his captivity is perfectly just and constitutional. tary commanders? Are they to do it with It seems to me that the Senator does not, will regulation or without it? That is the only not, take that view of the subject. Again, sir, question. Mr. President, the honorable Sena- when a military commander advances, as I tor says there is a state of war. The Senator trust, if there are no more unexpected great from Vermont agrees with him; or rather, he reverses, he will advance, through Virginia agrees with the Senator from Vermont in that. and occupies the country, there, perhaps as What then? There is a state of public war; here, the civil law may be silent; there pernone the less war because it is urged from the haps the civil officers may flee as ours have other side; not the less war because it is un- been compelled to flee. What then? If the just; not the less war because it is a war of civil law is silent, who shall control and reguinsurrection and rebellion. It is still war; and late the conquered district-who but the miliI am willing to say it is public war-public, as tary commander? As the Senator from Illinois contra-distinguished from private war. What has well said, shall it be done by regulation or then? Shall we carry that war on? Is it his without regulation? Shall the general, or the duty as a Senator to carry it on? If so, how? colonel, or the captain, be supreme, or shall he By armies under command; by military or- be regulated and ordered by the President of ganization and authority, advancing to suppress the United States? That is the sole question. insurrection and rebellion. Is that wrong? Is The Senator has put it well. I agree that we that unconstitutional? Are we not bound to ought to do all we can to limit, to restrain, to do with whoever levies war against us as we fetter the abuse of military power. Bayonets would do if he was a foreigner? There is no are at best illogical arguments. I am not willdistinction as to the mode of carrying on war;ing, except as a case of sheerest necessity, ever we carry on war against an advancing army just the same, whether it be from Russia or from South Carolina. Will the honorable Senator tell me it is our duty to stay here, within fifteen miles of the enemy, seeking to advance upon us every hour, and talk about nice questions of constitutional construction as to whether it is war or merely insurrection? No, sir. to permit a military commander to exercise authority over life, liberty, and property. But, sir, it is part of the law of war; you cannot carry in the rear of your army your courts; you cannot organize juries; you cannot have trials accorded to the forms and ceremonial of the common law amid the clangor of arms, and somebody must enforce police regulations in a |