HAYTI AND LIBERIA RECOGNIZED, licans voting Nay, with all the Democrats and all the Border-State men. The Republicans voting Nay were Messrs. Dawes and Delano, of Mass., Diven, of N. Y., Dunn, of Ind., Fisher, of Del., Horton, of Ohio, Wm. Kellogg, of Ill., Killinger, of Pa., Mitchell, of Ind., Nixon, of N. J., Norton, of Ill., Porter, of Ind., A. H. Rice, of Mass., Stratton, of N. J., and Train, of Mass. 56 proc Mr. Porter, of Ind., now moved" a reconsideration; which narrowly escaped defeat, on a motion by Mr. Holman that it do lie on the table: Yeas 69; Nays 73. The reconsideration prevailed: Yeas 84; Nays 64: and the bill was recommitted, with instructions to report a substitute already proposed by Mr. P., which prevailed-Yeas 84; Nays 66: and Mr. Eliot again reported a bill emancipating the slaves of certain specified classes of prominent Rebels, and also of all persons who shall continue in armed rebellion sixty days after the President shall have issued his lamation requiring them to desist therefrom. The bill thus modified passed the Ilouse: Yeas 82; Nays 54. The House Confiscation bill aforesaid was taken up in the Senate; and, after debate, so amended, on motion of Mr. Clark, of N. H., as to recombine Emancipation therewith; when it was passed: Yeas 23; Nays 13. The House non-concurred" in this action: Yeas 8; Nays 124; whereupon, the Senate insisted, and asked a committee of conference; which was granted; and the Committee reported a bill which was in substance Mr. Clark's, providing for both Confiscation and EmancipaMay 27. 55 68 June 28. 56 June 17. July 3. 59 58 57 June 23. 57 60 265 tion. Its purport is that all slaves of persons who shall give aid or comfort to the Rebellion, who shall take refuge within the lines of the army; all slaves captured from such persons, or deserted by them, and coming under the control of the Government ; and all slaves of such persons found or being within any place occupied by Rebel forces, and afterward occupied by the forces of the United States-shall be deemed captives of war, and shall be for ever free, and not again held as slaves; that fugitive slaves shall not be surrendered to persons who have given aid and comfort to the Rebellion; that no person engaged in the military or naval service shall surrender fugitive. slaves, on pain of being dismissed from the service; that the President may employ persons of African descent for the suppression of the Rebellion, and organize and use them in such manner as he may judge best for the public welfare. This bill passed the IIouse by the decisive majority of 82 Yeas to 42 Nays; also the Senate, by 27 Yeas to 12 Nays; and, being approved by the President," became the law of the land. President Lincoln having recommended, in his first Annual Message," the establishment of Diplo | matic intercourse with the republics of Hayti and Liberia, Mr. Sumner reported" to the Senate, from its Committee on Foreign Relations, a bill for that purpose; which in due time. was taken up," supported by its author, opposed" by Mr. G. Davis, of Ky., who proclaimed his disgust at the continued "introduction 61 July 17. 62 Dec. 3, 1862. C3 3 Feb. 4, '63. 64 April 22. 65 April 24. per annum, whereof a tenth was appropriated to the support of schools, not one of their children was permitted to enter those schools or to receive any benefit whatever from the money thus wrested from them by law for the education of the children. of the Whites, many of whom paid no tax whatever. Ilis bill proposed simply that the city revenue raised for schools by the taxation of Blacks should be devoted to the education of their own children, and not those of the Whites. of the subject of slaves and Slavery | of the District were taxed $36,000 into this chamber;" though no one but himself had mentioned either in connection with this measure. He drew a ludicrous picture of "a big negro fellow," fantastically arrayed, being presented as Minister from Hayti. Mr. Sumner rejoined; and Mr. Davis's substitute, providing for consular relations only with the republics aforesaid, was voted downYeas 8; Nays 31-and then the bill passed: Yeas 32; Nays 7. On reaching the House, it was referred to its Committee on Foreign Affairs; which Committee was discharged from its further consideration, on motion of Mr. Gooch, of Mass., who ably and temperately advocated its passage. Mr. Cox, of Ohio, replied, à la Davis; and, after further debate by Messrs. Fessenden, of Maine, Eliot, of Mass., McKnight and Kelley, of Pa., and Maynard, of Tenn., in favor, and Messrs. Eiddle, of Pa., and Crittenden, of Ky., in opposition, it was passed-Yeas 86; Nays 37-and, being signed" by the President, became the law of the land. 66 This bill having been referred to and reported" from the District Committee, it was taken up," on motion of Mr. Grimes; and certain nonessential amendments of the Committee agreed to. Mr. Wilson, of Mass., then moved to add a new section, as follows: "That all persons of color in the District of Columbia, or within the corporate limits town, shall be subject and amenable to the of the cities of Washington and Georgesame laws and ordinances to which free White persons are or may be subject or amenable; that they shall be tried for any offenses against the laws in the same manner as free White persons are or may be being legally convicted of any crime or tried for the same offenses; and that, upon offense against any law or ordinance, such persons of color shall be liable to such would be imposed or inflicted upon free penalty or punishment, and only such, as White persons for the same crime or offense : with the provisions of this act, are hereby and all acts, or parts of acts, inconsistent repealed." Previous to the triumph of Emancipation in the Federal District, there was no public provision for the education of the Blacks, whether bond or free; and very few, even of the latter, received any schooling whatever. The great obstacle to improvement having been swept away, Mr. Grimes, of Iowa, submitted to the Senate a bill providing for the education of colored children in the city of Washington; prefacing it by a statement that, whereas the number of those children was in 1860 no less than 3,172, and while the Free Blacks 67 June 5. E8 April 29. €9 "9 April 30. 66 June 2. 68 This important amendment prevailed; and the bill, thus improved, passed:" Yeas 20; Nays 7. Reaching the IIouse, it was there referred to its District Committee; reported” therefrom without amendment, by Mr. Rollins, of N. H., and, on his motion, passed, under the Previous "May 8. 1 May 9. ** May 15. 71 12 ཁས་ འ་ ་ RENDITION OF FUGITIVE SLAVES. 267 Question, without a call of the Yeas | Jersey. That report killed it. But 80 81 the proposition, by a bill which required every person, who should apply for the legal process required for the arrest of a fugitive slave, to take a stringent oath of loyalty. The bill further provided that each alA treaty between the Great Pow-leged fugitive shall have compulsory ers of Western Europe, intended to process against witnesses deemed esprovide for the more effectual sup-sential to his defense, and that such pression of the African Slave-Trade, witnesses should be sworn and heard, was matured and signed at Paris in irrespective of their color. Mr. Wade 1841. It necessarily accorded a qual- promptly reported this bill; but it ified reciprocal right to search sus-shared the fate of its predecessor. pected cruisers to the National ves- Mr. Wilson, of Mass., proposed sels of the subscribing parties. Gen. to amend the bill of 1850 aforesaid, Cass, then our Envoy at Paris, and a so as to secure to every one claimed prospective candidate for President, as a fugitive slave a trial by jury; resisted and defeated the accession of which, though once taken upour Government to this most right- Yeas 25; Nays 10-failed to comeous and necessary increase of power mand the attention of the Senate. to the international police of the ocean, and earned thereby the qualified approbation of the Slave Power; as was evinced in the Presidential election of 1848. A similar treaty was now negotiated between the United States and Great Britain; and a bill designed to give effect to its provisions was reported" to the Senate by Mr. Sumner, considered, and passed:" Yeas 34; Nays 4. The House concurred;" and the bill became a law." 83 Soon after the meeting of the next Congress, Mr. Stevens, of Pa., submitted to the House a bill contemplating an absolute repeal, not only of the act of 1850, but also of the Fugitive Slave act of 1793. Messrs. Ashley, of Ohio, and Julian, of Ind., introduced bills of like tenor. Mr. Julian further proposed that the Judiciary Committee be instructed to report a bill to repeal the most obnoxious provisions of the acts in question; but this was, on motion of Mr. Holman, of Ind., laid on the table: Yeas 82; Nays 73. In the Senate, Mr. Sumner next introduced" a bill sweeping away all slave-catching by statute; which was referred to a Select Committee of seven, whereof he was Chairman, which had been raised to consider all propositions affecting Slavery. He soon reported" his bill, with ample | Winkle and Willey, of West Va., reasons for its passage-Mr. Buckalew, of Pa., making a minority report in opposition. Mr. Sumner persistently and successfully pressed the consideration of his bill, offering not to debate it; and, after some discussion, the Senate adopted" an amendment proposed by Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, excepting the act of 1793 from the contemplated repeal: Yeas 24; Nays 17. The debate was still further continued; but no final action was had on the bill. Mr. Morris, of N. Y., reported" from the Judiciary Committee a bill repealing all acts and parts of acts contemplating the rendition of fugitive slaves; which was debated with great spirit by a score of membersMessrs. Mallory, of Ky., Cox, of Ohio, and others, opposing it as equivalent to annulling the Constitution. Mr. Mallory observed that the majority had already crushed out the Unionism of the revolted States, and were now extending the process to that of the Border Slave States, and impressively warned the House to forbear. Finally, after having once moved and withdrawn the Previous Question, Mr. Morris moved it again; when it prevailed, and the bill passed under it: Yeas 88; Nays 57. voting with the Opposition. The President's signature, five days thereafter, made it a law of the land, abolishing for ever the least creditable and most disagreeable function of the marshals of our Federal Courts. The District of Columbia had been governed mainly by the laws of the States which ceded it; and those laws were framed in the interest of slave-holding. They presumed every colored person a slave who could not produce White evidence of his freedom; and there had grown up in Washington a practice, highly lucrative to her Federal Marshal, but most disgraceful to the city and Nation, of seizing Blacks on the streets, immuring them in the jail, advertising them, and waiting for masters to appear, prove property, pay charges, and take the human chattels away. Mr. Lincoln's Marshal, Col. Ward H. Lamon, came with him from Illinois, but was a Virginian by birth, and did not revolt at the abundant and profitable custom brought to his shop by the practice just depicted. Gen. Wilson, of Mass., early" called the attention of the Senate to this painful subject; saying that he had “visited the jail; and such a scene of Mr. Sumner demanded" the consid- degradation and inhumanity he had eration of this bill in Senate; and it never witnessed. There were perwas, after a fiery debate, ordered: sons almost entirely naked; some Yeas 25; Nays 17. Mr. Johnson, of of them without a shirt. Some of Md., endeavored to save the act of those persons were free; most of them 1793; but the Senate refused: Yeas had run away from disloyal masters, 17; Nays 22. The bill, after being or had been sent there by disloyal laid over one day to enable Mr. Da- persons, for safe keeping until the vis, of Ky., to make a speech against war is over." He thereupon proposit, was passed:" Yeas 27; Nays 12 ed a discharge by joint resolve of all -Messrs. Cowan, of Pa., and Van persons confined in the District jail 85 Feb. 29. 86 Mar. 19. 87 June 6. * June 13. 29 June 21. *0 June 23, 1864. 91 Dec. 4, 1861. 88 NO SLAVE-TRADE-LAW OF EVIDENCE. 269 as fugitive slaves. In the debate | after, all such persons now in his jail. which ensued, Mr. Wilson stated This put a stop to one of the most that the French legation had recent- flagrant and glaring iniquities habitly taken to that jail gentlemen who ually perpetrated in a Christian and had traversed the world inspecting civilized community. prisons, with a view to their improvement; and that, after examining this, they observed to the jailer that they had never before seen but one so bad; and that was in Austria. Mr. Grimes, of Iowa, remarked that he believed there was never a jail so bad as this, save the French Bastile, and some of the dungeons of Venice. When he visited it, a few days before, he found among the prisoners a boy who claimed to be free-born, yet who had been confined there thirteen months and four days on suspicion of being a runaway slave. He further stated that Marshal Lamon had forbidden Members of Congress access to the prison without his written permission. Messrs. Powell, of Kentucky, Pearce, of Maryland, and Carlile, of Virginia, opposed the resolve; but it was warmly supported and passed:"2 Yeas 31; Nays 4. A similar resolve had already" been submitted to the House. No action was taken, however, upon this, nor upon the Senate's kindred measure; because the President, through Secretary Seward, addressed" an order to Marshal Lamon, directing him not to receive into custody any persons caught up as fugitives from Slavery, but to discharge, ten days there A bill reported" by Mr. Sumner, from the Select Committee on Slavery and Freedom, to prohibit the holding of slaves on National vessels, and also the coastwise Slave-Trade, was lost "Yeas 13; Nays 20—but he again moved a prohibition of the coastwise Slave-Trade, and of all laws sanctioning and regulating the same, as an amendment to the Civil Appropriation bill; and it was adopted: Yeas 23; Nays 14. Thus fastened to a necessary measure, the proposition was duly enacted, andreceived the President's signature on the 2d of July, 1864. Mr. Sumner proposed" another Amendment to this bill, providing that "in the Courts of the United States, there shall be no exclusion of any witness on account of color." Mr. Buckalew moved to add, "or because he is a party to or interested in the issue tried." This was agreed to; and Mr. Sumner's amendment, thus amended, was adopted: Yeas 22; Nays 16; and the bill passed, as already stated; making it the law of the land that no person shall henceforth be precluded from giving testimony either because of his color or because he is interested in the pending issue. 93 Dec. 9, 1861. 94 Jan. 25, 1862. 95 March 23, 1864. 96 June 24. 97 June 25. |