to 18. Mason's Speech in Fessenden's Defence. and Polk, the amendment was adopted-30 | terests of the Government. And if I can no longer do that, I will leave my place here and return to my State, and say I am at its service. Now, sir, how do we stand as Senators-we who remain, whose States have not seceded? We look on these facts, remarkable as they are, as taking place out-ide When the bill was reported to the Senate, on its passage, a discussion followed of an interesting character. Mason, (Dem.,) of Virginia, spoke against the special amendment proposed. He referred to the depressed state of the Treasury, remarking that Government was in an actual state of destitution. For what, then, were these additional expenses to be incurred at that particular moment? He could not shut his eyes to the fact that seven States had seceded; six of them had joined, formed a Government and a nationality, and by no vote of his should there be any additions to the mil-side, who are waging war against it, are to have the itary force of the Government, which was to be used to coerce those States. Fessenden's Defence. Mr. Fessenden answered for the Committee. He said it was time that Senators should understand precisely what the condition of the country was, and who was responsible for it. It was a singular address, coming from that quarter, to appeal to the Republican side to know what was the object of the proposition! Who had been in power for years? The proposition to build the steamers had come from a Democratic President, and a Democratic Committee of a Democratic Senate, year after year. Why did the gentleman question the Republicans about it? What change has transpired, Mr. Fessenden wished to know, that rendered the measure less requisite now than heretofore? The only reason offered by the Virginia Senator was, that six States had seceded, had seized property, had assailed the Government! Mr. Fessenden continued: "It is almost impossible to refrain from asking, Who does the Senator represent here? Is he a Senator of the United States here on this floor, and does he stand up here and say, after all these things have taken place, that they render it unnecessary now to increase the naval force of the country? I recognize the fact, as was said by the Senator from Mississippi, (Mr. Davis,) that, so long as I am here, I am bound to perform my duty as a Senator of the United States, without any reference to what may be done outside of this Chamber. So long as I stay here, and receive the money of the Government, I will look out, to the best of my ability, for the in of this Chamber, and we are not bound to deal with them as negotiations. We are to look on them as against the interest, the welfare of the Government and the Constitution of the United States, under which we live. That is the point of view from which we must look at them. But men seem to say to themselves and the country, 'I, standing here as a member of this Government, must look out and keep my eyes open, not that this Government has the advantage of my counsels, but that those out benefit of my counsels and my aid.' Why, sir, taken in consideration and in connection with this question, this bill of my friend from Vermont (Mr. Collamer) is simply a bill to provide that, if the revenue of the Government cannot be collected in a particular place, or a particular point, then these places shall cease to be recognized as places where the revenue shall be legally collected. Yet this is commented on as a design of coercion. Do we not owe it to the foreign Governments themselves, that we should either enforce our own laws in these ports, or else declare them not to be legal ports of entry for the United States?" Mr. Mason replied," Clearly so!" and added that, if the Committee could avow that reason in the bill-that the State of South Carolina is no longer a member of the Confederacy, and is beyond the jurisdiction of the Government-let them avow it! Mr. Fessenden asked what difference there was, as a point of law, whether or not the motive was avowed. It was not necessary that the motive should stand declared. He resumed: "We simply declare that there may be cases in which it may be difficult for the United States to collect revenue in particular places, by the ordinary course of proceedings, and we give the President the power to say that we shall no longer attempt to collect the revenue, for it shall cease to be a port where vessels may legally enter, under the authority of the United States; when we declare that it is no longer a port of the United States, a port of entry, and give notice of the fact, then comes a time when, if foreign vessels undertake to consider it a port of the United States, they will become amenable to the laws, and must take the consequences. It MR. KING'S CALL FOR THE USE OF FORCE. Fessenden's Defence. 397 Mason's Rejoinder. was in reference to this fact that I will tell whom I represent. I these people are now availing represent the sovereign State themselves of this being a port of Virginia, to whom I alone am of the United States, and collect the revenue and put amenable for what I may do, or what I may say. I it into their own pockets, when in fact they are no- heard the Senator from Mississippi, to whom he rebody in the eyes of the law, and in the eyes of the fers, with equal approbation to himself. I will do noworld, We are going on now, also, furnishing them thing that will stand in the way of the fu!! and compostal facilities, we paying the expense and they re-plete administration of this Government as long as I ceiving the money. Now the Senator says this won't remain one of the participants in its administration; do. Either declare war, or else declare that they are but I have reason to believe that the Government is no longer a part of the United States. I don't propose initiating a policy that will lead to civil war, and to do either. I propose to do simply that which is that will lead to unnecessary war, and will minister necessary for our own protection and advantage. I to the passions of bad men. I will not vote to inam acting yet as Senator of the United States, and I crease the naval armament for that purpose; and will legislate for the United States, and not for if I have reason to believe that the purpose is South Carolina, or any other Seceding State; and to strengthen the arm of the Government with a as long as I stay here, I take it that it is my duty. view to prospective war, I am doing my duty as a Nor am I going to be diverted from this by talk Senator of the United States in doing what I can to about force and coercion. The time may come prevent it. The Hon. Senator has not favored us when it will be necessary for us to speak plain. I with his view of the reasonable propriety of incuram willing to speak plain now, and I say, speaking ring this expenditure in the present condition of the for myself, that if the time ever does come when it Treasury, but has contented himself with the recwill be necessary to use force to execute the laws ommendation of a Democratic President. When of the United States, under the Constitution, I am Senators, who are soon to become the dominant perfectly ready to do it. But I trust I shall have power, will not say whether they are going to war no such necessity. The measure of my friend from or not, but shadow it out darkly, I will not vote a Vermont is a measure of peace, and the measure of dollar until there is a settled policy, an established constructing these additional vessels is a measure and understood policy, for the new state of things. of peace. I do not suppose anybody ever dreamed I want to know what is to be the policy of this Govof making this appropriation for the purpose of ernment; whether they are going to make war on making war upon these States. It may be war will the Seceding States, or whether they will let them come. It may be these difficulties will grow vastly peacefully withdraw upon terms to be settled by greater than they are now, and when that time comes negotiation, or whether we are to remain here till I trust we shall be ready to meet our responsibilities the 4th of March, with these purposes only darkly like men. But the question is now, What is neces- shadowed forth, as was done by the Senator from sary for us to do for the interest of this country, in New York (Mr. Seward) the other day, and as has reference to its naval force? Although the Senator been done by the Senator from Maine to-day, that will not vote for it, because it may be that it will there may be a state of things when it is necesgive additional force to the Government which he sary to coerce a State. We have that policy represents here, I say to him that is no objection to shadowed out, but not avowed. It is time to estabmy mind. I am perfectly willing it should have lish a policy. Let us know what is to be done. 1 that additional force, when I am so well defended desire as a Senator of the United States to know by the recommendation of a Democratic President, how to shape my vote in relation to their measures year after year, and supported by a Democratic of public policy; and until we know whether civil Senator." war is to be waged or not, because of Secession, I will never vote a dollar to increase the navy. King, (Rep.,) of New York, followed. He said he had, at former sessions, voted against any increase of the navy, because he did not see the necessity for it. But now that treason was abroad in the land, he believed there was a necessity for the increase of the armament and defensive power of the country. He declared: Mason's Rejoinder. Mason retorted that the Senator had enlightened him, by confessing that the increased naval force had some reference to the condition of matters in the Seceded States. He continued: "The Senator undertakes to ask me who I represent? I did not ask the Senator that question. I have that respect for him to which he is entitled by his position, his mind, and his intellect. He is authorized to say for himself what he represents. I King's call for the "This Government and this country cannot be King's Call for the peaceably destroyed, or overthrown, or divided. The sove, reigns themselves will come here before that is done, even if their representatives could prove recreant in their defence of it. It is well that the whole country should know that the people of this country will not consent, they will never consent to the peaceable destruction or dissolution of the Government. They would be recreant to the highest duties of men, to their country, to their race, to themselves, and to the high trust of the ancestry who acquired it, if they could entertain a thought of the destruction of this country. I don't believe it can be destroyed. I would use forbearance and patience; I would extend every degree of kindness, and make every effort at conciliation to these people. But, to their right to divide this Government, to take a State out of the Union, or, least of all, that they should peaceably have a right to break up this Government, I would never admit. I don't know what these gentlemen consider peace. They have armed themselves, and have even taken arms belonging to this Government. Cabinet officers and members of the Senate have been interested in this treason, and a foul, infamous plot has existed, I have no doubt, to destroy this Government. Providence, rather than the skill and attention of the people, has arrested it; some of the men have been driven out of the Cabinet in disgrace; and an indictment found against one of them for embezzlement, or petty larceny, or grand larceny, or for any other infamous attempt which men can commit. There were mem bers of Congress found in the war of 1812 who voted against the supplies for Government, and it is not surprising that such should be found in Congress at any time. The greatest latitude of opinion exists in this country, and so it should. Men cannot talk treason they must act it—and he who acts it, in my judgment, should take the fate of a traitor, and should not seek to escape by pretending that he can commit it peacefully against the country. I cannot conceive the case of a man of honor who could steal into a house, partly his own, and clandestinely and privately rob it of its means of strength and defence, and then assail it and claim a right to do so peacefully, and say he should not be punished or disturbed by force. I tell these gentlemen that, in my judgment, this treason must come to an end-peacefully, I hope; but never, in my judgment, peacefully, if by an ignominious submission of the honor of the people of this country to traitors. Never! I desire peace, but I would provide, amply provide, for the means of defence of the country, by war, if necessary." 66 Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives, That the President be and is hereby required to ac knowledge the independence of the said Southern Confederacy, as soon as official information of its establishment shall be received, and that he receive such Commissioners as may be appointed by that Government for an amicable adjustment of all matters in dispute." This was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The subject of the seizure of the Mint at New Orleans was then brought before the House, in a preamble and resolu tion, by McClernand, (Dem.,) of Illinois, reciting that by the seizure of the Mint, money, and Custom-house by the revolutionary authorities of Louisiana, the United States are put at defiance, and calling upon the Presi dent, if not incompatible with the public interests, for all the facts in the case, and what steps, if any, have been taken, or contemplated, to recover possession of the said property. Adopted. Ferry, (Rep.,) of Connecticut, asked leave to offer a resolution instructing the Committee on the Judiciary to inquire into the expediency of so aniending the Constitution of the United States as expressly to forbid the withdrawal of any State from the Union without the concurrent vote of two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, the approval of the Presi dent, and the consent of all the States, and that the Committee report by joint resolution or otherwise. Objected to by Winslow, of Green, (Dem.,) of Missouri, obtained the North Carolina, but afterwards introduced floor, when the Senate adjourned. and laid over. SLAVERY IN THE STATES. 399 Interesting Resolu tions. Mr. McKeon, (Rep.,) of| New York, introduced the following: "Whereas, The Gulf States have assumed to secede from the Union, and it is deemed important to prevent the Border Slave States from following their example; and whereas, it is believed that those who are inflexibly opposed to any measure of compromise or concession that involves a sacrifice of principle, or the extension of Slavery, would, nevertheless, cheerfully concur in any lawful measure for the emancipation of the slaves: Therefore, "Resolved, That the Select Committee of Five be instructed to inquire whether, by the consent of the people, or of the State Governments, or by compensating the slaveholders, it be practicable for the General Government to procure the emancipation of the slaves in some, or all of the Border States; and if so, to report a bill for that purpose." Mr. Sickles, (Dem.,) of New York, offered a resolution calling on the Secretary of the Treasury to inform the House whether there have been any obstructions to the revenue laws in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Louisiana; also, what measures have been taken to secure the revenue cutters from seizure, and to recover those which have been seized, together with other property. This resolution was adopted, after an amendment, on motion of Burnett, (Dem.,) of Kentucky, calling on the President to furnish the reasons which have induced him to bring a large number of troops to Washington, why they are kept here, and whether he has any information showing a conspiracy to seize the Capitol, and prevent the inauguration of the President-elect. Slavery in the States, Republican Resolu tions. Their introduction was immediately followed by a demand for the previous question, which, being seconded, the main question was ordered, and the yeas and nays called on the first resolution. These proceedings opened a new light on the controversy. The Disunion leaders, and many Northern Democrats, had so repeatedly charged upon the dominant party a settled design to interfere with Slavery in the States, that a portion of even the Northern public really had grown to believe there was truth in the preposterous charge. This resolution, unmasking the truth, would not only exonerate the party aspersed, but would convict its enemies of misrepresentation. It therefore excited both sections of the House very much. Efforts were made to put the resolutions aside, but the Republicans crowded it to a vote. Pending the call of the roll, on the first resolution, Hindman, of Arkansas, demanded, amid shouts of "Order!" from the Northern men, to know if Mr. Lincoln had not said the Union could not exist one-half slave and the other half free; and if that did not indicate a settled purpose to interfere with Slavery in the States. Boteler, (Am.,) of Virginia, wished the resolution to be divided, that they might consider separately the purpose and the right; but the yeas and nays having been called, and the voting having commenced, the resolution could not be divided. Hindman, amid great confusion, rose to a question of order, insisting on the right to call for a division, as suggested by Mr. Boteler. He believed the assertion in the resolution that the people of the non-slaveliolding States have no purpose to interfere with Slavery was untrue. In spite of the call to order from the Republicans, and the loud demand "Call the roll!" the Arkansas member continued to the end of his denunciation. Burnett, of Kentucky, could not stultify himself by voting for what he believed to be false. He wished the resolution divided, that he might vote for a portion of it. Bocock, of Virginia, asked to be excused from voting. Many others offered excuses for not going upon the record. Ruffin, of North Carolina, regarded it as a political trick. Brabson, of Tennessee, could not vote as to the purposes of the North, but would, nevertheless, vote for the resolution. Hindman taunted him, in an offensive manner, with being a "submissionist.” Cox, (Dem.,) of Ohio, approved that portion of the resolution which denies the right to interfere with Slavery in the States. As to the purpose of the Northern people thus to interfere, he believed the hitherto controlling portion of the dominant party of the North had the purpose then to interfere, but that the majority of the people of the North have no such purpose now. If they ever had, they are cured. He voted aye. The vote, as finally announced, stood 106 to 4, being no quorum. Several Republicans, not having voted, asked to have their names recorded. McClernand suggested that the roll be called again. This was done, when the resolution passed-116 to 4. Howard, (Dem.,) of Ohio, then moved to reconsider the vote, when Burnett, of Kentucky, again asked that the resolution should be divided. Sherman, (Rep.,) of Ohio, Sherman's Substitute. did not wish that Southern men should be called upon to decide as to the purposes of the North-the North would decide for itself in that respect. He therefore offered the following substitute: Resolved, That neither the Federal Government uor the people or Governments of the non-slaveholding States have the right to legislate upon or interfere with Slavery in any slaveholding State in the Union." This substitute, designed to cover the entire question before the House, as a substitute for Mr. Palmer's two resolutions, passed under the operation of the previous question: yeas 161--nays none. At the Tuesday's session of the House, Mr. Sherman had the communication of the Secretary of the Treasury read, stating the critical condition of the Government finances, [see page 390.] Mr. Sherman offered a bill providing for the acceptance of the States' guarantees, as proposed by the Secretary; but Garnett, of Virginia, objected to the bill being reported. He would allow it to be read, but would not, so long as he was a member of the House, allow it to be reported. Holman, (Dem.,) of Indiana, introduced A Hoosier Propogiuon. resolutions, "adopted by citizens of Kentucky and Indiana," which proposed a unique settlement of difficulties, viz.: that, as Kentucky and Indiana were friends, they would not allow any line to be drawn be tween them in the formation of a new Confederacy-that other States be called upon to adopt the same rule of conduct, thus to "kick the line of division between two confederacies eastward into the Atlantic, southward into the Gulf, westward into the Pacific, and northward into Canada." The resolu | tion, although offered in humor, was, nevertheless, a true expression of the feelings of States for their neighbors. Report on the Bailey Robbery. The Special Committee appointed to investigate the frauds perpetrated in the Interior Department offered their report, [see page 392,] which was read, though its consideration was postponed. It was a very thorough exposition of the robbery and frauds perpetrated by Bailey and Floyd, to which Russell was accessory. It embraced a history of the Indian Trust fund; the man. ner of keeping the bonds; the bonds abstracted; the negotiations between Russell and Bailey; Bailey's motives for taking the bonds; Bailey's confession; the disposition made of the bonds; the acceptances issued by the Secretary of War to an amount e ceeding six millions of dollars; what was done with the acceptances; further light on Mr. Floyd's proceedings; Mr. Russell's statement regarding the amount of the acceptances negotiated by him; the peculiar records of the War Department; the payments made to Russell & Co.; Mr. Benjamin's explicit testimony, &c., &c. It closed, recommending special legislation in the matter, to provide for the more effectual punishment of crimes of the nature of those brought to their notice, and to compel the disclosure of evidence by witnesses. The want of power in these respects threatened to thwart the ends of justice. The consideration of the Pacific Railway bill being the special order, was resumed. In the course of the discussion which fol lowed, the Virginia members, of the revolutionary school, put forth their several |