Here are the resolutions as finally passed: "Joint Resolution relative to the decision of the United States Supreme Court, regarding the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. "Whereas, The Supreme Court of the United States has assumed appellate jurisdiction, in the matter of the application of Sherman M. Booth, for a writ of habeas corpus, presented and prosecuted to final judgment in the Supreme Court of this State, and has, without process, [see before, why they could not get "process"] or any of the forms recognized by law, assumed the power to reverse this judgment, in a matter involving the personal liberty of the citizen, asserted by, and adjudged to him by the regular course of judicial proceedings upon the great writ of liberty, secured to the people of each State by the constitution of the United States. "And Whereas, Such assumption of power and authority by the Supreme Court of the United States to become the final arbiter of the liberty of the citizen, and to override and nullify the the judgments of the State Courts' declaration thereof, is in direct conflict with that provision of the constitution of the United States which secures to the people the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, therefore "Resolved, the Senate concurring, That we regard the action of the Supreme Court of the United States in assuming jurisdiction in the case before mentioned, as an arbitrary act of power unauthorized by the Constitution and virtually superceding the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus, and prostrating the rights and liberties of the people, at the foot of unlimited power. "Resolved, That the principle and construc tion contended for, by the party which now rules in the counsels of the nation-that the General Government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it, stop nothing short of despotism, since the discretion of those who administer the Government, and not the Constitution, would be the measure of their powers-that the several states which formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction, and that a POSITIVE DEFIANCE of those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts, done, or attempted to be done, under color of that instrument, is the rightful remedy! "Approved March 19, 1859. (Signed,) "ALX. W. RANDALL, MR. HORN'S SUBSTITUTE VOTED DOWN. While these resolutions were pending, F. W. HORN, (Dem.) offered the following as a substitute, which was rejected by ayes 36, noes 49-a strict party vote See p. 863 Assembly Journal, 1859. Whereas, The Supreme Court of the United States has totally reversed the decision of the Supreme Court of this State in the case of the United States against Sherman M. Booth; and "Whereas, Every law abiding citizen, no matter what his private views and feelings may be, should acquiesce in the decisions of the highest tribunals known by the Constitution of the United States, to whom the interpretation of the sacred document is especially confided; and Whereas, It would lead to anarchy and a dissolution of the Union, (how prophetic) if the interpretation of that instrument should be usurped by the different State Courts, in opposition to the Supreme Court of the United States [this was the Democratic doctrine then, and not as the Journal asserted that our Supreme Court could make no original decision of the kind] where it has been placed by those who mutually pledged to each other their "lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor;" therefore Resolved, by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That we will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States declar"Resolved, That this usurpation of jurisdiced by said Court to be constitutional, without tion by the Federal Judiciary, in the said case and without process, is an act of undelegated power, and therefore, without authority, void and of no force. 'Resolved, That the Government framed by the Constitution of the United States, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself [but that Wisconsin was] but that, as in all other cases, of compact among parties, having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself as well of infractions, as of the mode and measure of redress. regard to our own private views and feelings. -See p. 778, Assembly Journal, 1859. This shows the determination of the Republicans of Wisconsin to "positively defy" the whole power of the General Government, which they proceeded to execute, as we have seen, by sundry armed mobs, &c. SENATOR DOOLITTLE'S VIEWS. In a speech by Senator DOOLITTLE in the U. S. Senate February 24th, 1860, he said: "The great question, in the science of American government is, when the jurisdiction of the state and federal governments came in conflict, who is to decide? It will never do to say that the decisions of the federal court should be received as conclusive. When it usurps power its decisions must not be respected, and are binding upon nobody." Again: speaking of the writ of habeas corpus by state courts to persons arrested and held by virtue ef U. S. process, he said: "Add this doctrine of the Senator from Georgia, and there would be no constitutional limit upon his (a U.S. district judge's) power-whether constitutional or unconstitutional-whether with or without authority of the United States; whether within or outside of his constitutional jurisdiction, with or without cause, by his warrant alone he could arrest any citizen of Wisconsin, try him, sentence him, even to death, and there is no appeal. No habeas corpus could reach the prisoner, whether in the state prison or at the foot of the gallows! Where are we? In the United States of America, or at St. Petersburg, under the power of an autocrat, whose will is law, or under the Constitution of the United States, which declares that no person shall be deprived of his liberty but by the process of law, which law must itself be subject always to the constitution of the United States?" Mr. DOOLITTLE don't talk thus now; then it was "your ox," &c.-now a different rule is urged. By such arguments were the people of the state educated up to the standard of open resistance to the Federal power, and we have not the least doubt that had the Republicans failed in electing their candidate in 1860,they would, provided they had the same courage, have done precisely what South Carolina did in 1860and precisely what the Republicans of Green county pledged themselves to do in 1856. This chapter is a sad one-it galls our state pride to record it, but we should be false to truth and unjust to history, did we omit it. We trust that hereafter, the Republicans of Wisconsin will not have the face to claim all the loyalty and all the patrotism. May God forgive them for the wrongs they have done their country. Hartford, on the 15th of December, 1815. It put forth a disunion report, accompanied by a series of resolutions; from the former we select the following, seasoned with this apropos spice from HENRY IV : "Treason is but trusted like the fox, Who, ne'er so tame, so cherish'd, and lock'd up. "In cases of deliberate, dangerous and palpable 'infractions' of the Constitution, affecting the 'sovereignty' of a 'state' and the 'liberties' of the people, it is not only the right but the duty of each state to interpose its authority for their protection, in the manner best calculated to secure that end. When emergencies occur which are either beyond the reach of judicial tribunals, or too pressing to admit of the delay incident to their forms, states, which have no common umpire, must be their own judges, and execute their own decisions.” SOUTH CAROLINA ENDORSES JUDGE SMITH'S OPINION. It will be observed that the substance of the Hartford Convention report, and the Republican resolutions of 1859, quoted above, are identical, while many of the words employed are the same, as well as certain phrases, leaving no doubt that their authors must have selected garbled sentences from the treasonable report of the Hartford Convention, as a foundation for their resolutions of "positive defiance." The only real difference is that the Wisconsin resolutions go deeper into resistance and positive defiance than their Federal fathers. SOUTH CAROLINA QUOTES JUDGE SMITH. Mr. RHETT, of South Carolina, on the day that treasonable State seceded from the Union, thus endorsed the decision of Judge SMITH, as good enough doctrine for South Carolina to go out of the Union on: "Sir, the North threaten to fight us back into the Union, after we shall have taken our stand for Southern Independence. They now deny the right of a State to judge of its own grievances and to apply its own remedies, notwithstanding for years, many of the Northern States, Wisconsin in particular, have asserted this right for themselves. I want no better license for our action to-day than the decision of Judge SMITH in the Rescue cases of Wisconsin. CHAPTER XVI. REPUBLICANS TRUE TO OLD FEDERAL INSTINCTS. Classification of parties, principles and arguments, from 1798 to 1863...Thurlow Weed on Greeley...New York Tribune favors Secession...Greeley advocating Peace with Rebels... Mr. Lincoln Advocates the right of Secession... The Republican Congress vote down a Resolution against a Dictatorship... The Ayes and Noes on that Subject...The Constitution again the "Cause of all our Troubles"...Complete overthrow of the Public Liberties ...From the New York World...Republicans Raise a "Higher Standard than the Stars and Stripes"... Prefer "Their principles to Fifty Unions"...Who Discourage Enlistments... Reference to Aboltition Votes in Congress. DISLOYALTY AND REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT OF REPUBLICANS. [The crowd of other duties, and the necessary haste in which these extracts have been collected--involving the perusal of hundreds of books and newspapers-render it quite impossible to place them in chronological order, but by proper headings it is believed they will be convenient for reference.-COMPILER.] to read the pages of this book, shall not have THURLOW WEED'S TESTIMONY. THURLOW WEED, late editor of the Albany Journal, is good Republican authority. He denounces HORACE GREELEY, the principal leader of the Republican party, with whom the President condescends and delights to correspond with, as the "architect of ruin," and proceeds, "first, while SLIDELL, TOOMBS, MASON, DAVIS, etc.. etc., were maturing their schemes for rebellion, and the Gulf States, under their instructions, were seceding, Mr. GREELEY approved, justified, and invited them to go forward with their treasonable designs,' HERE IS THE EVIDENCE. "If the cotton states shall become satisfied The that they can do better out of the Union than We have already published enough to show that the leaders of the great party opposed to the Democracy desire the dissolution of the Government, by any means, and, have been laboring to that end for 'seventy-five years.Under all the dodges and guises of a change of name—shifting of ostensible purposes and objects, they have steadily pursued their de-andstructive course-using the same class of arguments, and resorting to the same class of means to accomplish their purpose. The Federalists of 1812, though professing a different line of policy, used the same class of arguments, and hurled the same species of denunciation against the Government and the principles on which it was founded, as the Federals of 1798-always professing to be for the Constitution-yet insisting that Congress, the Executive and the courts had placed a wrong construction on its meaning. The Federal Republican of 1824 used the same class of arguments as the Federals of 1812. The Whig of 1833 was true to the reasoning of his Federal Republican progenitors of 1824, while the Republican or "Union" of the present era goes back to the Hartford Convention for the inspiration of his political history, and while this class of men (the leaders-we do not mean all) profess, as did their Federal progenitors, to revere the Constitution, they scout the idea of ever again enforcing it-laud those who wantonly violate it, and denounce as "traitors" and " copperheads" all who are sincerely devoted to it "as it is," or desire to maintain the "Union as it was." Future generations, that may chance "If the cotton states unitedly and earnestly wish to withdraw peacefully from the Union, we think they should and would be allowed to do so. Any attempt to compel them by force to remain, would be contrary to the principles enunciated in the immortal Declaration of Independence--contrary to the fundamental ideas on which human liberty is based."-New York Tribune, Nov. 26, 1860. How easy it is for heretics to summon the Bible to their aid, or political disunion lunatics, to summon the "immortal Declaration" or the "fundamental ideas of humanity" as evidence that Dissolution is according to the true Union faith! Again: "Whenever it shall be clear that the great body of the Southern people have become conclusively alienated from the Union and anxious to escape from it. WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO FORWARD THEIR VIEWS!"-New Here, then, during the insipient stages of the Rebellion, we find the great leading organ of the Republican party, pleading for the right of secession, and pledging itself not only to resist any coercive measures but to forward the views of the traitors. No Republican press -no Republican orator-has from that day to this, denounced GREELEY, the author of these disunion sentiments, and why? Because GREELEY always votes against the Democracy and supports the Republican ticket!! GREELEY ADVOCATING PEACE WITH THE RE BELS. To show still further the treasonable animus of the Tribune, we quote from its reply to Mr. WEED: "We believe that should they (the rebels) be successful and we defeated, in the general results of the campaign now opening, impartial third parties will say, that we ought to consent to peace, an the best attainable terms! Whether we shall take that counsel, or renew the struggle [which actually did go against us at Fredericksburg and several other places] as a united people, who have come to understand, and to accept its real character, the cost and suffering involved, even will determine. rebellion and slavery. Had an opposition journal or member of Congress uttered these sentiments, the Tribune would have demanded their removal to Fort Lafayette. "Mr. Greeley evades, though he does not deny, that he has communicated with the French Minister and Mr. Vallandigham, suggesting mediation to the former and peace to the latter. In entering upon the question of mediation with a foreign Minister, he takes issue in violation of law against the GOVERNMENT! And in opening a correspondence with a representative, whom he is constantly denouncing as a traitor, he commits an offense, I leave others to name and characterize ! "And now I leave Mr. Greeley. The columns of his own Tribune being the exponent and witness, as first inviting the withdrawal from the Union, and then, after a hundred thousand lives had been sacrificed, and twelve hundred millions of treasure squandered, demanding the intervention of the Great Powers of Europe, in favor of, "peace upon the best attainable terms! 'for the sake of humanity and commerce!'"'. MR. LINCOLN ON THE RIGHT OF SECESSION. Mr. GREELEY was not the first to advocate the right of secession and dissolution, nor was Mr. LINCOLN, but Mr. LINCOLN did advocate it as early as the 12th of January, 1848, on a question of reference of a portion of the President's message-See Ap. Con. Globe, 1st Session, 30th Congress, p. 94. * "Any people, any where, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one that suits them better. * * * Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and may make their own of so much territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with or near about them, who may oppose their movements." "But we believe the time will come-we do not say how soon, as that must depend on the results of the conflicts yet future, when the great powers of Europe will mediate-not by blows nor menaces, but by representationsagainst a coniinuance of the struggle, as fruit- | THE less, wasteful butchery, and urge a settlement in the interest of humanity and commerce." These are precisely the grounds on which the Federals of 1814 urged a "settlement." To this last extract, Mr. WEED replies: "In simple, direct, unequivocal language, Mr. Greeley says that if we are not successful in the campaign now opening, [the campaign of Fredericksburg] our cause and country are lost, and that we must have peace upon the 'best attainable terms.' "This is saying openly and publicly, to the enemy, that they have only to hold out two or three months longer, to secure the triumph of RADICALS IN CONGRESS SHOW THEIR PURPOSE TO DESTROY THE UNION. Mr. VALLANDIGHAM, who has been denounced as the "prince of copperheads,” introduced a series of resolutions in Congress, testifying to the integrity of the Union, on the 5th of January, 1862, from which we select the following: "Resolved, That the Union as it was must be restored, and maintained, one and indivisible, forever, under the constitution as it is, the 5th Article, providing for amendments, included. "Resolved, That this Government can never permit the intervention of any foreign nation in regard to the present civil war. 'Resolved, That no two Governments can ever be permitted to exercise jurisdiction within the territory now belonging to the United States, and which ackowledged their jurisdiction at the beginning of this civil war. kind of government in its stead, then there is no meaning to be attached to the actions of men. THE CONSTITUTION AGAIN THE "CAUSE OF During the summer of 1863, the Anti-Slavo "Resolved, That whoever shall propose, by Federal authority to extinguish any of the States of this Union, or to declare any of them extinguished, and to establish territorial gov-ry Society of New, York, passed the following ernments within the same, will be guilty of a high crime against the constitution and the Union. "Resolved, That whoever shall affirm that it is competent for this House, or any other authority, to establish a Dictatorship in the United States, thereby superceding, or suspending the constitutional authorities of the Union, and shall proceed to make any move towards the declaring of a Dictator, will be guilty of a high crime against the constitution and the Union, and Public Liberty." Mr. LOVEJOY (radical) immediately moved to table the resolutions, which would be equivlet to their final rejection. resolution, WENDELL PHILLIPS being present and aiding in the same: "Resolved, That while the Society has rendered this verdict with the deepest emphasis, it has not failed to remind the people of the North, that ever since the adoption of the constitution of the United States, 'their feet have run to evil, and they have made haste to shed innocent blood,' in the way of slaveholding complicity; that by consenting to a slave representation in Congress, to the arrest and rendition of fugitive slaves on their own soil, and the iron heel of the General Government, they to the suppression of slave insurrections by have made a covenant with death, and with The yeas and nays were demanded by Mr. hell they have been at agreement, till at last, VALLANDIGHAM, and resulted: judgment is laid to the line and righteousness to the plummet, and the ball sweeps away the refuge of lies, the waters overflow the hiding place, the covenant with death (the constitution) is annulled, and the agreement with hell no longer stands." THE PURPOSE OF VOTING DOWN THE PLEDGE The following brief views of the act authorizing the President to suspend the writ of freedom, and to indemnify the President and all acting under him for any act they may commit, is from that able paper, the New York WorldIt should be read in the same connection with the sedition law of old, which was virtue, compared with this law. It gives a clue to the real motives that governed the majority in Congress in voting down Mr. VALLANDIGHAM'S resolutions against a Dictatorship, noted above: From the New York World. THE COMPLETE OVERTHROW OF THE PUBLIC "This is the darkest hour since the outbreak of the rebellion. Congress, by the act passed yesterday authorizing the President to suspend the writ of habeas corpus throughout the whole extent of the country, has consummated its series of measures for laying the country prostrate and helpless at the feet of one man. It was not enough that Mr. Lincoln has been intrusted with the purse and the sword; that, with an immense power to raise or manufacture money he has unrestricted command of the services of every able-bodied man of the country, Congress has thought it necessary to give the finishing stroke to its establishment of a military despotism, by removing all checks on the abuse of |