Part 19

And now at last a new power is invoked, being nothing less than that great Proclamation of the President which places Liberty at the head of our columns.

Mr. Sumner here explained the immediate and prospective effects of the Proclamation, and then closed as follows.

It is sometimes said that this edict is unconstitutional. Some there are with whom the Constitution is a constant stumbling-block, wherever anything is to be done for Freedom. It cannot be so, I trust, with the liberal farmers of this valley. Of course, the Edict of Emancipation is to be regarded as a war measure, made in the exercise of the Rights of War. It is as much a war measure as the proclamation calling forth troops, and is entitled to the same support. It is not a measure of Abolition or Antislavery, or of philanthropy, but a war measure, pure and simple. If there be any person disposed to discourage it, I warn him that _he departs from the duties of patriotism hardly less than if he discouraged enlistments_. There is but one course now before us. The policy of Emancipation, at last adopted as a war measure, must be sustained precisely as we sustain an army in the field. With this new and mighty agency I cannot doubt the result. The Rebellion will be crushed, and the Republic will be elevated to heights of power and grandeur where it will be an example to mankind. It is related of the Emperor Julian, known as the Apostate,--for he had once embraced Christianity,--that, perishing before he had struck the last blows prepared by hatred to the Church, he looked at the blood which spurted from his side, and then cried, “Galilean, thou hast conquered!” Whether fable or truth, the story has its meaning. Such a cry will yet be heard from the apostate chiefs in our Rebel States, “Liberty, thou hast conquered!”--and the echo of this cry will be heard round the globe.

* * * * *

Following the usage of your festival, I offer the following sentiment:--

_The Valley of the Connecticut._ Happy in its fertility, and also in its beauty; happier still in that inspiration of Liberty which is better than fertility or beauty.

AMBULANCE AND HOSPITAL CORPS.

RESOLUTION IN THE SENATE, DECEMBER 3, 1862.

The following resolution, offered by Mr. Sumner, was adopted.

RESOLVED, That the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia be directed to consider the expediency of providing by law for the establishment of a corps composed of men especially enlisted for hospital and ambulance service, with officers commissioned purposely to command them, who shall have the entire charge, under the medical officers, of the hospitals and of the ambulance wagons, so as to enlarge the usefulness of this humane service, and give to it the efficiency derived from organization.

CELEBRATION OF EMANCIPATION.

LETTER TO A PUBLIC MEETING OF COLORED CITIZENS IN BOSTON, JANUARY 1, 1863.

WASHINGTON, January 1, 1863.

MY DEAR SIR,--Owing to the wretched condition of the mails between New York and Washington, I did not receive your letter of the 27th in season for an answer to be used at the proposed meeting.

I am glad that you celebrated the day. It deserved your celebration, your thanksgiving, and your prayers. On that day an angel appeared upon the earth.

Accept my best wishes for your association, and believe me, dear Sir,

Faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

PRUDENCE IN OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS.

REMARKS IN THE SENATE, ON RESOLUTIONS AGAINST FRENCH INTERFERENCE IN MEXICO, FEBRUARY 3, 1863.

In the Senate, January 19th, Mr. McDougall, a Democratic Senator from California, introduced the following resolutions, setting forth the duty of the United States to take steps against French interference in Mexico.

“_Resolved by the Senate_ (_the House of Representatives concurring_), That the present attempt by the Government of France to subject the Republic of Mexico to her authority by armed force is a violation of the established and known rules of International Law, and that it is, moreover, a violation of the faith of France, pledged by the treaty made at London on the 31st day of October, 1861, between the allied Governments of Spain, France, and England, communicated to this Government over the signatures of the representatives of the allies, by letter of the 30th day of November, 1861, and particularly and repeatedly assured to this Government through its minister resident at the Court of France.

“_Resolved further_, That the attempt to subject the Republic of Mexico to French authority is an act not merely unfriendly to this Republic, but to free institutions everywhere; and that it is regarded by this Republic as not only unfriendly, but as hostile.

“_Resolved further_, That it is the duty of this Republic to require of the Government of France that her armed forces be withdrawn from the territories of Mexico.

“_Resolved further_, That it is the duty and proper office of this Republic, now and at all times, to lend such aid to the Republic of Mexico as is or may be required to prevent the forcible interposition of any of the States of Europe in the political affairs of that Republic.

“_Resolved further_, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be communicated to the Government of Mexico the views now expressed by the two Houses of Congress, and be further requested to cause to be negotiated such treaty or treaties between the two Republics as will best tend to make these views effective.”

February 3d, Mr. McDougall moved to take them up for consideration. His motion was opposed by Mr. Sumner, who said, among other things:--

But, Sir, if the Senate had abundant time, like a mere debating society, and were free to select at will a topic for discussion, I surely should object at this moment to a debate which must be not only useless, but worse than useless. I forbear from details at present. I wish to avoid them, unless rendered necessary. I content myself with saying that the resolutions either mean something or they mean nothing. If they mean nothing, surely the Senate will not enter upon their discussion. If they mean anything, if they are not mere words, they mean war, and this no common war, but war with a great and adventurous nation, powerful in fleets and armies, bound to us by treaties and manifold traditions, and still constant in professions of amity and good-will. Sir, have we not war enough already on our hands, without needlessly and wantonly provoking another? For myself, I give all that I have of intellectual action, and will, and heart, to the suppression of this Rebellion; and never, by my consent, shall the Senate enter upon a discussion the first effect of which will be aid and comfort to the Rebellion itself.

Mr. McDougall, in reply, said: “I trust the Senate will dare to look the grave question of our foreign relations with France and Mexico fairly, boldly, and openly in the face. I hope the Senate will not take counsel of its fears.” Mr. Sumner followed.

MR. PRESIDENT,--I, too, hope that the Senate will dare do everything that is right; but I hope that it will not dare to embarrass the Government at this moment, and give aid and comfort to the Rebellion. I do not say that the Senator means to give such aid and comfort, but I do say that the very speech which has just fallen from him, to the extent of its influence, will give aid and comfort. Can any Senator doubt that all who sympathize with the Rebellion will rejoice to see this Senate discussing the question of peace and war with a great European power? Can any one doubt that the Rebels over the way will rejoice and clap their hands, when they hear the tidings? Sir, I will not give them any such encouragement. They shall not have it, if vote or voice of mine can prevent. I, too, Sir, am for the freest latitude of debate, but I am for the suppression of the Rebellion above and before everything else; and the desires of the Senate must all yield at this moment to the patriotic requirements of the country. There is a time for all things. There is a time to weep, and there is a time to laugh. I do not know, that, in the chapter of national calamities, there may not be a time for further war; but I do say that the duty of statesmanship here in this Chamber is to set the foot down at once against any such proposition, which, just to the extent of its recognition, must add to present embarrassments.

The resolutions were taken up for consideration by a vote of 29 yeas to 16 nays, when Mr. McDougall made an elaborate speech. Mr. Sumner followed.

MR. PRESIDENT,--At the present moment there is one touchstone to which I am disposed to bring every question, especially in our foreign relations; and this touchstone is its influence on the suppression of the Rebellion. A measure may in itself be just or expedient; but if it would be a present burden, if it would add to our embarrassments and troubles, and especially if it would aggravate our military condition, then, whatever may be its merits, I am against it. To the suppression of the Rebellion the country offers life and treasure without stint, and it expects that these energies shall not be sacrificed or impaired by the assumption of any added responsibilities.

If I bring these resolutions to this touchstone, they fail. They may be right or wrong in fact and principle, but their influence at this moment, if adopted, must be most prejudicial to the cause of the Union. Assuming the tone of friendship to Mexico, they practically give to the Rebellion a most powerful ally, for they openly challenge war with France. There is madness in the proposition. I do not question the motives of the Senator, but it would be difficult to conceive anything more calculated to aid and comfort the Rebellion, just in proportion to its adoption. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. The present war is surely enough, without adding war with France.

I content myself with this protest, without following the Senator in a discussion which must be unprofitable, if not pernicious.

I say nothing of France, whose power cannot be doubted, and whose friendship I would carefully cultivate.

I say nothing of Mexico, our unhappy neighbor Republic, torn, as we now are, except to declare sympathy and cordial good-will.

It is sufficient that the policy of the Senator from California, without any certainty of good to Mexico, must excite the hostility of France, and give to the Rebellion armies and fleets, not to mention that recognition and foreign intervention which we deprecate.

Let us all unite to put down the Rebellion. This is enough for the present.

If Senators are sensitive, when they see European monarchies again setting foot on this hemisphere,--entering Mexico with their armies, entering New Grenada with their influence, and occupying the ancient San Domingo,--let them consider that there is but one way in which this return of empire can be arrested. It is by the suppression of the Rebellion. Let the Rebellion be overcome, and this whole continent will fall naturally, peacefully, and tranquilly under the irresistible influence of American institutions. Resolutions cannot do this, nor speeches. I therefore move that the resolutions lie on the table.

The Senate went into Executive Session without a vote. The resolutions came up again the next day, when, on motion of Mr. Sumner, they were laid on the table, by a vote of yeas 34, nays 10.

EMPLOYMENT OF COLORED TROOPS.

BILL IN THE SENATE, FEBRUARY 9, 1863.

As early as May 26, 1862, Mr. Sumner introduced a resolution declaring that the time had come for the Government “to invite all, without distinction of color, to make their loyalty manifest by ceasing to fight or labor for the Rebels, and also by rendering every assistance in their power to the cause of the Constitution and the Union, according to their ability, whether by _arms_, or labor, or information, or in any other way.”

After much debate, an Act was passed to amend the Act to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions, approved February 28, 1795. The new Act, approved by the President July 17, 1862, contained the following provision:--

“That the President be, and he is hereby, authorized to receive into the service of the United States, for the purpose of constructing intrenchments, or performing camp service or any other labor, or any military or naval service for which they may be found competent, persons of African descent; and such persons shall be enrolled and organized under such regulations, not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws, as the President may prescribe.”[137]

This was the beginning of colored troops.

In his speech at Faneuil Hall, October 6, 1862,[138] Mr. Sumner justified an appeal to the slaves.

In the Senate, February 9, 1863, he introduced the following bill, providing for the enlistment of slaves and others of African descent, which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia, and ordered to be printed.

* * * * *

A Bill to raise additional Soldiers for the Service of the United States.

_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled_, That each and every able-bodied male person of the age of eighteen years and under forty-five years, made free by the Act of Congress, approved August sixth, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, entitled “An Act to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes,” or the Act of July seventeenth, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled “An Act to suppress insurrection, to punish treason and rebellion, to seize and confiscate the property of Rebels, and for other purposes,” or by Proclamations of the President of the United States, dated September twenty-second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and January first, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, respectively, or by any other legal and competent authority exercised in suppressing the present Rebellion, shall severally be forthwith enrolled as a military force of the United States by the commanding officer within whose department such persons shall be found, and they shall be organized, armed, equipped, and mustered into the service of the United States, to serve during the present war, to a number not exceeding three hundred thousand men.

SEC. 2. _And be it further enacted_, That the said military force shall be organized according to the regulations of the branch of service in which they may be designated to serve, and receive the same rations, clothing, and equipments as volunteers, and a monthly pay of seven dollars, to be paid one half at the end of each month, and the other half when discharged. They shall be officered by persons appointed and commissioned by the President, and governed by the rules and articles of war, and such other rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law. Each person so serving as a non-commissioned officer or private in such military force of the United States shall be entitled to receive, upon his discharge, ten acres of land, and each person so serving as a commissioned officer shall be entitled to receive twenty-five acres, the same to be located upon any lands confiscated during the present Rebellion, and not reserved by the Government for public use; the land so located to be occupied only as a homestead by the person entitled to receive the same, and his family.

SEC. 3. _And be it further enacted_, That the President be, and is hereby, authorized to further order the voluntary enlistment or enrolment of each and every able-bodied free male person of African descent, of the age of eighteen years and under forty-five years, within the United States, for military service, as provided by this Act, except that the monthly pay of such free persons shall be the same as that of the volunteers: _Provided_, The whole number called into the service of the United States under the provisions of this section shall not exceed one hundred thousand men.

There was no action of the Committee on this bill, and it fell with the session.

* * * * *

February 10, 1864, more than a year later, the subject was brought forward in the House of Representatives by Mr. Stevens, in an amendment to the Enrolment Bill then pending, and finally prevailed in the following terms:--

“That all able-bodied male colored persons, between the ages of twenty and forty-five years, resident in the United States, shall be enrolled according to the provisions of this Act and of the Act to which this is an amendment, and form part of the national forces; and when a slave of a loyal master shall be drafted and mustered into the service of the United States, his master shall have a certificate thereof, and thereupon such slave shall be free.”[139]

IMMEDIATE EMANCIPATION, AND NOT GRADUAL.

SPEECH IN THE SENATE, ON THE BILL PROVIDING AID FOR EMANCIPATION IN MISSOURI, FEBRUARY 12, 1863.

The recommendation of President Lincoln to aid the States in Emancipation, though urged by him, never found great favor in Congress. Among the measures prompted by it was one introduced into the House of Representatives by Mr. Noell, of Missouri, entitled, “A Bill giving aid to the State of Missouri for the purpose of securing the abolishment of Slavery in said State.” This provided that the Government of the United States would, upon the passage of a good and valid Act of Emancipation of all the slaves therein, and to be irrepealable, unless by the consent of the United States, apply the sum of ten million dollars in United States bonds, redeemable in thirty years from date. It passed the House by 73 yeas against 46 nays.

In the Senate, this bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, which reported a substitute, when it was recommitted and another substitute reported, by which it was provided, that, on the adoption of a valid law by Missouri “for the _gradual_ or immediate emancipation of all the slaves therein, and the exclusion of Slavery forever thereafter from said State,” twenty million dollars in United States bonds should be applied “to compensate for the inconveniences produced by such change of system,” which was to take effect “on some day not later than the fourth day of July, 1876”; but the bonds were not to exceed ten million dollars, unless there was “full and perfect manumission” before the fourth day of July, 1865, nor in their aggregate were they to exceed “the sum of three hundred dollars for each slave emancipated.”

This recognition of the principle of _Gradual_ Emancipation, especially as a war measure, was very disagreeable to Mr. Sumner. February 7th, he moved to strike out “seventy-six” and insert “sixty-four,” so that the Act of Emancipation should go into operation on the 4th of July, 1864; and here he remarked:--

MR. PRESIDENT,--This bill, as I understand it, is a bill of peace; it is to bring back tranquillity in a disturbed State. If you ask for authority under the Constitution, I cannot doubt that it is in the War Power. It is in the power to suppress this insurrection, to put down this rebellion. But most strangely do you seek to put down this rebellion by the abolition of Slavery twenty years, or even ten years, from now. To my mind the proposition is simply ridiculous. I use strong language, because so it seems to me, and I cannot help saying it.

Sir, for the sake of our common country at this critical moment, for the sake of Missouri herself, for the sake of every slave-master in Missouri, and for the sake of every slave, I insist that Abolition shall be completed at the nearest possible day. History, reason, and common sense are uniform in this requirement, and I challenge contradiction to their concurring testimony.

The measure on its face is double, being in the alternative. It provides a certain sum in the event of Emancipation taking place within two years, and another sum if it takes place at a certain distant day. Now, Sir, I do not desire any alternative. I trust that what we do will take effect at once. I wish to see the benefit of it, especially to see it felt in the suppression of the Rebellion.

Mr. Willey, of West Virginia, said, that, in his estimation, “it would be much better for Missouri, and for the slave, if, instead of 1876, it was 1900”; and he was followed by Mr. Henderson, of Missouri, on the same side. Mr. Sumner replied briefly.

I assume that Senators are in earnest for something to put down the Rebellion. Our country, I know, is rich in resources. It can vote millions for almost any purpose; but still I doubt if the Senator from Missouri would urge Congress, at this moment, to appropriate millions, unless he expected in this way to do something very positive against the Rebellion. I assume that this is his object, and also the object of other Senators urging this measure. Is there any other object to justify, at this moment, a vote for it? Is there any Senator who will toss twenty or ten millions of money to any State, unless he is satisfied that by doing so he can help put an end to the Rebellion? On this point all must agree. Therefore do I insist on the single question, How shall we most surely help put an end to the Rebellion? If this can be best accomplished by immediate Emancipation, then must we vote accordingly. But if it is better to allow Emancipation to drag through twenty or even ten years, with the possibility of reaction, and with the certainty of controversy during all this period, and, above all, without any immediate good, then will Senators vote accordingly. Sir, I am against any such thing. I wish the measure to be effective for the object proposed, and, as I do not believe it can be effective, unless immediate, I must vote accordingly.

The amendment of Mr. Sumner was lost,--Yeas 11, Nays 26.

In the debate which ensued, Mr. Powell, of Kentucky, taunted Mr. Sumner with desiring the negroes of Missouri to be “freed quickly, so that Governor Andrew can recruit there to fill up the Massachusetts quota.” Mr. Sumner replied: “I would have a musket put in the hands of every one of these negroes in Missouri.”

Mr. Sumner moved to amend by striking out “three hundred” and inserting “two hundred” dollars, as the measure of value of a slave. Here he said:--

I object to the enormous valuation. I object to it in the present bill, and also as a precedent. We shall be bound by it hereafter. The next bill will have this same value of three hundred dollars for each slave. I would begin by putting it at two hundred dollars, and that is my motion.

This amendment was adopted,--Yeas 19, Nays 17.

Mr. Sumner then moved to strike out the word “gradual,” so that the money should be paid only on immediate Emancipation. Here he remarked, that he did not understand a war measure which was to go into effect ten years from now,--that he did not understand a gradual war measure,--that it was an absurdity in terms, and utterly indefensible.

The motion was lost,--Yeas 11, Nays 27.

The question then recurred on the adoption of the substitute, when Mr. Sumner spoke as follows.