title: Freedmen's bureau.
text: * • • * A ^ 'o * * , v * #„ <i>. .4* .cw* ^ i* W vT> a? ° f • A«* *0 * ^ ^ <X ***** a° ^ „0 % o°* * * A •* ♦ «y v Ccv * 4< A *%, ' r ?r>'’ <v 0 v <> • * •. ^o Ay. 0 • V>  '*» 1 * £° ^ / %. **•'' *+ ** v v * T * °* c> sy »* * * '* y> * * * o M c> '■ % <? 4\Va- *<? r #■ .VSSfefc'. .& .m. **. W ■ jM t • * «? od> • * av 0 V/ M \>r * a? ^ * av v <» ^ +^*mxr\ 'y v • £r ^ v \* <i. v **%3?Eyr\ ^ »** ^ A <A '°Va a g* V ♦-TrA A -u 6 - *- °* A sLjrfcZ-' ^ G° 1% X> ^ ** * ^ 0 > $* 'O, ^ **' 1 * 1 A 0 *V* % ® »o* <$r A- ■• ^ \A ^^ ( : ^ v ^ * 5 ". ; zv'. i * * * v " L / • Pvi vV o / V 0 A a». - o * * .4>.<•., <s> A* % o eft L 0 " 0 + ^o G o /A 4 A a, ■* • ^ A* : v^ v » A “C ^ ^ «* • v .•-‘Ji*. V c ° %.°"" < w ;. ^ o^ :* °*- •»: -, ri» «*’ ^KyV>~ ♦ a Ir C* * * A 0 V * B >r 0 ^ A O * qV ^ # • • j, ^jv 6 ^ • o ^ 1>4SV> '.< 4..'I' «* • • j, ^jv 6  '•-^ r / °* ^,6^ V> ♦ 7 ^' A, oo 4,.^. °o A A \0 * 7 * *».. ^ ^ ° <£* °i* s K o ‘ • o - A.° »W'» "> A ***«^ C\ a0 v,• _, * A^*V ° + A ^ ° • ^ ^ • vv .- /"V A*' A <> 'Zml** jfi %< ** Ap.• ^^ c o v.••-“•»- o s^ :<flH^*. ^. 0 < ‘ 0 Xo ^ « 1 v^ v\^ *<A ° * A ^ - # V r <\ ' _A-. t' * + •<£. % o Sjr/tfZh* % . o V . ^ 0^ # f i * r^ A V ♦ * : vv o V ,' 4° %. *» ’ f° ^'* 1 >LVL'- v *\sK > •? • # ^ k A A °V * «? °i>. * * v V, , a ^ * -0.* o mo’ /y o * A y , * • •'x, V v % f’*o> c> *• V c# >*• «■ **«-»-•- ■#* ° rr .*^m- 'r^ v "fS «» TMimw , x * Or ^ c , ll - / ^^5^4* ”*> x ; r>» A cz/yy/ni jw > 7 w ^ariiw^^s.^ w v» w> ^ ' ^ ^ *f %^y..\F$-v v °*» Oj. <0 ♦ , .l^ v A n**®,. c> , 0 ” *«** ^ ^ a*’ a a-o- 9 » 0 • ^ ^ * S£*V A «? ^ >°-v -J <s» * l:,!:. <?• v % ' c^' ^ "•'P!llP»* 4^ ^ 0, \PgP^ ••• a° V *^T‘ ,<V <, '?..• ,„ 0 O ®L*L * * O • V ' # *<i> AX^ J ♦ -r^t. ^ * O I /*v C %. ^ ^ .* o E* °ypi|v ^ ^ °°^s ^ ° •  * v* o' , oV f ^ • o > • j -'^ j^> Jp "'^* ^*Yj y£r * r\ <f. #'Vm\\vs$> > kV ‘ * * ''. * d* # '*o^ 1 ** < 1.^ o »>’• A 0 <^. *..0» O,^ C , A°. *> \> <j^ S A° V ^ '"'TV*" -V... ^-*, ♦ ^oV 4 *■ °o *^T*.o' 5 “%• '3®*^^.* «,K o Q o ... % "' 0 f »•* V •** ^... * *••’•.4°. V - X/ =*' v \/ » ‘ r/ 4^ V % ’.%!!♦• ^ v % V ^ S'*, /^\^,,.V W V - --. b V 4.'i 0*. ' • # °«. M »" «Vi\\\\T ^ Nl^ ■> v * * * °- ■’^•, v ap. '**<? • • • ^ • + aV* o M/ J5eC\N 4 <;p, 4^ <»..** A ^. 'o.»•»,Cr vr> O aP • v'* * ^,0^ e 0'* ♦ *^b a V, -• v* o* ° ^ s* ° i* - i »«, C>.Vl* % V s ^^L°o ^ ^ * W/Oi \ ° r W<sr •; uJ ^?* ^ «y^rs^s>> ~ M - ^ FREEDMEN’S BUREAU. SPEECH ov HON. L. TRUMBULL, 1 1 OF ILLINOIS, I 5*3 V In the Senate of the United States, January 19, 1866L 6 \ \ • The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration the bill (S. No. 60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmen’s Bureau— Mr. TRUMBULL said : Mr. President, I feel it incumbent on me to reply To some of the arguments presented by the Senator from Indiana against this bill, many of the positions he has assumed will be found, upon examination, to have no foundation in fact. He has argued against provisions not contained in the bill, and he has argued also as if he were entirely forgetful of the condition of the country and of the great war through which we have passed. Now, sir, what was the object of the Freedmen’s Bureau, and why was it established? It was established to look after a large class of people who, as the results of the war, had been thrown upon the hands of the Government, and must have perished but for its fostering care and protection. Does the Senator mean to deny the power of this Government to protect people under such circumstances? The Senator must often have voted for appropriations to protect other classes of the people under like circumstances. Whenever, in the history of the Government, there has been thrown upon it a helpless population which must starve and die but for its care, the Government has never failed to provide for them. At this very session both Houses of Congress have voted half a million dollars to feed and clothe Indians. We did not hear the Senator’s voice in opposition to that appropriation. What were the facts? It was stated by our Indian agents that the Indian tribes west of Arkansas, a part of whom had joined the rebel armies and some the Union armies, had been driven from their country; that their property had been destroyed; and now, the conflict of arms having ceased, they had nothing to live upon during the winter; that they would encroach upon the white settlements unless provision was made for them, and would rob, plunder, and murder the inhabitants nearest them; and Congress was called upon to appropriate money to buy them food and clothing, and we did it. We did it for rebels and traitors. Were we not bound to do it? Now, sir, we have thrown upon us four millions of people who have toiled all their lives for others; who, unlike the Indians, had no property at the beginning of the rebellion; who were never permitted to own anything, never permitted To eat the bread, their own hands had earned; many of whom are without any means of support, in the midst of a prejudiced and hostile population who have been struggling to overthrow the Government. This Freedmen’s Bureau is not intended as a permanent institution. It is only designed to aid these helpless, ignorant, and unprotected people until they can provide for and take care of themselves. The authority to do this, so far as legislative sanction can give it, is to be found in the action of a previous Congress which established the bureau, but if it were a new question, the authority for establishing such a bureau, in my judgment, is given by the Constitution itself; and as the Senator’s whole argument goes upon the idea of peace, and that all the consequences of the war have ceased, I shall be pardoned, I say, if I refer to those provisions of the Constitution which, in my judgment, authorize the exercise of this military jurisdiction—for this bureau is a part of the military establishment not simply during the conflict of arms, but until peace shall be firmly established and the civil tribunals of the country shall be restored with an assurance that they may peacefully enforce the laws without opposition. The Constitution of the United States declares that Congress shall have authority "to declare war and make rules concerning captures on land and water," "to raise and support armies," "to provide and maintain a navy," "to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces," "to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection, and repel invasion," and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers." It also declares that "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States," and that "the United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a republican form of government." Under the exercise of these powers, the Government has gone through a four years' conflict. It has succeeded in putting down armed resistance to its authority. But did the military power which was exercised to put down this armed resistance cease the moment the rebel armies were dispersed? Has the Government no authority to bring to punishment the authors of this rebellion after the conflict of arms has ceased; no authority to hold as prisoners, it necessary, all who have been captured with arms in their hands? Can it be that the moment the rebel armies are dispersed, the military authority ceases, and they are to be turned loose to arm and organize again for another conflict against the Union? Why, sir, it would not be more preposterous on the part of the traveler, after having, at the peril of his life, succeeded in disarming a highwayman by whom he was assailed, to immediately Turn round and restore to the robber his weapons with which to make a new assault. And yet this is what some gentlemen would have this nation do with the worse than robbers who have assailed its life. They propose, the rebel armies being overcome, that the rebels themselves shall be instantly clothed with all the authority they possessed before the conflict, and that the inhabitants of States who for more than four years have carried on an organized war against the Government shall at once be invested with all the powers they had at its commencement. Nay, more, they insist that without any action of the Government it is the right of the inhabitants of the rebellious States on laying down their arms to resume their former positions in the Union with all the rights they possessed when they began the war. If such are the consequences of this struggle, it is the first conflict in the history of the world, between either individuals or nations, from which such results have followed. What man, after being despoiled of much of his substance, his children slain, his own life periled, and his body bleeding from many wounds, ever restored the authors of such calamities, when within his power, to the rights they possessed before the conflict without taking some security for the future? Sir, the war powers of the Government do not cease with the dispersion of the rebel armies. They are to be continued and exercised until the civil authority of the Government can be established firmly and upon a sure foundation not again to be disturbed or interfered with. And such, sir, is the understanding of the Government. None of the departments of the Government understand that its military authority has ceased to operate over the rebellious States. It is but a short time since the President of the United States issued a proclamation restoring the The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the loyal States, but did he restore it in the rebellious States? Certainly not. What authority has he to suspend the privilege of that writ anywhere except in pursuance of the constitutional provision allowing the writ to be suspended “when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it?” Then the President understands that the public safety in the insurrectionary States still requires its suspension. The Attorney General, when asked a few days ago why Jefferson Davis was not put upon trial, told you that, “though active hostilities have ceased, a state of war still exists over the territory in rebellion,” so that it could not be properly done. General Grant, in an order issued within a few days—which I commend to the especial consideration of the Senator from Indiana, for it contains many of the provisions of the bill under consideration; an order issued with the approbation of the Executive, for such an order, I apprehend, could not have been issued without his approbation, declares: [General Orders, No. 1.] War Department, Adjutant General’s Office, Washington, January 12, 1866. To protect persons against improper civil suits and penalties in late rebellious States. Military division and department commanders, whose commands embrace or are composed of any of the late rebellious States, and who have not already done so, will at once issue and enforce orders protecting from prosecution or suits in the State, or municipal courts of such State, all officers and soldiers of the armies of the United States, and all persons thereto attached, or in anywise thereto belonging, subject to military authority, charged with offenses for acts done in their military capacity, or pursuant to orders from proper military authority; and to protect from suit or prosecution all loyal citizens, or persons, charged with offenses done against the rebel forces, directly or indirectly, during the existence of the rebellion; and all persons, their agents or employees, charged with the occupancy of abandoned land or plantations, or the possession or custody of any kind of property whatever, who occupied, used, possessed or controlled the same, pursuant to the order of the President, or any of the civil or military departments of the Government, and to protect them from any penalties or damages that may have been or may be pronounced or adjudged in said courts in any of such cases; and also protecting colored persons from persecutions in any of said states charged with offenses for which white persons are not prosecuted or punished in the same manner and degree. By command of Lieutenant General Grant, E. D. TOWNSEND, Assistant Adjutant General. Mr. SAULSBURY. As I propose to make some remarks in reply to the honorable Senator from Illinois, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, I wish to ask him one question, and it is this: whether he believes that General Grant, or the President of the United States, had any constitutional authority to make such an order as that? I should like to have an answer to this question. Mr. TRUMBULL. I am very glad the Senate from Delaware has asked the question. I answer, he had most ample and complete authority. I endorse the order and every word of it. It would be monstrous if the officers and soldiers of the Army and loyal citizens were to be subjected to suits and prosecutions for acts done in saving the Republic, and that, too, at the hands of the very men who sought its destruction. Why, had not the Lieutenant-General authority to issue the order? Have not the civil tribunals in all the region of country to which the order applies been expelled by armed rebels and traitors? Has not the power of the Government been overthrown there? Is it yet re-established? Some steps have been taken toward re-establishing it under the authority of the military, and in no other way. If any of the State governments recently set up in the rebellious States were to undertake to embarrass, military operations, I have no doubt they would at once be set aside by order of the Lieutenant-General, in pursuance of directions from the Executive. These governments which have been set up act by permission of the military. They are made use of to some extent to preserve peace and order and enforce civil rights between parties; and so far as they act in harmony with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and the orders of the military commanders, they are permitted to exercise authority; but until those States shall be restored in all their constitutional relations to the Union they ought not to be permitted to exercise authority in any other way. I desire the Senator from Indiana to understand that it is under this war power that the authority of the Freedmen’s Bureau is to be exercised. I do not claim that its officers can try persons for offenses without juries in States where the civil tribunals have not been interrupted by the rebellion. The Senator argues against this bill as if it was applicable to Indiana. Some of its provisions are, but most of them are not, unless the State of Indiana has been in rebellion against the authority of the Government; and I know too many of the brave men who have gone from that State to maintain the integrity of the Union and put down the rebellion to cast any such imputation upon her. She is a loyal and patriotic State; her civil government has never been usurped or overthrown by traitors, and the provisions of the seventh and eighth sections of the bill to which the Senator alludes cannot, by their very terms, have any application to the State of Indiana. Again, the Senator objects very much to the expense of this bureau. Why, sir, as I have once or twice before said, it is a part of the military establishment. I believe nearly all the officers at the present time are military officers, and by the provisions of the pending bill they are to receive no additional compensation when performing duties in the Freedmen’s Bureau. I shall necessarily, Mr. President, in following the Senator from Indiana, speak somewhat in a desultory manner; but I prefer to do so because I would rather meet the objections made directly than by any general speech. I will therefore take up his next objection, which is to the fifth section of the bill. That section proposes to confirm for three years the possessory titles granted by General Sherman. The Senator from Indiana admits that General Sherman had authority when at the head of the army at Savannah, and these people were flocking around him and dependent upon him for support, to put them upon the abandoned lands; but he says that authority to put them there and maintain them there ceased with peace. Well, sir, a sufficient answer to that would be that peace has not yet come; the effects of war are not yet ended; the people of the States of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, where these lands are situated, are yet subject to military control. But I deny that if peace had come the authority of the Government to protect these people in their possessions would cease the moment it was declared. What are the facts? The owners of these plantations had abandoned them and entered the rebel army. They were contending against the army which General Sherman then commanded. Numerous colored people had flocked around General Sherman’s army. It was necessary that he should supply them in order to save them from starvation. His commissariat was short. Here was this abandoned country owned by men arrayed in arms against the Government. He, it is admitted, had authority to put these followers of his army upon these lands and authorize them to go to work and gain a subsistence if they could. Mr. TRUMBULL. I presume so, too; the Senator from Indiana and myself agree precisely, and he has admitted now all I desire him to admit. Then the Government having placed these people rightfully upon these lands, and they having expended their labor upon them, had a right to be protected in their possessions for some length of time after peace on the principle of equity. That is all we propose to do by this bill. The committee thought it would not be more than a reasonable protection to allow them to remain for three years, they having been put upon these lands destitute, without any implements of husbandry, without cattle, horses, or anything else with which to cultivate the land, and having up to the present time been able to raise very little at the expense of great labor. Perhaps the Senator thinks they ought not to remain so long. I will not dispute whether they shall go off at the end of one year or two years. The committee propose two years more. On account of that provision of the bill, the Senator asks me the question whether the Government of the United States has a right in time of peace to take property from one man and give it to another. I say no. Of course, the Government of the United States has no authority in a time of peace, by a legislative act, to say that the farm of the Senator from Indiana shall be given to the Senator from Ohio; I contend for no such principle. But following that up, the Senator wants to know by what authority you buy land or provide schoolhouses for these refugees. Have we not been providing schoolhouses for years? Is there a session of Congress when acts are not passed giving away public lands for the benefit of schools? But that does not come out of the Treasury, the Senator from Indiana will probably answer. But how did you get the land to give away? Did you not buy it of the Indians? Are you not appropriating every session of Congress money by the million to extinguish the Indian title, money collected off his constituents and mine by taxation? We buy the land and then we give the land away for schools. Will the Senator tell me how that differs from giving the money? Does it make any difference whether we buy the land from the Indians and give it for the benefit of schools, or whether we buy it from some lebel and give—no, sir—use it for the benefit of schools, with a view ultimately of selling it for at least its cost? I believe I would rather buy from the Indian; but still if the traitor is to be permitted to have a title, we will buy it from him if we can purchase cheaper. Sir, it is a matter of economy to do this. The cheapest way by which you can save this race from starvation and destruction is to educate them. They will then soon become self-sustaining. The report of the Freedmen’s Bureau shows that today more than seventy thousand black children are being taught in the schools which have been established in the South. We shall not long have to support any of these blacks out of the public Treasury if we educate and furnish them land upon which they can make a living for themselves. This is a very different thing from taking the land of A and giving it to B by an act of Congress. But the Senator is most alarmed at those sections of this bill which confer judicial authority upon the officers and agents of the Freedmen’s Bureau. He says if this authority can be exercised there is an end to all the reserved rights of the States, and this Government may do anything. Not at all, sir. The authority, to be exercised under the seventh and eighth sections is a military authority, to be exerted only in regions of country where the civil tribunals are overthrown, and not there after they are restored. It is the same authority that we have been exercising all the time in the rebellious States; it is the same authority by virtue of which General Grant issued the order which I have just read. Here is a perfect and complete answer to the objection that is made to the seventh and eighth sections. But the Senator says that these sections, he supposes, derive their authority, in my opinion, from the amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Sir, I think that amendment does confer authority to enact these provisions into law and execute them, not through the military tribunals, but through the judicial tribunals in any State of the Union. What was the object of the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery? It was not, as the Senator says, simply to take away the power of the master over the slave. Did we not mean something more than that? Did we not mean that hereafter slavery should not exist, no matter whether the servient was claimed as due to an individual or the State? The constitutional amendment abolishes just as absolutely all provisions of State or local law which make a man a slave as it takes away the power of his former master to control him. If the construction put by the Senator from Indiana upon the amendment be the true one, and we have merely taken from the master the power to control the slave and left him at the mercy of the State to be deprived of his civil rights, the trumpet of freedom that we have been blowing throughout the land has given an “uncertain sound,” and the promised freedom is a delusion. Such was not the intention of Congress, which proposed the constitutional amendment, nor is such the fair meaning of the amendment itself. With the destruction of slavery necessarily follows the destruction of the incidents to slavery. When slavery was abolished, slave codes in its support were abolished also. Those laws that prevented the colored man going from home, that did not allow him to buy or to sell, or to make contracts; that did not allow him to hold property; that did not allow him to be educated, were all badges of servitude made in the interest of slavery and as a part of slavery. They never would have been thought of or enacted anywhere but for slavery, and when slavery falls they fall also. The policy of the States, where slavery has existed, has been to legislate in its interest; and out of deference to slavery, which was tolerated by the Constitution of the United States, even some of the non-slaveholding States passed laws abridging the rights of the colored man which were restraints upon liberty. When slavery goes, all this system of legislation, devised in the interest of slavery and for the purpose of degrading the colored race, of keeping the negro in ignorance, of blotting out from his very soul the light of reason, if that were possible, that he might not think but know only, like the ox, to labor, goes with it. Now, when slavery no longer exists, the policy of the Government is to legislate in the interest of freedom. Now, our laws are to be enacted with a view to educate, improve, and Christianize the negro; to make him an independent man; to teach him to think and to reason; to improve that principle which the great Author of all has implanted in every human breast, which is susceptible of the highest cultivation, and destined to go on enlarging and expanding through the endless ages of eternity. I have no doubt that under this provision of the Constitution we may destroy all discriminations in civil rights against the black man; and if we cannot, our constitutional amendment amounts to nothing. It was for that purpose that the second clause of that amendment was adopted, which says that Congress shall have authority, by appropriate legislation, to carry into effect the article prohibiting slavery. Who is to decide what the appropriate legislation is to be? The Congress of the United States; and it is for Congress to adopt such appropriate legislation as it may think proper, so that it be a means to accomplish the end. If we believe a Freed men’s Bureau necessary, if we believe an act punishing any man who deprives a colored person of any civil rights on account of his color necessary; if that is one means to secure his freedom, we have the constitutional right to adopt it. If in order to prevent slavery Congress deem it necessary to declare null and void all laws which will not permit the colored man to contract, which will not permit him to testify, which will not permit him to buy and sell, and to go where he pleases, it has the power to do so, and not only the power, but it becomes its duty to do so. That is what is provided to be done by this bill. Its provisions are temporary; but there is another bill on your table, somewhat akin to this, which is intended to be permanent, to extend to all parts of the country, and to protect persons of all races in equal civil rights. But, says the Senator from Indiana, we have laws in Indiana prohibiting black people from marrying whites, and are you going to disregard these laws? Are our laws enacted for the purpose of preventing amalgamation to be disregarded, and is a man to be punished because he undertakes to enforce them? I beg the Senator from Indiana to read the bill. One of its objects is to secure the same civil rights and subject to the same punishments persons of all races and colors. How does this interfere with the law of Indiana preventing marriages between whites and blacks? Are not both races treated alike by the law of Indiana? Does not the law make it just as much a crime for a White man to marry a black woman as for a black woman to marry a white man, and vice versa? I presume there is no discrimination in this respect, and therefore your law forbidding marriages between whites and blacks operates alike on both races. This bill does not interfere with it. I see no discrimination against either in this respect that does not apply to both. Make the penalty the same on all classes of people for the same offense, and then no one can complain. My object in bringing forward these measures was to bring to the attention of Congress something that was practical, something upon which I hoped all could agree. I have said nothing in these bills which are pending, and which have been recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary—and I speak of both of them because they have both been alluded to in this discussion—about the political rights of the negro. On that subject it is known that there are differences of opinion, but I trust there are no differences of opinion among the friends of the constitutional amendment, among those who are for real freedom to the black man, as to his being entitled to equality in civil rights. If that is not going as far as some gentlemen would desire, I say to them it is a step in the right direction. Let us go that, and, going that far, we have the cooperation of the executive department, for the President has told us in his annual message that— “Good faith requires the security of the freedmen in their liberty and their property, their right to labor, and their right to claim the just return of their labor.” The public interest will be best promoted, if the several states will provide adequate protection and remedies for the freed men. Monopolies, perpetuities, and class legislation are contrary to the genius of free government, and ought not to be allowed. Here there is no room for favored classes or monopolies; the principle of our Government is that of equal laws and freedom of industry. Wherever monopoly attains a foothold, it is sure to be a source of danger, discord, and trouble. We shall but fulfill our duties as legislators by according equal and exact justice to all men, special privileges to none. Such, sir, is the language of the President of the United States in his annual message, and who in this Chamber that is in favor of the freedom of the slave is not in favor of giving him a qual and exact justice before the law? Sir, we can go along hand in hand together to the consummation of this great object of securing to every human being within the jurisdiction of the Republic equal rights before the law, and I preferred to seek for points of agreement between all the departments of Government, rather than to hunt for points of divergence. I have not said anything in my remarks about reconstruction. I have not attempted to discuss the question whether these States are in the Union or out of the Union, and so much has been said upon that subject that I am almost ready to exclaim, with one of old, “I know not whether they are in the body or out of the body; God knows.” It is enough for me to know that the State organizations in several States of the Union have been usurped. and overthrown, and that up to the present time no State organization has been inaugurated in either of them which the various departments of Government or any department of the Government has recognized as placing the State in full possession of all the constitutional rights pertaining to a State in full communion with the Union. The Executive has not recognized anyone, for he still continues to exercise military jurisdiction and to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in all of them. Congress has not recognized any of them, as we all know; and until Congress and the Executive do recognize them, let us make use of the Freedmen’s Bureau, already established, to protect the colored race in their rights; and when these States shall be recognized, and the authority of the Freedmen’s Bureau as a court shall cease and determine, as it must when civil authority is fully restored, let us provide, by other laws for protecting all people in their equal civil rights before the law. If we can pass such measures and they receive Executive sanction; and it shall be understood that it is the policy of the Government that the rights of the colored men are to be protected by the States if they will, but by the Federal Government if they will not; that at all hazards and under all circumstances there shall be impartiality among all classes in civil rights throughout the land. If we can do this, much of the apprehension and anxiety now existing in the loyal States will be allayed, and a great obstacle to an early restoration of the insurgent States to their constitutional relations in the Union will be removed. If the people in the rebellious States can be made to understand that it is the fixed and determined policy of the Government that the colored people shall be protected in their civil rights, they themselves, will adopt the necessary measures to protect them; and that will dispense with the Freedmen’s Bureau and all other federal legislation for their protection. The design of these bills is not, as the Senator from Indiana would have us believe, to consolidate all power in the Federal Government, or to interfere with the domestic regulations of any of the States, except so far as to carry out a constitutional provision which is the supreme law of the land. If the States will not do it, then it is incumbent on Congress to do it. But if the States will do it, then the Freedmen’s Bureau will be removed, and the authority proposed to be given by the other bill will have no operation. Sir, I trust there may be no occasion long to exercise the authority conferred by this bill. I hope the people of the rebellious States themselves will conform to the existing condition of things. I do not expect them to change all their opinions and prejudices. I do not expect them to rejoice that they have been discomfited. But they acknowl¬ edge that the war is over ; ti.ey a^ree that they can no longer contend in arms against the Government; they say they are willing to submit to its authority ; they say in their State conventions that slavery shall no more exist among them. With the aboli¬ tion of slavery should go all the badges of servitude which have been enacted for its maintenance and support. Let them all be abolished. Let the people of the rebel¬ lious States now be as zealous and as active in the passage of laws and the inaugura¬ tion of measures to elevate, develope, and improve the negro, as they have hitherto been to enslave and degrade him. Let them do justice and deal fairly with loyal Union men in their midst, and henceforth be themselves loyal, and this Congress will not have adjourned till the States whose inhabitants have been engaged in the rebellion will be restored to their former position in the Union, and we shall all be moving on in harmony togetlier. H_ Polkinhorn k Bjsx, Primers’ 376 ami 377 D street, near 7th, Washington, D.,C. i ' ' ! ; •(! ■ j! ; ' . (f 1 lit >i TO '♦!»! 1 • . if’ ■ • i ' i • * »r' i,;' w ■ Rli V .. • ' ■ ' * i ff ... J , M - | »rt) .:>(•*•»: tv * ' !. , - > fKv<J Xw i i 1 >'■' ij - *  v 4 0 <1> «* ♦ <> % V$ °<l>. * * *o w * » * • / *>> v* V r ^V* .vX > 0 ^<v •. \ *■•■’•' A» v > v % ,* "«• ^ °, ° a + « > # * 6 OL '0,7* A * 11 "* **b it ■*¥• *. ^ 0 < ; ,-f 1 ^ *jEKs§^ s ° 3>° ’V ** aj* C* **^*S$r* 0 ^*> * « v' 9 ,— V*'” *° ,. '%■ ""'‘ x^ * .‘JOK*. X* .A* 9 .\'4,‘J'*„ ^ _<j, v ,‘‘ O v > * 1 0 cf* ° 4 <0 0 ^ * <L V <£* * A r a ; # v. y *- e * a° ^ ■ <T ,\j$$SJm:. ■V C° ,w%i’ O * ->* 0 v to * ^xr* <v^ * •* ^ Cj^ * **<& ; .‘ ^ % l o ^ * »° a u -. cx f •* *■ : V r * ° to f vp , 0* ^ Vj 4 * ^ K • * cv A \ ^ ^ C °." * 4 4 O. * ^° ..... % "’ y .... V '•*«• ^ .^yA» a »‘^dfefc'. v. ^ ^ <? to • O. 'o . , * ^ , o * a • W" « ; 4> %. « i ^ *. . .«' «0’ *o , * .<* T, •* *P* <* ^ o v c«*V^i->o %* a h o *’• ° * ■^* # w 0 V' . vLTC.% 'O 0 »■* * * a a v V- * V > * * A <.♦«.„. 4 0 * '* ^ <>, '- ... °<*. *,, “° c b •; V \,^ i • o «%» ° * * 1 • 4 <b •; %V^ » ,0vv % v y> to •»‘ rp fc * ./.....% "’'.A, _„„.. vV ° -wr- * # ^/w: x 4 0 s^V. 7 *$\ * ’ o v \ *-... ^o o *. ^ 0^'^*. / ' ^ $ “ aV^V ,* # ^ * 0 •l O. % -a.' « * o * V *'.. jfi C 0 * ° * *&JU V> to r^SV %A A i h0 <t\ *“ # 4 0 % V- v^> to <C<4wir2r'* 4? ^ • a -i- ±r£ylr£F ♦ ,. ^ " * * 0 ’ A? r ^P- "'H*' * '♦ ^ ^p t * ^ % **« ■ r "N/v ^ * •/* *’.....,,. w » * <<? %> \ . + *,4? - i v / to to •.0 o 4^ r * * * '♦ ^ ^p t * ^ % **« ■ r "N/v ^ * •/* *’.....,,. w » * <<? %> \ . + *,4? - i v / to to •.0 o 4^ r * * * '♦ ^ ^p t * ^ % **« • O • i O • i A \> y c°* a » X. > * vV- o \/..WV * \ v^P> * c -m?/ <r% •»• /\ i m?s 'o..* a <v ♦t™?** &* V -f.V a <- +: o A*,o* t - v '^ *o A V • •••♦%* *fe / -V^SlV- ^ ,-v 5.°^ 4 . 4± 0 <t :&m^ : -ov 1 <{3 C U> " iSItSv jP vv V^SSMIPy,,* <d ’ /'.,. y\... % °v* * * ° °\/\,. „%/*" ’ *’V^. y /jaVa ‘” %/ ;'Jf§|; \/ :'m£°. 