P'-i :g i Si
2 YL-^ a>.v is 9^1
^
filass L GG %
/
THE EQUAL RIGHTS OF ALL;
The Great Giiaraatee and Present Necessity, ^or the Sake of Security, mn\ to Maintain a Itepublican Governmeut
SPEECH
OF
OF MASSACHUSETTS,
IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, FEBRUARY 6 AND 7, 1866.
Taxation without representation is Tyranny.— T/te Revolutionary Fathers. >
" The laws, the rights,
The generous plan of power delivered down
From ago to age, by our renowned forefathers
So dearly bought, the price of so much blood,
Ohl let it never perish in our hands." — Addison's Cato,
"But, if any among you think that Philip will maintain his power by having occupied forts and havens nd the like, this is a mistake. Inipo.ssiljle is it— impossible, Athenians— to acquire a solid power by injustice nd perjury and falsehood. Such tilings hist for once, or for a short period; may be, they blofsom fairly "Ith hope; but in time they are discovered and drop away. As a house, a ship, or the like, ought to have s lower part firmest, so in human conduct, I ween, the principle and foundation should be just and rue," — Demosthenes, 2d Olymthiac.
WASHINGTON:
PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE.
1866.
ME(SHUI9t
EQUAL RIGHTS TO ALL,
K
The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, pro- ceeded to consider the following joint resolution (H. R. No. 51) proposing to amend the Constitution of the United States:
Resolved hy the Senate and House of Representatives «>/ the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two thirds of both Houses concurring:,) That the fol- lowing article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States; which, when ratified by three fourths of said Legislatures, shall be valid as part of V'aid Constitution, namely:
Article—. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which may bo included within this Union according to their respective nuin- bers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed: Provided, That whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color, all persons therein of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation.
Mr. SUMNER said:
Mr. President: I begiu by expressing my acknowledgments to the Senator from Maine, who yields the floor to me to-day, and also my sincere regret that anything should interfere with the opening of this debate by him. It is his right, and I enter upon it now only by his indulgence.
I am not insensible to the responsibility which I assume in setting myself against a OToposition already adopted in the other House, i'<d having the recommendation of a commit- tee to which the country looks with such just expectation, and to which, let me say, I look with so much trust. But after careful reflec- tion, I do not feel that I can do otherwise. Knowing, as I do, the eminent character of the committee, its intelligence, its patriotism, and the moral instincts by which it is moved, I am at a loss to understand the origin of a prop- osition which seems to me nothing else than another Compromise of Human Rights^ as if the country had not already paid enough m costly treasure and more costly blood for such com- promises iu the past. I had hoped that the
day of compromise with wrong had gone by for ever. Ample experience shows that it ia the least practical mode of settling questions in- volving moral principles. A moral principle cannot be compromised.
Here are the words of the amendment:
Provided, That whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged on account of race oi color, all persons therein of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation.
I may be mistaken, sir, but I think it diffi- cult to read this proposition without being pain- fully impressed by the discord and defilement which it will introduce into the Constitution, having among its specific objects the guarantee of a republican form of government. The dis- cord is apparent on the face. The defilement IS none the less apparent. Go back, if you please, to the adoption of the Constitution, and you will gratefully acknowledge that the finest saying of the times was when Madison, evi- dently inspired by the Declaration of Independ- ence, and determined to keep the Constitution in harmony with it, insisted in well-known words, that "it was wrong to admit in the Constitu- tion the idea of property in man." Of all that has come to us from that historic Convention, where Washington sat as President, and Frank- lin and Hamilton sat as members, there is noth- ing having so much of imperishable charm. It was wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that man could hold property in man. Accordingly, in this spirit the Constitution was framed. This ofl'ensive idea was not admitted. The text at least was kept blameless. And now, after generations have passed, surrounded by the light of Christian truth and in the very blaze of Human Freedom, it is proposed to admit in the Constitution the twin idea of Inequality in Rights, and thus openly set at naught tiie first principles of the Declaration of Independence and the guarantee of a republican government itself, while you blot out a whole race politi-
cally. For some time we have been carefully expunging from the statute-book the word "white. '■''and now it is proposed to insert in the Constitution itself a distinction of color. An amendment, according to the dictionaries, is "an improvement" — "a change _ for the better." Surely the present propo.sition is an amendment which like the crab goes Ijackward. Such is its appearance when you regard it merely in its form, without penetrating its sub- stance ; but here it is none the less oifensive. The case is plain. There are among us four million citizens, now robbed of all share in the government of their country, while at the same time they are taxed according to their means, directly and indirectly, for the support of the Government. Nobody can question this state- ment. And this bare-faced tyranny of taxa- tion without representation it is now proposed to recognize as not inconsistent with funda- mental right and the guarantee of a republican government. Instead of blasting it you go for- ward to embrace it as an element of political
power. . -, ,
If, by this, you expect to mduce the recent slave-master to confer the right of suflrage without distinction of color, you will find the proposition a delusion and a snare. He will do no such thing. Even the bribe you offer will not tempt him. If, on the other hand, you expect to accomplish a reduction of his politi- cal power, it is more than doubtful if you will succeed, while the means you emplo.v are un- worthy of our countr/. There are tricks and evasions possible, and the cunning slave-master will drive his coach and six throughyour amend- ment stuffed with all his representatives. Should he cheat you in this matter, it will only be a proper return for the endeavor on your part to circumvent him at the expense of fellow- citizens to whom_ you are bound by every obligation of public faith.
I know not if others will see this uncertainty as I see it •, but there are two practical conse- quences having a direct influence on the times, which all must see as following at once from ' the adoption of the so-called amendment. In the first place, it will be a present renunciation of all power under the Constitution to apply the remedy for a grievous wrong, when the remedy, even according to your own recent example, is actually in your hands. You ha\ e already in this Chamljcr, only last Friday, decreed civil rights without distinction of color. Who can doul)t, that by the same title you may decree political rightsalsojwithoutdistiiictiouofcolor? But, liaving the power, it is your duty tooxcr- cise it. You cannot evade tiiis duty witliout becoming partakers in the wrung. And this brings me to the second practical consequence whicLi must ensue from llie aduj)tion of this proposition. You will hand oven- wards and allies, through whom tJie lleijublic has been saved, and therefore our saviors, to the control
of vindictive enemies, to be taxed and governed without their consent ; and this you will do for a consideration " nominated in the bond," by virtue of which men may do a great wrong, provided they will submit as a quidpro quo to a proportionate abridgment of political power. Who does not admire the English patriot who once said that he would give his life to serve his country, but he would not do a mean thing to save it. I hope Ave may act in this spirit. Above all do not copy the example of Pontius Pilate, who surrendered the Saviour of the World, in whom he found no fault at all, tOT)e scourged and crucified, while he set at large Barabbas, of whom the gospel says in simple words, "Now Barabbas was a robber."
I speak with a sincere deference for those val- ■ ued friends from whom I differ ; but I submit that the time has come at last when we should deal directly and not indirectly with the great question before us, and when- all compromise of Human Plights should cease, and especially there should be no thought of a three-headed compromise, which, after degrading the Con- stitution, renounces a beneficent power essen- tial to the safety of the Republic, and, lastly, borrowing an example from Pontius Pilate, turns over a M'hole race to sacrifice. These objections I now present briefly on the thresh- old, without argument, and I advance to the main question which must dominate this whole debate. By way of introduction I send to the Chair a counter-proposition, which I desire to have read.
The Secretary read the following joint reso- lution :
A joint resolution carrying out the {ruavantce of a republican form of government in the Constitution of the United States, and enforcing the constitu- tional amendment for thepruUibilion of slavery. Whereas it is provided in the Constitution that tho United St.ates shall guaranty to every State in the Union arepublicanfonn of government; and whereas by reason of thelailure of certain Statesto maintain governments which Congress might recognize, it h.as become the duty of tho United States, standnig in the place of guarantor, where the principal has made a lapse, to secure tosuch Statcsaccording to the leiiuire- ment of tho guarantee, governments loimblicau in form ; and whereas further, it is i)rovided in a recent constitutional an\endment that Congress may "en- force" tho prohibition of slavery by "appropriate legislation," and it is important to this end, that all relics of slavervshould bcremovcd, inchulingall dis- tinction of rights on account of color: Now.therefori.. to carry out tho guarantee of a republican Itirm of government and to enforce the prohibition of slavery, Bi: it rrHolv'il /<?/ '/('• Senair and J/ousr- of Hrpresent- (itimnoftlu! Unii'd Stairs of Ahierica in ConurcKi as- xnnilcd, Tliat tberoshallbe no Uligarohy, Aristocracy. Caste, or Monopoly invested with peculiar privileges and powers, and there shall be no denial ol nghts, civil or political, on account of color or race any- where within the limits of thu I nitoil Slates or the jurisdiction thereof; but nil poisons thcreia shall bo conal bclorotho law, whether in tlic court-room or at the ballot-box. And this statuto, made in pur- suance of the Constitulicm, sball bo tho supreme law of tho land, anything in tiiu Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwilhstaudmg.
Mr. SQMNEIl. Mr. President, in opening
this great question, I begin by expressing a heart-felt aspiration that the day may soon come, when the States lately in rebellion may be received again into the copartnership of political power and the full fellowship of the Union. But I sed too well that it is vain to^ expect this day, which is so much longed for, until we have obtained that security for the future, which is found only in the Equal Rights! of All, whether in the court-room or at thel ballot-box. This is the Great Guarantee, wit+pJ out which all other guarantees will fail. This is the sole solution of our present troubles and anxieties. This is the only suflScient assurance of peace and reconciliation. To the establish- ment of this Great Guarantee, us a measure of
Ksafety and of justice, I now ask your best at- tention.
The powers of Congress over this subject arc as ample as they are beneficent. From four specific fountains they flow — each one sufficient for the purpose — all four swelling into an irre- sistible current, and tending to one conclusion : first, the neces&ity of the case, by which, accord-
_ ing to the analogies ofthe' "Territories," disloyal States, having no local government, lapse under the authority of Congress ; secondly, the Bights of Vrar, which do not expire or lose their grasp, except with the establishment of all needful guarantees ; thirdly, the constitutional injunc- tion to guaranty a llepublican Form of Govern-
^ment; and, fourthly, the constitutional amend- 'ment by which Congress, in words of peculiar energy, is empowered "to enforce" the aboli- tion of slavery " by appropriate legislation." According to the proverb of Catholic Europe, all roads lead to Rome, and so do all these powers lead to the jurisdiction of Congress over this whole subject. No matter which road you take, you arrive at the same point. Two of these powers have already been discussed exhaust- ively. The latter have been less considered, and it is on these that I shall speak especially to-day. I propose, with the permission of the Senate, to show the necessity and duty of ex- ercising the jurisdiction of Congress so as to secure that essential condition of a Republican Government, the Equal Rights of All. And I put aside, at the outset, the metaphysical ques- tion, worthy of the schoolmen in the dark ages, whether certain States are in the Union or out 6f the Union. This is a question of form and not of substance, of words only and not of facts ; for the substance is clear and the facts arc un- answerable. All are agreed, according to the authority of President Lincoln, in his latest utterance before his lamented death, that these States have ceased to be " in practical relations with the Union ;" and this is enough to sustain the jurisdiction of Congress, even without the plain words of the Constitution in two separate texts. ' .
Necessity and duty commingle. If v.diat is necessary is not always according^to duty, surely
duty is always a necessity. On the present occasion they unite in one voice for the Great Guarantee. It is at once a necessity and a duty. Glancing at the promises of the fathers, I shall exhibit: Jirst, the overruling necessity of the times ; and secondly, the positive mandate of the Constitution, compelling us to guaranty "a republican form of government," and thus to determine what is meant by this require- ment ; all of which has been fortified by the constitutional amendment authorizing Congress to enforce the abolition of slavery.
PROMISES OF THE FATHERS.
In the life of a nation, as in that of an indi- vidual, there are special moments when out- standing promises must be performed under peril of ruin and dishonor. Such is the present moment in tho life of our Republic. There are sacred promises beginning with our history yet unperformed, and now the hour has sounded when continued failure on our part will open the door to a long train of woes. And there areyet other promises recently made for the national defense against a wicked rebellion, which, like those of an earlier date, areunper- iformed also. But the latter are all included in the former, so that our whole duty now centers in the performance of those sacred promises which are coeval with the national life.
Our fathers solemnly announced the Equal Rights of all men, and that Government had no just foundation except in the consent of the governed; and to the support of the Declara- tion, heralding these self-evident truths, they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Looking at this Declaration now, it is chiefly memorable for the promises it then made._ Mighty words ! Fit utterance for the giant infant then born. Fit device for the great Republic taking its place in the family of kings. Fit lesson for mankind. And now the moment has come when these vows must be fulfilled to the letter. In securing the Equal Rights of the freedman, and his participation in the Govern- ment, which he is taxed to support, we shall perform those early promises of the Fathers, and at the same time the sujjplementary promises only recently made to the freedman as the con- dition of alliance and aid against the Rebellion. A failure to perform these promises is moral and political bankruptcy. It is repudiation of moral and political duties, ending in the repu- diation of the financial obligations of the coun- try. So arc your duties to the national freed- man linked with your obligations to the national creditor, that you cannot repudiate the former without impairing the value of the latter. Who- ever disowns any of the promises of the Repub- lic leads the way in repudiation.
But you cannot be thus guilty. Even, if indilierent to the vows of the Fathers, neces- sit}', in harmony with the plain injunction of the Constitution, v,-ill constrain you. On this
6
there can be no doubt. You must perform these promises, and this brings me to the over- ruling necessity of the times.
OVERRULING NECESSITY OF THE TIMES.
I. Necessity is a peremptory instructor. It gives the law which no man can disregard. It will not hearken to apology or postpone- ment. With a voice of command it insists that its behests shall be obeyed. And now this very necessity speaks to us with familiar tones.
Twice already, since rebel Slavery rose against the Republic, it has spoken to us, insisting; first, that the slaves should be declared free ; and secondly, that muskets should be put into their hands for the common defense. Yield- ing to necessity, these two things were done. Reason, humanity, justice were powerless in this behalf; but necessity was irresistible. And the result testifies how wisely the Republic acted. Without emancipation, followed by the arming of the slaves, rebel Slavery would not have been overcome. ^Viih these the victory was easy.
At lastthe same necessity, which insisted first upon emancipation and then upon the arming of the slaves, insists with the same unanswer- able force upon the admission of the freedman to complete Equality before the law, so that there shall be no ban of color in court-room, or at the ballot-box, and government shall be li.xed on its only rightful foundation — the con- sent of the governed. Reason, humanity, and justice, all of which are clear for t.liis admission of the freedman, may fail to move you ; but you must yield to necessity, which now requires that these promises shall be performed.
The demand which I now make stands on necessity. You must grant it, or you will peril the i<eace of this Republic, and postpone indef- initely the great day of security and reconcilia- tion. Therefore, in the name of that national safety, whicli is tlic supreme law, I begin my appeal. Whatever is required for the national safety is constitutional. Not only it viai/ be done, but it imi,it be done. Not to do it is to fail in duty. This Republic must be saved.
When I speak of necessity, I mean that over- ruling compulsion which cannot be disobeyed. In the present case it is compounded of moral duty and the instinct of self-jircserv;ition. 'I'he moral duty t()i)eribrm tli(>se))roniises is asjjlain as the decalogue. The instinct of self-preser- vation, impelling us to save the Republic, is in iiarmony with the requirements of moral duty. In denying justice now, you will not only be guilty of grievous wrong, but you will expose your country to incalculable calamity. 'J'he case is too clear for debate.
The irresistible! argument for Kniaiicipation was always twofold: first, its intrinsic justice, and secondly, its necessity for the salcty of the Republic; all of which wa.s expressed by Pres-
ident Lincoln in the closing words of his great Proclamation, when he said:
"And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice wnrranfed Inj the Constitution upon military nncexsity, I invoke the considerate judgment of man- kind and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
Butthe argument forEnfranchisement, which is nothing but the complement of Emancipa- tion, is the same. Enfranchisement is not only intrinsically just, but it is necessary to the safety of the Republic. There is no reason, point, or suggestion once urged for Emancipation which may not be urged now for Enfranchise- ment. I shall not err if I say that Emancipa- tion itself will fail without Enfranchisement.
By Enfranchisement I mean the establish- ment of the Equal Rights of All, so that there shall be no exclusion of any kind, civil or po- litical, founded on color, and the promises of the Fathers shall be fulfilled. Such an act will be, in the words of President Lincoln, " an act of justice warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity."
As an act of justice, Enfranchisement has a necessity of its own. No individual and no people can afford to be unjust. Such an offense will carrj' with it a curse, which, sooner or later, must drag its perpetrator to the earth. Bu*' here the necessity from considerations of justice is completed and intensified by the positive re- quirements of the national safety, plainly in- volved in the performance of these promises.
Look at the unhappy freedman blasted by the ban of exclusion. He has always been loyal, and now it is he and not the rebel master who pays the penalty. From the nature of the case, he must be discontented, restless, anxious, smart- ing with a sense of wrong and a consciousness of rights denied. He will not work as if taken by the hand aiul made to feel the grasp of friend- ship. He will be idle, thriftless, unproductive. Industry will suffer. Cotton will not grow. Commerce will not thrive. Credit will fail; nay, it will die before it is born. On the other hand, his rebel master, with hands still red with the blood of his fellow-countrymen, will be en- couraged in that assumption of superiority which is a part of the Barbarism of Slavery ; he will predominate as in times past; he will be exact- ing as of old ; he will be harsh, cruel, and vin- dictive; he will make the unprotected and from- ' bling freednmn sutler for the losses and disap- pointments of the Rebellion: lie will continue to insult and prostitute the wife and children who, in ceasing to be chattels, have not ceased to be dependents; he will follow the freedman to by-ways and to obscure places, where he will once again play the master and assert his ancient title as lord of tin; lash. Sccuiesof sav- age brutal'ty and blood must ensue. All tliis, whicli reason foretells, the short experience of a few months already confirms. And all this you sanction, when you leave the freedman despoiled of hit rights.
But the frcedman, though forbearing and slow to anger, will not submit to outrage always. He will resist. Resistance will be organized. And here will begin the terrible war of races foreseen by Jefferson, where God, in all His attributes, has none which can take part with the oppressor. The tragedy of St. Domingo will be renewed on a wider theater, with bloodier incidents. Be warned, I entreat you, by this historic example. It was the denial of rights to colored people, after successive promises, which caused that fearful insurrection. After various vicissitudes, during which the rights of citizenship were conferred on free people of color and then resumed, the slaves at last rose, and here the soul sickens at the recital. Then luCame Toussaint L'Ouverture, a black of un- mixed blood, who pjlaced himself at the head of his race, showing the genius of war, and the genius of statesmanshija also. Under his mag- nanimous rule the beautiful island began to smile once more ; agriculture revived ; com- merce took a new start ; the whites were pro- tected in person and property : and a constitu- tion was adopted acknowledging the authority of France, but making no distinction on account of color or race. In an evil hour this policy was reversed by a decree of Napoleon Bona- parte. War revived, and the French army was compelled to succumb. The connection of St. Domingo with France was broken, and this island became a black republic. All this dreary 'catalogue of murder, battle, sorrow, and woe began in the denial of justice to the colored race. And only recently we have listened to a similar tragedy from Jamaica, thus swelling the terrible testimony. Like causes produce like effects ; therefore, all this will be ours if we madly persist in the same denial of justice. The freedmen among us are not unlike the freedmen of St. Domingo or Jamaica ; they have the same ''organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions." and above all, the same sense of wrong, and the same revenge.
To avoid insurrection and servile war, big with measureless calamity, and even to obtain that security which is essential to industry, ag- riculture, commerce, and the national credit, you must perform the promises of the Repub- lic, originally made by our lathers, and recently renewed by ourselves. But duty done will not *'nly save you from calamity, and give you se- — curity ; it will also prepare the way for all the triumphs of the future, when through assured peace there shall be tranq;; illity_, prosperity, and reconciliation, all of which it is vain to expect without justice.
The freedman must be protected. To this you are specially pledged l>y the Proclamation of President Lincoln, which, after declaring him "free,"' promises io maintain this free- dom, not for any limited period, but for all time. But this cannot be done so long as you deny him the shield oiimpartial laws. Let him
be heard in court and let him vote. Let these rights be guarded sacredly. Beyond even the shield of impartial laws, he will then have that protection which comes from the conscious- ness of manhood., Clad in the full panoply of citizenship he will feel at last that he is a man. At present he is only a recent chattel, awaiting your justice to be transmuted into manhood. ,Jf you would have him respected in his rights, you must begin by respecting him in your laws. If yoti would maintain him in his freedom, you must begin by maintaining him in the equal rights of citizenship.
And now the national safety is staked on this act of justice. You cannot sacrifice the freed- man without endangering the peace of the coun- try, and the stability of our institutions. Every- thing will be kept in jeopardy. The natioual credit will suffer. Business of all kinds will feel the insecurity. The whole land will gape with volcanic fire, ready to burst forth in a fatal flood. The irrepressible conflict will be pro- longed. The house will continue divided against itself. From all these things. Good Lord, deliver us! But, under God, there is but one deliverance, andthis is thorough justice.
I have said that the national credit will suffer; but this does not disclose the whole financial calamity. It is idle to suppose that recent rebels, restored to the privileges of citi- zenship, will give their votes cordially for that national debt which has been incurred in the suppression of their rebellion, or that they will willingly tax themselves for the interest on those enormous outlays by which their darling Slavery has been overthrown. The evidence shows that they are already set against any such contribu- tion. As time advances, and their power is assured, in conjunction with northern sym- pathizers, they will openly oppose it ; or if they consent to recognize it, they will impose the condition that the rebel debt shall be recog- nized also. All this is inevitable, if you give them the power ; it is madness to tempt them. But they will not have the power if the prom- ises to the freedmen are performed. Here again justice to the freedman becomes a necessity.
It is sometimes said that we must not require justice to the freedman in the rebel States, be- cause justice is still denied to the colored citi- zen in Connecticut and New York. Idle words of inconceivable utterance ; as if the two cases bore any imaginable resemblance. There are rivers in the North and rivers in the South, but who says that on this account the two regions are alike? The denial of justice to the colored citizens in Connecticut and New York, is wrong and mean ; but it is on so small a scale that it is not perilous to the Republic, nor is it vital to the protection of the colored citizen, and the protection of the national creditor. You are moved to Enfranchisement in Connecticut and New York, simply in order to do justice to a few indmduals ; but you are moved to it in the rebel
8
States, in order to do justice to multitudes, also to save the Republic, wliicli is imperiled by in- justice on such a gigantic scale, and to supply needful protection to the national f reedman and the national creditor. From'failure on our part there is in one case little more than shame, while in the other case there is positive danger to the Republic, involving the late of the na- tional freedman and the national creditor, to whom we are bound by the most solemn ties. To a good man injustice, even on a small scale, cannot be tolerable. He will feel the neces- sity of resisting it ; but where the victims are counted by millions, this necessity becomes a transcendent duty, quickened and invigorated by all the instincts of self-preservation. There- fore, I again say, for the national safety, do not fail to keep these promises.
It is sometimes said that the Constitution of the United States expres.sly reserves to the States, the jiower of determining who shall vote, iDCcause it declares, that "the electors in each State shall have the qualifications re- quisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature." But this assump- tion proceeds on the fatal error, that, at any time under the Constitution, which makes no distinction of color, there can be any such oligarchical distinction as a "qualification," founded on color. But even assuming that this • might be done in a period of peace, yet, beyond all doubt, at the present moment, from the ne- cess'ty of the case — from the Rights of War — from the Constitutional clause of guarantee — and from the Constitutional Amendment, Con- gi-ess, by its quadruple powers, is completely authorized to do all that it thinks best for the national security and the national faith in the rebel States. As well question Farragut in the maintop of his steamer — Sherman in his march across Georgia — or Grant in the field before Richmond, as question the authority of Con- gress on this occasion. But if the authority exists it must be exercised.
GUARANTEE OF A BEPUBLICAN FOllM OF GOVERN- MENT.
II. And this brings mc to the next form of this necessity and duty, as they appear in the guarantee clause of tlio Constitution. It is expr(!ssly declared that "the United States shall guaranty to every State iu this Union a Re- publican form of government." These words, when properly understood, leave no alternative. They speak to us ^^^th no uncertain voice.
The magnitude of the question now before us may be seen in the postulate wilii which I begin. Assuming that there bus been a lapse of govern- ment in any State, so as to impose upon the United States the duty of executing this gnar- untee, then do I insist that it is tiie boiinden duty of the Un'ted States to see that sueli State has a '"Republican government," and, in the dis- charge of this boundcn duty, they must declare
that a State, which in the foundation of its gov- ernment, sets aside* "the consent of the govr erned" — which imposes taxation without rep- resentation— which discards the principle of Equal Rights, and which lodges power exclu- sively with an Oligarchy, Aristocracy, Caste, or Monopoly, cannot be recognized as a " Repub- lican government," according to the require- ment of Afeierican Institutions. Even if it may satisfy some definition handed down from an- tiquity or invented in monarchical Europe, it cannot satisfy the solemn injunction of our Con- stitution. For this question I now ask a hear- ing. Nothing in the present debate can equal it in importance. Its correct determination will be an epoch for our country and for mankind.
Believe me, sir, this is no question of theory ■ or abstraction. It is a practical question which you are summoned to decide. Here is the posi- tive text of the Constitution, and you must now affix its meaning. You cannot evade it ; you cannot forget it, without an abandonment of duty. Others iu vision or aspiration have dwelt on the idea of a Republic, and they have been lifted in soul. You must consider it. not merely in vision or aspiration, but practically as legis- lators, in order to settle its precise definition, to the end that the constitutional "guarantee" may be performed. Your powers and duties are involved iu this definition. The character of the Government founded by our fathers is also involved in it. There is another consider^' ation, which must not be forgotten, in affixing the proper meaning to the text, and determin- ing what is a " ILepublican government," you act as a court in tlie last resort from which there is no aj^peal. You are sole and exclusive judges. You may decide as you i^lease. Rarely in history has such an opportunity been offered to the statesman. You may raise the name of Republic to majestic heights of justice and truth, or you may let it drag low down in tlie depths of wrongand falsehood. You may makeit fulfill the idea of Jolni Milton, when he .said that "a commonwealth ought to be butas one huge Chris- tian personage, one mighty growth or stature of an honest man, as big and compact in virtue as in body ;" or you may let it shrink into the ignoble form of a pretender, with the name of Republic, but without its soul.
OUIGIN OP THE GUARANTEE. '>
Before considering this vital question, it will be proper to look -at the origin of this "guar- antee," and see how it obtained a place iu the Constitution. Perhaps there is no clause which was more cordially welconujd ; nor dues it ap- pear that it w.'is .sultjected to any serious criti- cism in the National Coiivontiou, or in any State Convention. It is not found in the Articles of Confederation. But we learn from the Feder- alist (No. 21) "that the wanf^of this provision was felt as a capital defect in the plan of the Confederation." Mr. Madison, in a private
9
record made in advance of the National Con- vention, and wliicli has only recently seen the light, enumerates among the defects of the Con- federation what he calls ' ' want of guaranty to the States of their Constitutions and la^YS against internal violence, ' ' and he then proceeds to anti- cipate danger from slavery, which could be coun- teracted only by such a " guarantee. ' ' In show- ing why this was needed he says that, "accord- ing to republican tlieori/, right and power being both vested in the majority, are held to be syn- onymous ; according to fact and experience, a minority may, in an appeal to force, be an over- match for the majority," and he then adds, in words which furnish a key to the "guarantee " Kafterwards adopted, "where slavery exists the /•e^v/.'^>//c«HM(?o;-.i/becomesstillmore fallacious;" (Madison's IFritings, vol. i, p. 322) — thus show- ing (hat, at its very origin, it was regarded as a check upon slavery.
Hamilton was not less positive than Madison. In his sketch of a Constitution, submitted to the National Convention at an early stage of its proceedings, this ' ' guarantee ' ' will be found, and in the elaborate brief of his argument on the Constitution, (Hamilton's Works, vol. ii, p. 403,) it is specified as one of its "miscella- neous advantages." The last words of this re- markable paper are "guarantee of Republican Governments." Randolph, of Virginia, in his ^sketch of a Constitution proposed the "guar- 'antee," and, in a speech setting forth the evils of the old sj'stem, he said that "the remedy must be in the republican principle.'''' (Elliot's Debates, vol. v, pp. 127, 128.) Colonel Mason, of ^'irginia, taking up the same strain, said that, though the people might be unsettled on some points, they were settled as to others, among which he put foremost "an attachment io republican governments^ {Ibid, 217.)
The proposition in its earliest form was ' ' that a republican government, and the territory of each State, ought to be guarantied by the Uni- ted States to each State." {Ibid, VIS.) This was afterward altered so as to read, "that a republican Constitution and its existing laws ought to be guarantied to each State by the United States. ' ' Gouverneur Morris made haste to say that the proposition in this form was ■^'very objectionable," and he added that he should be very unwilling that such laws as " exist in Rhode Island should be guarantied. {Ibid, 332. ) After discussion, it was amended, on tlie motion of Mr. Wilson, the learned and philosophical delegate from Pennsylvania, af- terward of the Supreme Court of the United States, so as to read, "that a rcpuhlican form of government shall be guarantied to each State, and that each fitate shall I)e protected against foreign and domestic violence," {Ibid, 333;) and, in this form, it was unanimously adopted. {Journal of Convention, 113-189.) Afterward it underwent modifications in the Committee of Detail and the Committee on Style, {Ibid, 381, )
until it received the final form which it now has in the Constitution, as follows :
" Tlie Unif/d StateniiJtall flitrii'cinh/ to every State inthis Unioiia lUpubllcan furmof aovernment, andshall pro- tect each ot them a!,'ainst invasion; and on applica- tion of tbeLegislature.orofthe Executive, when the Lesislatare cannot bo convened, against domestic violence."
Thus stands the ' ' guarantee. ' ' If any further reason be required for Its Introduction into the Constitution It will be found in the prophetic language of the Federalist :
"Itmaypossiblybcaskcd, what need there could he of such a precaution and whether it may not become a pretext for alterations in the State governments without the concurrence of the States themselves. These questions admit of ready answers. If the inter- positiou of the General Government should not be needed, the provision for such an event will be a harmless superfluity only in the Constitution. But who can say wlint experiment may be produced by the caprice of particular Slates, by the ambition of enterpris- ing leaders, or by the intrigue and influence of foreign Powers?"— The Federafist, No. xxi;_see also Story's Commentaries on the Constitution, vol. ii, sec. 1811.
The very crisis herein anticipated has arrived. "The caprice of particular States," and "the ambition of enterprising leaders" have done theirworst. And now the "guarantee " must be performed, not only for the sake of Indi- vidual States, but for the sake of the Union to which they all belong, and to advance the declared objects of the Constitution, specified in its preamble.
The text of this great undertaking Is worthy of study. No stronger or more comprehensive words could be employed, whether we regard the object, the party guarantying, or the party guarantied. The express object is a "republi- can form of government. ' ' This Is plain enough. The party guarantying is not merely the Exec- utive or some specified branch of the National Government, but "the United States," or in other words,, the Nation. The Republic, which is the impersonation of all, guaranties a "re- publican form of government," and every branch of the National Government must sus- tain the " guarantee," Including especially Con- gress, where is the collected will of the peoi^le. The obligation is not less broad, when we con- sider the party guarantied. Here there can be no evasion. 1'he ' ' guarantee' ' is not merely for the advantage of individual States, but for the common defense and the general welfare. It Is a "guarantee" to each In the interest of all; and, therefore a ' ' guarantee' ' to all. And such is the solidarity of States In the Union, that the good of all Is Involved in the good of each. ¥ov each and all, then, this "guarantee" mu!»t be performed when the casus foederis arrives. As a guai'antor, the Republic, according to a familiar principle, is called to act on the default of the party guarantied ; l)ut when the default has occurred, then the duty Is fixed in all its amplitude.
WHAT IS A KEPUIU.ICAX GOVERXMENT?
The question then returns, what is "a Ke-
10
publican form of government, ' ' according to the requirement of the Constitution of the United States? Mark, if you please, that it is not the meaning of this term, according to Plato and Cicero ; not even according to the examples of history; nor according to the detinitions of mo- narchical writers or lexicographers ; but what is "a Republican form of government" accord- ing to the requirements of the Constitution of the United States? Of course these important words were not introduced and unanimously adopted without a purpose. They must be in- terpreted so as to have a real meaning. Any interpretation which renders them insignificant is on this account to be discarded as irrational and valueless, if not dishonest. They cannot be treated as a phrase only ; nor as a dead letter ; nor as an empty figure-head. Nor can they be treated as a mere profession and nothing more, so that the Constitution shall merely seem to be republican ; reversing the old injunction " to be rather than to seem " — Esse quam videri. They must be treated as real. Thus interpreted they become at once a support of Human Rights and a balance-wheel to our whole political system.
REJECTED DEFINITIONS.
In determining their signification, I begin by putting aside what is vague, unsatisfactory, and inapplicable, in order to bring the inquiry di- rectly to American Institutions.
I put aside all illustration derived from the speculations of ancient philosophers, because, on careful examination, it appears that the term "Republic," as used by them, was so absolutely different from any idea among us as to exclude their definition from the debate. This capti- vating term is of Roman origin. It is the same as Commonwealth and means the public inter- ests. As orginally employed, it was not a spe- cific term, describing a particular form of gov- ernment, but a general term, embracing all Governments, whether kingly, aristocratic, dem- ocratic, or mixed. Its equivalent in Greece was "Polity," which was the general term for all Governments. Therefore, the definition of a Republic, according to these ancient masters, is simply the definition of an organized Govern- ment, whether kingly, aristocratic, democratic, or mixed. Following this definition the words of the Constitution arc only the "guarantee" of an organized Govcrninont, without d(;t(;rmin- ing its character. 'J'his, of course, leaves open the very question now under consideraliini. • While tlie nomenclature of ancient philoso- pher.s cannot be cited in determining the defi- nition of a Republic, we may, nevertheless, be encouraged by them in demanding that all gov- ernment, under whatever name it may be called, shall be to cstaijlish justice and secure thegen- Hral welfare. 'J'hus i'lato, who commenced th(!se int(;resting speculations, is pleased to liken government to u Just man, delighting in justice always, however he may be treated by
others ; and the philosopher insists that every man is a government to himself, as every com- munity is a government to itself According to him, every well-ordered man, like every well- ordered community, is a Republic. Aristotle, in a different vein, and with more precision, says, in most suggestive words, that "every i:)olitical society is a sort of community or part- nership," (Aristotle's Politics, book i, cap. i,) that "the object of all good government is the common good," (book iii, cap. iv, ) that "it is the best plan to admit to a participation in the governing power as many as can be ad- mitted with safety ; for where large numbers are excluded, there will be discontent and danger," (Ibid, book iii, cap. vi,) and that "when tbci One, the Few, or the Many govern well and for the common good, theirs must be called a good Government." (lb.) Cicero gives to the same ideas new fervor and expansion, when he says, "A Republic is for the good of the whole people. But by the people I do not mean every assemblage of men, anyhow gathered together, but an assemblage united by a common accord respecting rights, and a common enjoyment of the public weal." [De liepublica, cap. xxv. ) And then again, in another place, the Roman philosopher says, "Liberty can have no certain dwelling in any state except where the laws are equal and the power of public opinion is su- preme." (/6i(i,cap.xxxi.) But all these require' ments or aspirations are applicable to any Gov- ernment, of whatever form ; and it is well known that Cicero recorded his preference for a Gov- ernment tempered by an admixture of the three different kinds ; so that -we are not advanced in our definition, unless we insist that our Re- public should have all those virtues M-hich are accorded to the ideal Commonwealth. And yet there are two principles which all these philosophers teach us: the first is justice, and the second is the duty of seeking the general welfare.
I next put aside the examples of history, as absolutely fallacious and inapplicable. Gov- ernments in all ages have been called Repub- lics, which can be no example to us. Indeed, there is hardly a government, from that of the great hunter, Nimrod, down to insulted and partitioned Poland, which has not been calW. i a " Repul)lic." In 177-!, only a few years before the adoption of the XatioiKil Constitution, Rus- sia, Austria, and Prussia, after dividing Poland, undertook to establish certain fundamental laws for this conquered country, one of which was as follows:
"The {rovcrniiKMit of Poliind shiill bo forever free, indcponili-nt ((;ir/ ;v7)i//i/((ff/i ui /<,,»/. The tnioprin- cijile of SiiiJ povcniiiK'nt euiisist.iii:,' in the stiict e.\e- cution of its laws ami tin: e(|iiilil)riuiii of tlio three estates, niiiiiclj'. tin- kinp, the si'iiatc, and tlie eques- trian order." — ./«/<» Atlamx'n Worlitt, vol. iv, i>. 370. But a governmint thus composed cannot be recognized in this debate as "republican in form."
11
At the adoption of the Constitution, the most competent persons, who disagreed on other things, agreed in discarding these examples. Alexander Hamilton and John Adams met here ■ on common ground. The former, in the brief of his argument on the Constitution, thus ex- hibits the various forms of government to which the term "Republic'' has been applied :
"A republic, a word used in various senses. Has been applied to aristocracies and monarchies. (1.) To Rome under kines. (2.) To Sparta, though a Senate for lite. (3.) To Carlhaco, th.)iigh thesame. (4.) To United Netherlands, thoush Stadtholdcr, and hered- itary nobles. (5.) To Pulaud, tlioujh :iristocraey and monarchy. (6.) To Great Britain, though a monar- chy."— Hamilton, Works, vol. ii, p. 463.
John Adams, in his Defense of the American K Constitutions written immediately anterior to the adoption of the National Constitution, thus concurs with Hamilton :
" But of all the words in aH languages, perhaps there has been none so much abused in this way as the words Jiepublic, Commonwealth, and Popular State. In the Eerum imbi icanuii Collcctio, of which there are fifty and odd volumes, and many of them very incorrect, France, Spain, and Portugal, the four great empires, the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman, and even the German, are all denominated 'Republics.'" — John Adams's Works, vol. v, i). 453.
In his old age, the patriarch expressed himself in the same sense and with equal force :
"The customary meaning of the words reptihlic and commoiuccalth have been infinite. They have been applied to every government under heaven; that of '^ Turkey and that of Spain, as well as that of Athens andof Rome, of Geneva and San Marino," — Ibid, vol. X, p. 378; Letter of 3Ut March, 1819.
And then again he said :
"In some writing or another of mine, I happened curreiitecalnmo, to drop the phrase, The word republic, as it is used, may signify anything, everything, or nothing. For this escape I have been pelted, for twenty or thirty years, with as many stones as ever were thrown at St. Stephen, when St. Paul held the clothes of the stoners. But the aphorism is literal, strict, solemn truth. To speak technically, or scien- tifically, if you will, there are monarchical, aristocrat- ical, anddemocratieal republics. The government of Great Britain and that of Poland are asstrictly repub- lics as that of Rhode Island or Connecticut." — Ibid, X, 379 ; Letter of 30th April, 1819.
In this latter remark, Mr. Adams simply re- peats what he says in his treatise, when he calls England and Poland "monarchical or regal republics.'''' {Ibid, vol. iv, p. 359.)
It is plain that our fathers, when they adopted ^ the " guarantee" of "a republican form of gov- ernment" intended something certain, or which at least, if not certain on the foce, could be made certain. But this excludes the author- ity of incongruous and inconsistent examples. They did not use words to signify "anything, everything, or nothing;" nor did they use words I which were as applicable to England and Po- land as to the United States. 'J'herefore, I can- not err when I put aside all these examples, ■which, however they may illustrate the defini- tion of Republican Government in times past, are utterly out of place as a guide to the inter- pretation of our Constituticu. Something bet-
ter must be found for this purpose; nor is it wanting.
I put aside also the definitions of European writers and lexicographers anterior to the Con- stitution; for all of these have the vagueness and uncertainty of political truth at that time in Europe. Among these none is of higher authority than Montesquieu, who brought to political science study, genius, and a liberal spirit. But even this great writer, who profited by all his predecessors, quickens and elevates without furnishing a satisfactory guide. He taught that ' ' virtue' ' was the inspiring principle of a Republic, and by "virtue," hesaysthathe meant the love of country, which, he says, is the love of Equality. This is beautiful; but, with curious inconsistency, he proceeds to include "democracy" and "aristocracy" under the term "Republic," the former being where the people in mass have the sovereign , power and the latter "where the sovereign power is in the hands of a j^art of the people. ' ' When defining "democracy" he expresses the importance of the suffrage as one of the fundamentals of gov- ernment, saying, among other things, that it was as important to regulate by ichom the suf- frage should be given, as in a monarchy to know who is the monarch. (Esprit des Lois, liv. ii, chap. 2 and 3.) But among all these glimpses of truth there is no definition of " a Republican form of government" which can help us essen- tially in interpreting the Constitution. Surely an ai'istocracy, "where the sovereign power' is in the hands of a jJart of the people,^^ cannot find a just place in our political system. It may be a " Republican form of government," according to Montesquieu, but it cannot be according to American institutions.
One of the ablest of the predecessors of Mon- tesquieu, in modern times, was the Frenchman, John Bodin, who wrote nearly two centuries earlier. He uses the term " Republic" as it is used by the ancient writers, to embrace Mon- archy, Aristocracy, and Democracy, which he calls "three kinds of Republics" — trivrii re- rumpublicarum genera. If the Republic is in the power of one, penes uniiin. it is a monarchy ; if in the power of a few, jjcnes 2)ancos, it is an aristocracy; if in the power of all, p&nes vni- versos, it is a democracy. Proceeding further he says, that a Democracy is "where all or the major part of all citizens, major pars om- nium civitim, collected together, have the su- preme power." (Bodin dc Jiej^iiblica, lib. ii, cap. 1.) Here the philosopher plainly follows the rule of jurisprudence in the case of corpo- rations : but this definition seems to sanction the exclusion of a part of the citizens, less than a majority, while it is inadequate in other respects. It says nothing of equality of rights or of that great touchstone of the republican idea, the de- pendence of taxation upon representation.
There are other definitions which may be put aside. Thus, for instance, it has been oftea
12
said, tliat a Republic is " a government of laws and not of men." and this saying found favor ■with some among our fathers. (John Adams's Works, vol. iv, p. 106.) Long before them Aristotle had declared, that such a government "would be the kingdom of God." But this condition, though marking an advanced degree of civilization and of course essential to a Re- public, cannot be recognized as decisive. Qn its face it is vague from its comprehensiveness. It is enough to say that it would embrace Eng- land, whose government our fathers renounced in order to build a Republic. And still further, it would throw its shield over a government which had "framed iniquity into law." This will not do.
There is also a plausible definition by MiUer, the learned author of the work on the British Constitution, who states, hypothetically, that by ReimMic may be meant "a government in which there is no king or hereditary chief ma- gistrate." (Miller's I'7e!t', vol. iii, p. 326.) But this again must be rejected as leaving aris- tocracies and oligarchies in the category of republics.
Sometimes it has been said, that a Govern- ment with an elective Chief Magistrate is a Republic. Here again nothing is said of aris- tocracy or oligarchy, which obviously may co- exist with an elective Chief Magistrate, as in the case of Venice, where the elected Doge was surrounded by an oligarchy of nobles ; and in the case of Holland, where the elected Stadt- holder was a prince surrounded by princes. But there are other instances which make this definition unsatisfactory, if not absurd. The Pope of Rome is an elective Chief Magis- trate : so also is the Grand Lama ; but surely the States of the Church are not republican, nor is Thibet.
Rejecting the definition founded on the elect- ive character of the Chief Magistrate, we must also reject another, founded on "the sover- eignty of more than one man." It has been said positively, by one who has written much on this subject, that "the strict definition of a Re- public is that in which the sovereignty resides in more than one man." (John Adams's Woi-Jcs, vol. X, p. 378.) But this strict definition will embrace aristocracies and oligarchies.
I conclude these rejected definitions with that of Dr. Johnson in his Dictionary, which appeared before American Indopendence :
" Ufipublick; (1) — Commonwealth, slate in, xohich the power in /n'lynd in vwre than one, (2) — Common interest,- thepiihllclc." I
Tlicse definitions are all as little to the pur- pose as the " vulgar error," chronicled by Sir Thomas Browne, that storks lived only in re-
Sublics, or the saying of Rous.scau, at a later ay, that a society of gods would govern them- selves democratically, or the remark of John Adams, that "all good government is, and must be republican." It is evident that we
must turn elsewhere for the illumination which we need. If others thus far have fulled, it is because they have looked across the sea instead of looking at home, and have searched foreign history and example, instead of simply recog- nizing the history and example of their own country. They have imported inapplicable and uncertain definitions, forgetting that the Fathers, by positive conduct, by solemn dec- lara tions, by declared opinions, and by public acts, all in harmony and constituting one over- whelming testimony, have exhibited their idea of a Republican Government in a way which is at once applicable and certain. They are the natural interpreters of their own Constitution. Mr. Fox, the eminent English statesman, ex- . claimed on one occasion in debate that, if by some interposition of Divine Providence all the wise men who ever lived in the world were as- sembled together, they could not invent even a tolerable Constitution ; meaning, of course, that a Constitution must be derived from habits and convictions, and not from any invention. There is sound sense in the remark ; and it is in this spirit that I turn from a discussion which has only this value, that it shows how little there is in the past to interpret the meaning of the Fathers.
TRUE SOURCE OF DEFINLTIOX.
Every Constitution embodies the principles of its framers. It is a transcript of their minds. If its meaning in any place is open to doubt, or if words are used which seem to have no fixed signification, we cannot err if we turn to the framers ; and their authority increases in pro- portion to the evidence which they have left on the question. By a "' republican form of govern- ment" our fathers plainly intended that Gov- ernment v.'hich embodied the principles for which they had struggled. Now, if it appears, that, through years of controversy they had in- sisted on certain principles as vital to free gov- ernment even to the extenfof encountering the mother country in war ; that afterward, on solemn occasions, they had heralded these jn-in- ciples to the world as "self-evident truths;" that also, in declared opinions, they had sus- tained these principles ; and that, in public acts, they had embudied these principles — then is it bej'ond dispute, that these principles mustliave ent,ered into the idea of that government which they took pains to place under the ' ' guarantee' ' of the United States. But all these things can bo shown unanswerably.
In these words of hj'pothesis, I have already foreshadowed the four dilferout heads under which these principles may l)e seen : First, as asserted by the lathers throughout the long revolutionary controversy which culminated in war; Sccoitdl//, as announced in solemn declarations ; T/n'rdli/, as sustained in declared opinions; and Fourthly, as embodied in public acts.
13
PRIXCIPLES ASSERTE'^ BT OUR FATHERS PRECED- ING IHE REVOLtTTIOJf.
(1.) I begin with the principles asserted by our fathers throughout the protracted contro- versy that preceded the Revolution. If Sena- tors ask why our fathers struggled so long in coutroversj' with the mother country, and then went forth to battle, they will iind that it was to establish the very principles for which I uow contend. To secure the natural rights of men, and especially to vindicate tlio controlling maxim that there can be no taxation without representation, they fought with argument and then with arms. Had these been conceded at that time there would have been no Lexington or Bunker Hill, and the Colonies would have continued yet longer under transatlantic rule.'. The first object proposed was not independence but the establishment of these principles ; and when at last independence was proposed, it was because it became apparent that these principles could be secured in no other way/ Therefore, the triumph of independence was the triumph of these principles, which neces- sarily entered into and became the animating soul of the Republic which was then and there born. The evidence is complete, and if I dwell on it with some minuteness, it is be- cause of its decisive character on the present occasion.
The great controversey opened with the pre- tension on the part of Parliament to tax the colonies. This pretension was first disclosed to Benjamin Franklin as early as 1754. It was at the time a profound secret ; but this patriot philosopher, whose rare intelligence embraced the natural laws of government not less than those of science, in a few masterly sentences exposed the injustice of taxation without rep- resentation. For a moment the ministry shrank back ; but at last, when the power of France had been humbled, and the colonies were no longer needed as allies in war, George Gren- ville, blind to principle and only seeing an in- crease of revenue, renewed the irrational claim. The colonies were to be taxed by the Parliament in which they had no representation. Two mil- lion and a half of people — for such was the colonial population then — were to pay taxes without any voice in determining them. The men of that day listened to the tidings with dis- may. They saw in this ministerial outrage the overthrow of their libeiiies, whether founded ouiij^tural rights or on the rights of British sub- jects. In their conclusions they were confirmed by two names of authority in British history — Algernon Sidney and. I ohn Locke, each of whom had solemnly asserted those liberties which were now in danger. One had borne his testimony on the scaffold ; the other in exile.
Sidney, in his Discourses on Government, did not hesitate to say "that God has left to nations the liberty of setting up such Govern- ments as best pleased themselves," and then
again, ' ' that all just magistratical power is from the people." (Discourses, p. 30, 14.) Such words were calculated to strengthen the senti- ment of human freedom ; but it was Locke who gave fornuil expression to the very principles which were now assailed. In a famous passage of his work on Civil Government, written dur- ing his exile in Holland, this eminent English- man bore his testimony thus :
"It is true government cannot be supported with- out great charge, aud it i.s fit every one who enjoys his share of the protection should pay out of his estate his proportion for the maintenance of it. But still it must be \yith his own consent: i. e., the consent of the majority, giving it either Ijij themxi^lvef or their rep- resentatives chosen by them; for, if any one shall claim a power to lay and levy taxes on the peor>le by his own authority and icithout xueh consent of the people, he therehy invades the fundamental law of property and subverts tlie end of government; for what prop- erty have I in that which another may by right take, when he pleases, to himself?" — Locke's Civil Govern- ment, book ii, eh. 7; ch. 14.
Here is a plain enunciation of two capital truths: first, that all political society stands only on the consent of the governed; aud, sec- ondly, that taxation without represeirtation is an invasion of fundamental right. It was these truths that our fathers embraced in the contro- versy before them, and these same truths, happily characterized byHallam as "fertile of great revolutions and perhaps pregnant with more," are as fertile and as pregnant now as then.
Unquestionably, Sidney and Locke exercised more influence over the popular mind, j^reced- ing the revolution, than any other v,-riters. They were constantly quoted, and their names were held in reverence. But their authority has not ceased. As they spoke to our fathers, they now speak to us. Sicut pafribus, sic nobis.
The cause of human liberty, in this great con- troversy, found a voice in James Otis, a young lawer of eloquence, learning, and courage, whose early words, like the notes of the morn- ing bugle mingling with the dawn, awakened the whole country. Asked by the merchants of Bos- ton to speak at the bar against ■wTits of assist- ance, which had been issued to enforce ancient Acts of Parliament, he spoke, not only as a law- yer, but as a patriot. His speech was the most important, that, down to that occasion, had ever been made on this side of the ocean. An emi- nent contemporary, who was present, says, "No harangue of Demosthenes or Cicero ever had such effect upon the globe as this speech." (John Adams's Woi'ks, vol. x, page 233.) It was the harbinger of a new era. For five hours the brilliant orator unfolded the character of these Acts of Parliament ; for five hours he held the court-room in attentive and ;istonished admiration ; but his effort ascended into states- manship, when, after showing that tiie colonists were without representation in Parliament, he cried out, that, notwithstanding this cxclusioUi Parliament had undertaken "to im])ose taxes and enormous taxes, burdensome, oppressive
14
taxes, ruinous, intolerable taxes," and, then, glowing with a generous indignation at this in- justice, he launched that thunderbolt of polit- ical truth, " Taxation without rejoresentation is Tyranny." From the narrow court-room where he spoke, the thunderbolt passed, smiting and blasting the intolerable pretension. It was the idea of J ohn Locke ; but the fervid orator, with tongue of liame, had given to it the intensity of his own genius. He had found it in a book of philosophy ; l)ut he sent it forth as a winged messenger, blazing in the sky.
John Adams, who, as a young man just admitted to the bar, was present at this scene, dwells on it often with sympathetic delight. There, in the old Town House of Boston, sat the five judges of the province, with Hutchinson as Chief Justice, in robes of scarlet, with cam- bric bands and judicial wigs ; and there too in gowns, bands, and tie-wigs were the barristers. Conspicijous on th"e wall were full-length por- traits of two British Monarchs, Charles II and James II ; while in the corners were the like- nesses of Massachusetts Governors. In this presence the great oration was delivered. The patriot lawyer had refused compensation. "In such a cause," said he, "I despise all fees." He spoke for his country and for mankind. Fii-mly he planted himself on the rights of man, which he insisted were, by the everlasting law of nature, inherent and inalienable ; and these rights he nobly proclaimed, were common to all, without distinction of color. To supjiose them surrendered in any other way than by equal rules and general consent was to suppose men idiots or madmen, whose acts are not bind- ing. But he especially flew at two arguments of tyranny: first, that the colonists were "vir- tually" represented; and secondly, that there was such a difference between direct and in- direct taxation, that while the former might be questionable, the latter was not. To these two apologies he replied: first, that no such phrase as "virtual representation" was known in law or constitution — that it is altogether a subtlety and an illusion, wholly unfounded and absurd — and that we must not be cheated by any such phantom or any other fiction of law or politics, or any monkish trick of deceit and hypocrisy; and, then, in the second place, he said with the same crushing force, that, in the absence of representation, all taxation, wliether direct or indirect, whether internal or external, whether on land or on trade, was equally obnoxious to the same unhesitating condemnation. The effect of this effort was electric. The judges were stunned into silence, and postponed their judgment. The peoi)le were aronscil to a frenzy of {)Utriotism. "American Independence," Bays John Adams, in the record of his impres- sions, " was theii and there born : the seeds of patriots and heroes were tlien and there sown, to defend the vigorous youth. Every man of a crowded audience appeared to go away as I
did, ready to take arms against writs of assist- ance. Then and there was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and there the child Independence was born." (J. Adams's Works, vol. X, p. 247; see also pp. 293-375; Tudor's Life of Otis, pp. 71-77.) But this great birth is inseparably associated with the principle, then and there declared, that " Taxation with- out representation is Tyranny."
From this time forward Otis dedicated him- self singly to the cause he had so bravely up- held, and the popular heart clove to him. He became the favorite of his fellow-countrymen. His arguments were repeated ; his words were gratefully adopted, and the saying, "Taxation without representation is tyranny," became a '' maxim of patriotism. In May 17U1, only a few weeks after this utterance, he was chosen a rep- resentative of Boston, in the Legislature, by an almost unanimous vote. The Crown officers were dismayed by this most significant election, and one of them, speaking with prophetic lam- entation, said that "It would shake the prov- ince to its foundation," on which John Adams remarked, many years later when some of its results were already visible, ' ' That election has shaken two continents and will shake four." {Ibid, p. 248.) Of course this was simply be- cause it affirmed and invigorated a practical truth of government, by which all the people are lifted to political power. At his new post of duty, Otis became the acknowledged leader, constant, fer- vid, eloquent, and according to his own lan- guage "daring to speak plain English." While still declaring an unhesitating loyalty to the Crown, and even pledging "the last penny and the last droj) of blood, rather than, by any back- wardness, his Majesty's measures should be em- barrassed," he made haste to announce in words, where humor blends with truth, "that God made all men naturally equal; that the ideas of earthly superiority are educational and not in- nate ; that no government has a right to make hobby-horses, asses, and slaves of the subject, nature having made sufficient of the two former for all the lawful purposes of man, from the harmless peasant in the field to the most refined politician in the cabinet; but none of the last, wiiieh infiillibly proves they are unnecessary." But the case would have been imiierfectly stated, f. if th<! patriot rej)resentative had not once more cried out against taxation without representation and warned against the calamities which uuisf follow from this unquestionable tyranny. This early debatcis preserved in a pami)hlet, printed in 17(12, and entitled "A \ indication of the House of Kepresentatives of Massachusetts Bay, l)y .l:iines Otis, Esq.," which we jiretold, by an eniineiit authority, contains, in solid substance, all that is to be found in the Declaration of llighta and Wrongs, issued by Congress in 1774, the Declaration of IndeiienJence in 1770, and the subsequent writings of those political phil-
15
osophers who upheld the national cause. (J. Adams's Work.% vol. x, pp. 300-312.) 1 ar- don me if I dwell too minutely on this history. I do it only to illustrate the issue of principle actually made in the controversy with the mother
country. . • -,-ri
The controversy still continued, when in 1 < h-i, the orator, who had already by voice and pen maintained the cause of his country, put forth another publication, entitled, " The Eights ot tl*3 Colonists asserted and proved. ' Mark, it you please, the vigor of the title. The rights of the colonists are not only ''asserted, but "proved." Reprinted in London, this pam- • phlet was read by Lord Mansfield, Chief Jus- tice of England, and was answered by Soame Jenyns, a partisan writer of the Crewu. _ ihe copy I now hold in my hand has th« iiopnnt ot London, and is marked third edition. Perhaps all things considered, it is the most remarkable pamphlet of our country and one of the most remarkable ever written. Recent events, ver- ifvin<^ the traths it so early announced, elevate its ptace in history. Here will be found the same vital principles, enforced with learning and eloquence, which Otis had announced at the bar in the case of writs of assistance, and then again in the debates of the legislature ; and here may be seen, not only the truths asserted by our fathers, but the unanswerable arguments by which they were vindicated. Even an ab- stract would be too long for this occasion ;_ but the character of this Defense of the American People, not unlike Milton's famous Defensio pro Ponulo Anglicano, will appear in a few passages, where, as in gleams, may be discerned \hQ Idea of a Republic. _
I do not pause on the assertion, "that every man of sound mind should have his vote, or the authority which he invokes, when he says, "Lord Coke declares that it is against Magna Carta and against the franchises of the land for freemen to be taxed but by their own consent. Nor do I dwell on that admirable statement ot much in little, where he says, "the first and simple principle is Equality and the Power o the Whole." (Page 14.) The Equality of All and the Power of All ! The two buttresses of a iust o-overnment. I come at once to the plain statement of fundamental right. Here are two sentences :
"The Supreme Power cannot take from any man any part of his property xoithout cotuent m person, or
^''WlllltcZtto be laid on the people i.« by their ccmaent in x)erson, or by representntion. —rage 61. Such, he says, are " the first principles of law and justice and the great barriers of a free state," and then he adds, "I ask, I want no more." And these principles he claims for all, without distinction of color.
" The colonists are by the law of nature free-born, as indeed arc white and black. Does . t follow that it is right to enslave a man because ho is black [ Will short curled hair, like wool, instead of Christian hair. as it ia called by those whoso heart is as hard as the
nether mill-stone, help the argument? Can any logi- cal inference in favor of slavery be drawn from a Hat nose, a long or a short ia.ce'i"—Paae 29.
Assuming that these rights are common to all, whether white or black, he then insists that any taxation, whether direct or indirect, with- out representation, is only another form ot slavery :
" I can sec no reason to doubt but that the imposi- tion of ta$es. whether on trade, or on land, or houses, or ships, or real or personal fixed or floatin? property in the colonies, is absolutely irreconcilable yHh he rights of the colonists, as British subjects and „s men. I fay men, for in a state of nature no man can take my property from me without^my consent, //he doe, he deprives meofmy liberty and '»"^\t ™f ' * ^'''i^" .^^! very act of taxing, exercised over those who are not represented, appears to me to deprive them oi one of fhcir m?st essential rights as freemen ; and it continued seems to be in effect an entire disfranchisement of eveiy flvTrioht. For what one civil right is worth a rush after a man's property issubject to bo taken from him at pleasure, without his consent / —I'age 6i.
Such was the voice of James Otis, who was our John the Baptist. It was he who went before in this great controversy. He first stated the case between the colonies and the mother country, and first developed the principles m issue. But though first, he was not long alone. Conspicuous among his followers was ^^amuel Adams, that austere patriot, always faithful and true, who desired to make Puritan Boston 'a Christian Sparta. ' ' He was remarkajile for the simplicity, accuracv, and harmony of his style, and on this account often held the pen for the Leo-islature or for the Town meeting. In obe- dience to the latter, he drew up instructions to the representatives of Boston, which were after- ward adopted in Faneuil Hall, where repeating the very arguments of Otis, he says, H our trade may be taxed, why not our lands / \Miy not the produce of our lands and everything we possess or make use of?" And then, advan- cing in the subject, he asks, "If taxes are laid upon us in any shape, icithout our having a Iccial representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the character of free subjects to the miserable state of tributary slaves/ (John Adams's Works, x, p. 294.) In asking this question he leaves no room to doubt the answer it deserved.
Meanwhile Franklin, as the general agent ot the colonies, had been maintaining the same principles in England. But the ministry, hur- ried on liythat fatal folly which leads to de- struction,-persevered in their pretension. Ihe stamp act was passed, and for the hrsttime in our historv papers were to bear stamps, in order to swell flic revenue of the Crown. Massachu- setts remonstrated against the tyranny, in forma resolutions, adopted unanimously, wherein it is declared, " that by the law of nature no man has a ri^ht to impose laws more than to levy taxes upon another; that the freeman pays no tax as the freeman submits to no law, but such as emanates from the body in which he is rep- resented ; that the ParUament possessed no
16
right of enacting laws binding upon tlie colo- nies, and that whatever legislative power»to that effect had been exercised b^^ the Parliament had been abusive and unlawful.''^ (John Adams's Works, vol. i, p. 78.) In an address to the royal Governor, the Legislature, after setting forth the injustice of the stamp act, proceeded to say: "We must beg your Excellency to ex- cuse us from doing anything to assist in the execution of it." The people in town meet- ings took up the strain and all united against the act. But Massachusetts was not alone. A writer in 'Virginia, catching the spirit of Otis, declared, in an elaborate pamphlet, that it was an ''essential principle of the English Consti- tution that the subject shall not be taxed with- out his consent ;^^ and then, again, quoting the words of another, said: "Men have natural and freemen legal rights which they may justly maintain, and no legislative authority can de- prive them of." [Considerations on ilie pro- priety of Taxes in the British Colonies, p. 5.) The Legislature of Virginia, even before Massa- chusetts, adopted resolutions kindred in spirit, which were moved by Patrick Henry and he- roically carried by his eloquent voice, even against the menacing cry of "treason." Thus spoke Virginia in one of these resolutions, ex.- posing the true issue in question, and insisting that taxation and representation were insepa- rable :
"licnolved, That thetaxationofthcpenplc by them- selves or by pp.rnons cho>ien lo represent them, who can only know what taxes the people are able to bear, or the euFicst method of raisins (hem, and must them- selves be affected by every tax laid on the people, is the onlii necnrity ngainut hurdeiinonie titration and the distinsnishing characteristic olBritishiieedom, with- out which the ancient constitution cannot exist." — Wirt' a Life of Patrick Henry, p. 57.
Pennsylvania, by her House of Assembly, spoke also to the same effect as follows :
"Renohcrl, Ncm. Con. That this House think it their duty thus firmly to assert with modesty and decency, their i»//^r';H</-i(7/t(s,thatthcir posterity mavlcarn and knoiv that it was not with their consent iuid Mcriuies- ceneo, <hat rniy taxesshonkl bo levied on them by any person but their own representatives."
_ The controversy still proceeded. At the in- vitation of Massachusetts a Congress assembled at New York in October 1705, where were del- egates from Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South Car- olina, which, after a session of three weeks, adopted a declaration of colonial rights, where, ' among other things, it is declared:
"That it iH inseparably essential to the freedom of a people and the undoubted ri^ht of Knglishmen, that no tax be impose^l on them hut milk their own consent, "'Iw'! nernnndlhi or by their reprexentatives."
"That the jicoplo of tho cohjnies arc not, and from their biciilcircumstancescannot berei)rescntud in tho House ol Commons of Great iJritaiu."
At last tiio stamp act w.-is repealed, but tho pretension of taxation was suspended rather I than abandoned. A ministerial jjartisan con- |
tinned to urge the scheme in the following bare- faced words:
" All countries, unaccustomed to t.axes. arc at first violently prepossessed against them, though the price, which they give lor their liberty, lilio au ox untamed to the yoke, they show at first a very stubborn neck, but by degrees become docile and yield a willing obedience." _ * * * * "America must be taxed. —Jmtice and JSeeessity of tamig tlie Ainerican Oolonies Demonstrated. London, 17t>6. _ As time advanced the old ajidaeity was re- vived ; and, under the lead of the reckless Charles Townsend, taxes were imposed by Par- liament on tea, glass, lead, paper and painters' colors. The old opposition in the colonies was revived also, and taxation without representa- tion was again denounced. Committees of cor- respondence were established and the work of organization began. The whole country was in a fever. _ Massachusetts, as in times past, did not hesitate to proclaim the true principle. At a Town meeting of Boston in 177l>. there was a declaration of rights, "which no man or bodyofmen, consistently with their own rights as men and citizens or members of society ,'^can for themselves give up or take away from oth- ers;" and here we meet again familiar words : " The supreme power cannot justly take from any man any part of his property without his consent in person or by his representatives."— Pofre 10.
Against all Parliamentary taxation, as often as It showed itself, this was the impenetrable buckler that was raised. But the mother coun- try was perverse. Ship-loads of tea arrived. At Boston the tea was thrown into the harbor. The colonies entered into an agreement of non- importation. Then came troops, and the Bos- ton Port Bill, by which this harbor was vindic- tively closed tigainst commerce. The whole country, including even South Carolina, made common cause with Massachusetts. Gadsden exclaimed, " Massachusetts sounded the trum- pet, but to Carolina is it owing that it was at- tended to." And Virginia exclaimed, " We mil never he taxed but by our representatives. This IS the great badge of freedom, ^^■hether the people in Ijoston were warranted by justice when they destroyed the tea, we knowiiot; but this we know, that tiie Parliament, by their pro- ceedings, have made us and all North America, parties in the present dispute." (A\'irt"s Life of Patrick Henry, p. 9<j.) Meanwhile more troops arrived. All things portended strife; and yet the colonists did not ask for independ- ence. They only asked for tlieir rielits. insist- ing always that there should be no taxation without representation. " Tlie patriots of this provnice," said ,'01111 Adams in 1771, "desire nothing new^ they wish only to keep their old privileges. They were for one lumdred and fifty years allowed to tax tlieniselves. This plan they wish may continue forever. ' ' (John Adams's Works, vol. iv, p. 131.*) And thus stood the two parties face to face.
Then came the Continental Congress, which at once put forth resolutions, where, after claim-
li
ing tla'e enjoyment of life, liberty, tind property as natural rights, it was insisted that the colo- nists could be bound by no law to which they had not consented by their representatives. Here was the original programme of Jame Otis : first the rights of men, according to natural laws ; and secondly, the principle that govern- ment, including of course taxation, depended on the consent of the governed. " The foun- dation of English Liberty and of all free govern- ment,'' said these resolutions, '"is aright in the people to participate in their legislative coun- cil." {American ^rc7«'fcs, 4th series, vol. i, p. 822.) In harmony with these resolutions were the several addresses of the Continental Con- gress— to the people of Great Britain — to the people of the Province of Quebec — and to the king himself, each of which pleads for Human Rights in the largest sense. The address to the people of England begins by an appeal for '"the rights of men and the blessings of Liberty," and then insists "that no po\rer on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent. ' ' {Ibid, p. 918.) The address to the people of the Province of Quebec, in similar spirit, says, " thejirst great right is that of the people hav- ing a share in their own government by their representatives, chosen by themselves, and in consequence of being ruled bylaw, which they themselves approve ; not by edicts of men over whom the)' have no control. This is a bulwark surrounding and defending their property." {Ibid, p. iydl.) And the address to the king has the same key-note when it says, " Duty to your ^Majesty and regard for the preservation of ourselves and our posterity, theprimary obli- gations of nature and of society command us to entreat your royal attention." {Ibid.) Thus constantly, down to the last moment, did our fathers set forth the principles which they sought to establish as essential to free govern- ment. Thus constantly did they testify to the cause for which I now plead.
Answering voices came back from England, all showing the principles in issue. The right of taxation Avas asserted ; but there were many who disguised the tyi'anny by assuming that the colonies were "virtually represented." Sir James Marriott, the Admiralty Judge, insisted boldly, that, since the lands of the colonies, according to their charters, were held in socage tenure, "as of the royal manor of East Green- wich in Kent." and since East Greenwich was represented in Parliament, therefore our fathers were represented in Parliament. Perhap^that spirit of legal technicality, which is satisfied by mere form at the expense of reason, was never more strikingly illustrated than in this sense- less argument. The whole ]n-etension was scouteii by Mr. Pitt, afterward Lord Chatham, in terms of indignant eloquence. "The idea," said he, "of s. virtual rei)resentation of Amer- ica in this House is the most contemptible that ever entered into the head of a man. It does not
deserve a serious refutation." As the contro- versy continued, and especially as those mas- terly state papers — the addresses of the Con- tinental Congress — reached England, t.hc min- isters of the king were put on the defensive. They retained as their advocate none other than Dr. Johnson, who, for a sura of money, lent the pen which had written Rasselas, the Vanity of Human Wishes, and the English Diction- ary, to a rancorous attack on the principles of our fathers. Its concentrated spirit was all ex- pressed in its title, "Taxation no Tyranny." Another pamphlet appeared in reply, with the epigraph, ' " llesistance no Rebellion, ' ' embody- ing the idea that, where there is taxation with- out representation, resistance is justifiable; and thus was issue joined even at London. This wasinlTTo. Already the "embattled farmers" had gathered at Lexington and Runker Hill; already Washington had drawn his sword at Cambridge, as Commander-in-Chief and gen- eralissimo of the new-born armies ; already war had begun. At last to the defiant watch word "Taxation no Tyranny," sent from across the sea, our fathers returned that other defiant watchword "Independence." Rutin seeking Independence, they did not turn their backs upon the principles asserted throughout the long controversy. Independence was the means to an end, and that end was nothing less than a Republic, with Liberty and Equality as the animating principles, where the government should stand on the consent of the governed, or, which is the same thing, where there should be no taxation witliout representation ; for here was the distinctive feature of American Institu- tions.
SOLEMN' DECLARATIONS OF THE FATIIEES.
(2.) The principles, heralded through fifteen years of controversy, were not forgotten when Independence was declared ; and here I come to the second head of these illustrations.
It sometimes happens that men fail in support of the cause to which they are pledged, or con- tent themselves with something less than the truth. Rut it was not so with our fathers, In declaring Independence they continued lo)'al to their constant vows. The natural rights of all men and the consent of the people as the only just foundation of government, which James Otis had first announced; which Sam- uel Adams had maintained with splendid sim- plicity ; which Patrick Henry had vindicated, even against the cry of " treason, "_ and which had been affirmed by legislative bodies and pub- lic meetings, were embodied in the opening words of the Declaration. 'Jlicrc they stand, like a mighty overture to the new Republic, in- terpreting, inspiring, and filling it with their transforming power. These are the words :
"We hold those truths to bo nelf-evidml ; that all men arc crrnted equal: thnt Ihey arc cmlowoil by tlicir Creator with oortain inalienablo rislits; tluit among these are life, liliorty, ami the pursuit oi hapiiincss: that, to secure these rights, govcrnmeuts arcinstituted
18
amttog men, deriving their Just powers from the consent of the governed."
■ Foremost is the Equality of all men. Of course, iu a declaration of rights, no such su- preme folly was intended as that all men are created equal in form or capacity, bodily, or mental ; but simply that they are created equal in rights. This is the first of the self-evident truths that are announced, leading and govern- ing all the rest. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are among inalienable rights ; but they are all held in subordination to that pri- mal truth. Here is the starting-point of the whole, and the end is like the starting-point. In announcing that Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, the Declaration repeats again the same procla- mation of Equal Rights. Thus is Equality the Alpha and the Omega, in which all other rights are embraced. Men may not have a natural right to certain things, but most clearly they have a natural right to impartial laics, without which justice, which is the end and aim of gov- ernment, must fail. Equality in rights is the first of rights. It was because these self-evident truths, beginning with Equality, had been set at naught by Great Britain, in her relations with our fathers, that Independence was declared. To these truths, therefore, was the new Govern- ment solemnly dedicated, as it assumed its sep- arate and equal station among the Powers of the earth. Do you ask for the definition of "Republic?" llere it is by patriot lexicog- raphers, whose authority cannot be questioned by us.
As the war of Independence began with a dec- laration of principles, so it ended with a like declaration. At its successful close, the Con- tinental Congi-ess, in an address to the people, by the pen of James Madison, thus announced the objects for which it had been waged, and thus supplied another definition of the new government :
" Let iibe remembered that it has been the pride and the boast of America, that the riohtsfor which she has contended ircri' thr rinlilnnf h iiinini vntarr. By the bless- ing oif til e Author ot til esc Uigli Is, tluy havo prevailed over all oiiiHisitiim \uu\J(inii the bctis nt thirteen In- dependent States. No instance has hcretoloro oc- curred, nor can any instance be expected hereafter to occur, in which tlie niiad ulturated furins of llijnibUcan Ci'jV'riiiiicnt can pretend to so fair an ojiportunity of justifying themselves by their fruits. In this view thecitizens of the United States are responsible for the greatest truth ever conliled to a nolitical soci- ety."— Journal of Continental Congress, April, 1783, vol. viii, p. -01.
Such was the sublime declaration. It was for the "rights of human nature" thatour fathers went forth to Ijattle, and tliese rights are pro- claimed to '■form the basis of thirteen inde- pendent Slates." But foremost among these rights is Equality, including of course tiie equal right of all to a voice in the (Jovernmeiit. And thus is the licpublic whicli our fatlwrs, with pride and Ijoast, then gave as an example to nu^d^ind.
The same spirit appears in the National Con- stitution, which, by its preamble, asserts prac- tically the same sentiments. Here it is :
" AVe, the people of the United State?, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Jii'-^tice, insure domestic tranquillity,provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blcssing.s of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Thus, according to this proclamation, the Constitution was ordained, not to create an oli- garchy or aristocracy, not to exclude certain persons from the pale of its privileges, not to organize inequality of rights in any form, but "to establish justice," which is Equality ; "to insure domestic tranquillity," which is vain without justice ; "to provide for the common defense," which is the defense of all : " to pro- mote the general welfare," which is the welfare of all ; and " to secure the blessings of Liberty' ' to all the people and their posterity, which is to give to all the complete enjoyment of rights, foremost among which is Equality. Here, then, is another authoritative definition of the Re- public which was formed.
Thus has our counfa-y testified to its idea of a Republic, not only throughout its long day-s of controversy, but in these solemn decla- rations, which are in themstlves monumental acts.
OPIXIOXS OF TUB FATHERS.
(3.) I am now brought to consider how these same principles have been sustained by eminent characters, whose names are historic, all testi- fying to the character of that government which they founded and ujiheld. In their weighty words you will find a definition, constantly repeated, which is in harmony with all the promises of the Fathers, whether in contro- versy or in these solemn instruments which are among the very title-deeds of the Republic.
I begin with Benjamin Franklin, who saw all questions of government with a surer instinct than anyotlicr person in our history. As early as 178t), while still a young man, he wrote an article on government, which was published in the Pennsylvania Gazette, where will be found these words :
" Popular Governments hare not been framed with- out the wisest reasons. It seemed highly fitting that the conduct of magistrates, created by and for the pood of the whole, .should bo made liable to tlio inspection and •^n'na^'Xv cxsion of the loholc."— Franklin's Works, vol. ii, p, 209.
It is for the good of the tchole, and not for an odious oligarchy or an aristocratic class that our patriot .speaks, and in these words we find foreshadowed the idea of a republican govern- ment ; bjit it was in tlie discussions on the stamp act, after Otis had fulmiued his flaming boll, that we find a fuller and more precise dermilion. Here it is, as adopted, if not writ- ten, liy Franklin in 17tJH:
" That every man of the commonalty, excci»t infantfe, insane persons, and criminals, is of common ^9ight«
19
and by the laws of God, a freeman and entitled to the free enjoyment of liberty. Thn( liberty or frrrdomvnn- sists ill having an- aftual tiharc in the ttppointmcnt of those who frame lite laws,&ru\ who are to be the ffu;ird- ians of every man: life, jiropcrty, and peace; for the a^^of one man i.s as dear to him as the a// of another; and the poor man has an equal right, but more need to have representatives in the Legislature than the rich one.
"That they who have no voice nor vote in the elect- ing of representatives do not enjoy lihertu; hut are abnolutebj enslaved to those who have voles and to their representatives,- for to be enslaved is to have govern- ors whom other men have set over us, and be subject to laws made hy the representatives of others, viithont having had representatives of our own to give con- sent in ou,r behalf." — Franklin's Vt'orks, vol. ii,p.372.
In these emphatic words wiJl be found a com- plete vindication of the equal right of represen- tation, as essential to free government, so much so, that where this does not exist, Liberty does not exist.
Jefferson has followed Franklin in the same V^n, expressing himself with greater fervor. The author of the Declaration of Independence could not do otherwise. Constantly he testifies to his idea of a Republic. Thus he wrote to •Alexander von Humboldt, under date of June 13, 1817, affirming the rights of the majority as "the first principle of republicanism," and assuming the principle of Equal Rights :
" The first principle of republicanism is, that the lex majoris partis is the fundamental law of every society of individuals of equal rights. To consider the will of the society constrained by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importanee.yetthelast which is thoroughly learned. This law oneedisregarded.nootherremaius but that of force, which ends necessarily in military despotism." — Jefferson's Worlcs, vol. vii, p. 75.
In another letter to John Taylor, of Caroline, dated May 28, 1816, he thus defines a Republic:
"Indeed, it must be acknowledged, that the term rejndjlie is of very vague application in every lan- guage. \Vitness the self-styled republics of Holland, Switzerland, Ui-noa, Venice, Poland. Were I to as- sign to this term a precise and definite i<lea, I would say, purely and simply, it moans n (lorernmentby its citizens in (»o>.-.v. ai'tintr directly and [icrsi in ally, accorrf- ing to rides estalJislied by the majority : and that every other Government is more or less rei)ublican, in pro- portion as it lias in its composition more or less of this ingredient of the direct action of the citizens."— J(/- ferson's Works, vol. vii, p. 605.
Here again, while confessing the unquestion- able vagueness of the term according to old examples, he assumes that in a Republic all the citizens must have a voice. And in another place he thus- indignantly condemns denial of representation :
"And also that one half of our brethren who fight and pay taxes are excluded, like Helots, from the rights of representation, as if society were instituted for the soil and not for the men inhabiting it, or one half of these rou/il dispose of the riylils and the will of the other half icithout their consent." — Ibid, p. 607.
Thus did he scout the whole wretched preten- sion of oligarchy and monopoly by which citi- zens are deprived of equal rights.
Madison was colder in nature than Jeffer- son, but they were associates in opinion, as in political life. Tke former ia the debates on
the Constitution thus condemned the denial of rights on account of color :
" We have seen the mere distinction of color, made in the most enliirhtened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man." — Elliot's Debutes, vol. iv, p. 162.
Speaking directly of the right of suffrage, he uses the following language :
" The right of suffrage is certainly one of the funda- mental articles of republican government, and ought not to be left to be regulated by the legislature. A grad- ual abridgment of this right has been the mode in which aristocracies have been built on the ruins of popular forms." — Elliot's Debates, vol. v, p. 388.
Thus declaring himself against "aristocra- cies," he naturally recognized the true idea, and here he was perplexed by the question of a prop- erty qualification, which he says in one j)lace, ' ' does not satisfy the fundamental principle that men cannot be justly bound by laws in making which they have no part." {Ibid, p. 580. ) And then again in another place, "It violates the vital principle of free government, that those who are to be bound by laws, ought to have a voice in making them, and the violation would becomemorestrikinglyunjust as the law-makers become the minority." {Ibid, p. iJ82.) Thus completely recognizing the great American principle that just government can stand only on "the consent of the governed," he is brought to this conclusion:
"Under every view of the subject, it seems indis- pensable that the mass of citizens should not be with- out a voice in making the laws which they arc to obey and in choosing the magistrates who are to administer them."— /6i(/, p. 583.
In one of the most remarkable chapters in the Federalist, Madison gives expansion to this idea in his formal definition of a llepublic :
"If we resort for a criterion to the diflFerent princi- ples on which ditt'erent forms of government arc estab- lished, we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, « government which derives all its poirers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by ofiiccrs holding their oQiees during i)leasure, for a limited time, or during good Ijcliavior. It is essential for such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable iinmort ion, ou A l-'AVOUKD CLASS OF IT; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exer- cising their oppressions l)y a delegation of their pow- ers, tnidht asjiire totherank of republicans, and claim fur their government the honorable title of repub- lic."—/'t(/(/-«^W, No. 39, by Madison.
Thus, in these few significant words, does this authority teach that a Republic is a govern- ment " derived from the great body of the peo- ple," and not from "a favored class of it." Better words could not be found for the Ameri- can definition.
Hamilton follows with, purliaps, equal au- thority. Though ap]>roachiiig political ques- tions from opposite points of view, we find him on this occasion uniting with Fraidvlin, .leifer- son, and Madison. Here is a glimpse of the definition he would supply:
"As long as offices are open for all and uo eonsti- tutional rank is established, it is pure republican- ism."— Hamilton's Works, vol. ii, p. 47.
Not for an oligarchy, but for all is a Republio
20
created. Then again lie testifies for Equal Riglits and against partial distinctions :
" There can be no truer principle than this, that evenj individual of the communitii has an equal right to the protection of government," * * * * "We propose a free government. Can it be so, ii partial dis- tinctions are made?" — J bid, p. 418.
And then again he says in positive words :
" A share in the sovereignty of the State, which is exercised by the citizens at large in voting at elec- tions, is one of the most important risrhts of the sub- ject, a7id in a Republic ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law. It is that right by which we ex- ist as a free people." — Hamilton, Works, vol. ii, p. 315.
He then portrays the principles of the Revo- lution as follows :
"They taught the inhabitants of this country to risk their lives and fortunes in asserting their liberty, or, in other words, their right in a share in the government. That portion of the sovereignty to which each indi- vidual is entitled, can never be too highly prized. It is that for which we have fought and bled. — Ibid.
More could not be said in the few words em- ploj'ed. But it is when Hamilton comes to con- sider the Constitution of the United States and to expound its provisions, that, while recog- nizing the anomalous condition of Slavery, and exposing what he calls "the compromising expedient of the Constitution,'' by which "the sZare is divested of two fifths of the man,'' he yet declares "the equal level of free inhabit- ants,"' and announces " that if the laws are to restore the rights which have been taken away the negroes could no longer he refused an eqval share of representation icith the other inhab- itants.''^ Here are the important words:
"It is only under the pretext that the laws have transferred the negroes into subjects of jiropcrty, that a place is disputed them in the computation of num- bers: AND IT IS ADMITTED TUAT IK THE I.AWS WERE TO BESTORK THIO RIGHTS WHICr. HAVK liKKN TAKEN AWAY, THE NEGROES COUI.U XO LONGER BE REFUSED AX EQUAL SHARE OE REPRESESTATIOX WITH THE OTHER INHAB- ITANTS."— The Federalist, No. 54, by Hamilton.
Thus, according to Hamilton, if the slaves are restored to the rights which have been taken away — in other words, if tliey become free- men— they will be on the same equal level, and will be entitled to the same equal share of rep- resentation \^ith the other inhabitants. The two ideas of Equality and of a right to repre- sentation, which were so early and so constantly avowed by the Fathers, are here again recog- nized as essential conditions of government; and this is the true definition of a Republic.
With these great representative names to illustrate the American idea of a Republic, I might close this catalogue. Surely this is enoitgh. But there are yet others, whose au- thority cannot be disregarded.
HfTeisthe testimony of that inflexible spirit, who had thought and acted much, Samuel Adams, iu a letterto his kinsman,. John Adams :
" That the sovereignty renidis in theproplf is a po- litical doctrine which I have iieverheurd an American politician scriouHly deny." •***•' We, the piuiilf, is the style of the Federal Constitution. They lulopled it ; and, conformably to it, they dele- gate the exercise of the powers of tfovernmeutto par-
ticular persons, who, after short intervals, resign their powers to the people, and they will reelect them, or appointothers, asthey see fit." — John Adams's Works, vol. vi, p. 421.
Here also is the testimony of another Re- publican, who signed the Declaration of Inde- pendence, Roger Sherman, in a letter to John Adams :
"What especially denominates it a republic is its dependence on Xh^public. or people at large, without any hereditary powers. But it is not of so much im- portance by what appellation the government is dia- tinguished, as to haveit constituted to secure the rights, ■ji/ia advance thehappiness of the community," — Ibid, p. 437.
There also was John Adams himself, who was the least distinct of all the fathers on this question ; but we find in the introduction to his J Defense ofthe American Constitutions apassag« which is full of prophetic meaning. Here it la:
"Thirteen governments, thus founded on the nat%e- ral autliority of the people alone, without a pretense ot miracle or mystery, and which arc destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter o? the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rigJU* of manhind." — /. Adams's ^YorJc«, vol. iv, p. 293.
Here is a plain assertion that our thirteen States were founded "on the natural authority of the people alone,'' and that they were des- tined to spread over all North America.
Here also is a voice from South Carolina, in a speech of Charles Pinckhey, on the adoption of the Constitution :
"Thodoctrine of representation is the fundamental i of a Republic." * * * * "As to the United Netherlands, it is such a confusion of states and assemblies, that I have always been at a loss what species of government to term it. According to my idea of the word, it is not a Republic ; f- r I con- ceive it as indispensable in a Republic that all author- ity should flow from the people." * * * * " A Republic is -where the people at large, either col- lectively or by representation, form the Legisla- ture."— Elliot's Debates, vol. iv, pp. 32G-328.
Colonel Mason, of Virginia, who always spoke with so much point, said in the National Convention :
"The true idea was that every man having evidence of atlaclnnoiit to and permanent common interest with the sorioty, ought to share in all its riglits aiKl duties."— A7/io<'« Debutes, vol. v, p. 397.
Again we have a plain recognition of the rev- olutionary idea. Here, also, is another voice from Virginia. I quote the words of a Virijinitv writer on government — John Tsylor, of Caro- line : " r
"The end of this guarantee is 'a republican fbrm of govcrumont.' The meaning of this expression is not so unsettled here as in other countries, because wo agree in one descriptive character as essential to the existence of a republican fnrm of trovci nment. This is rcjiresentaiion. We do nut ailniit ti (iovem- mrnttitbe even in itsorigin repubtiean, nnhxK it in intti- tuteil by representation; nor do we allow il to be SO, unless Its legislation is also f undcil uiiou rciirc-enta- t\on."—ConstrHclioii Construed, by Jidin Taylor, of Caroline, p. 312.
I close this arra)% illustrative of opinion, by the words of Daniel Webster, iu harmony with the rest:
"Now, fellow-citizens, I will venture to state in a few words what 1 take these American principles in
21
substance to be. They consist, as I think, in the first place, in the establishment of popular governments on the basis of representation." * « * * '* Th is reprtscntutioii in to be made as equal as circum- aiancesiciU allow."— Webster's Works, vol. ii, p. GUI.
Thus, at every stage, from the opening, when Otis announced the master principle, "Taxa- tion without representation is Tyranny," all along to Daniel Webster, we find "represen- tation " an essential element in the American detinition of a republican Government.
PUBLIC ACTS OF THE STATES.
(4.) Fi'om authoritative opinions I now pass to public acts, which testify to the true idea of Republican Government. These public acts are of two different classes : first, by the United States, in their collective character ; and sec- ondly, by the States individually.
Looking at the States, in their collective char- acter, we shall find that at the adoption of the National Constitution they had refused to rec- ognize any exclusion from the elective fran- chise on account of color or race. The Fathers knew too well the requirements of a Republican Government to sanction any such exclusion. Recognizing Slavery as a transitory condition, which would soon cease, they threw over it a careful oblivion ; but they were none the less jealous of the rights of all freemen. The slave did not pay taxes, and, so far as he was a person and not property, he was a part of the family of his master, by whom he was represented,_ so that the commanding principle of the Revolution was not disturbed in his case. But, on becom- ing a freeman, the slave stepped at once within the pale of taxation, and therefore necessarily of representation, -since the two were insepa- rable. And this consideration was the guide to our fathers.
The Congress of the Confederation refused point blank to insert the word "white"' in the Articles of Confederation. The question came up 2-5th June, 1778, on these words: "The FFvEE ixHABiTAXTS of cach of thcsc States (pau- pers, vagabonds and fugitives from justice ex- cepted) shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States." The delegates from South Carolina moved, in behalf of their State, to limit this guarantee to "free white inhabitants." On the question of inserting the word "white," eleven States voted ; two in favor of the insertion ; one was divided ; and eight were against it. South Carolina, not disheartened, made another at- tempt, by moving to add, after the words "the several States," the further clause, "according to the law of such States respectively for the gov- ernment of their own free WHiTE.inhabitants," thus seeking again to limit the operation of this guarantee. This proposition was also voted down by the same decisive majority of eight to three. And thus did our fathers testify to the right of representatioq without distinction of
color. On other occasions, for successive years, they constantly gave the same testimony.
By two different acts of the Confederation, one in April, 1783, and another in April, 1784, the war expenses were apportioned among the several States, according to "the number of white and other free citizens and inliabltants,^' thus positively embracing colored persons. In the Act for the temporary government of the territory " ceded or to be ceded" to the United States, dated April 23, 1784, and drawn by Jef- ferson, the voters are declared to be the " free males of fuUage," without distinction of color. In the famous Ordinance for the government of the Northwestern Territory, drawn by Nathan Dane, of Massachusetts, adopted by the Con- federation July 13, 1787, and then reenacted by our Congress, after the adoption of the Con- stitution, the voters are declared to be "free male inhabitants of full age" ^ — again without distinction of color. Then came successive acts of Congress for the government of Ten-itories, where the rule in the Ordinance for th& north- western Territories was followed, and there was no distinction of color. If this rule was changed, it was only when the partakers in the Revolu- tion and the authors of the Constitution bad ceased to exercise their influence over public affairs. The testimony of the Fathers was con- stant, and it is only of this that I speak on this occasion.
Turning from the States collectively, and looking at them individually, we shall find the same testimony. By tlio^ Constitution of New Hampshire, at the time of the adoption of the National Constitution, the suffrage was vested in "every male inhabitant of each town and parish" with certain qualifications, but without any exclusion on account of color. By the Con- stitution of Massachusetts, the suffrage was vested in "every male person" with certain specified qualifications, but without distinction of color. Rhode Island, at the adoption of the Constitution, was under her original colonial charter, which provided for elections by "the major part of the freemen of the respective towns or places," without distinction of color. Connecticut was likewise under her original colonial charter, which required that the voters should have " maturity in years, quiet and peaceable behavior, a civil conversation and forty shillings freehold or forty pounds personal estate," without distinctiorf of color. By the Constitution of New York, the snliVa^c was vested in " every male inhabitant of full age," with certain specified qualilications, but with- out distinction of color. By ihc Constitution of New .Jersey it was vested in •• all inhabitants ofthis colony of fulhige," witli certain specified qualifications, but without distinction of color. By the Constitution of Pennsylvania it was vested in "every freeman of the full ago of twenty-one years," with certain specilied qual- ifications, but without distinction of color. By
22
fhe Declaration of Rights prefixed to the Con- stitution of Delaware, it was announced that "every freeman, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest, with an attach- ment to the community, hath the right of suf- frage," without distinction of color. By the Constitution of Maryland the suffrage was vested in ''all freemen above twenty-one years of age," with certain specified qualifications, but without distinction of color. I3v the Dec- laration of Rights prefixed to the' Constitu- tion of Virginia it was announced that "all MEx having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest, with an attachment to the community, have the right of the suffrage," without distinction of color. And it is added that ' ' they cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public use, withovt their men con- sent or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not in like manner assented for the public good." By the Constitution of North Carolina the suf- frage was vested in "all freemen of the age of twenty-one years," with certain specified qualifications, and without distinction of color ; and this rule continued down to 1835, when the Constitution was amended or rather, let me say perverted. That eminent citizen, Chief Justice Gaston, of North Carolina, in giving judgment at a later day, said: " It is a matter of univer- sal noioricAyihai free persons, loithout regard to color, claimed and exercised the franchise.^' (4 Dev. and Battle, Rep. 35. Tlie State r.";. Manual. ) By the Constitution of Georgia in 1790 the suffrage waa vested in "citizens and in- habitants," with certain specified qualifications, but without distinction of color. To these States I may add Tennessee, which was carved out of North Carolina, and followed her benign ex- ampje. Her Constitution, which was adopted in 17'J6, vested the suffrage in " every freeman of twenty-one years," with certain qualifica- tions, but without distinction of color; and this rule continued down to the perversion of the Constitution in 1834. Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, once Postmaster General, is re- ported to have said thathe was originally elected to Congress ))y the votes of colored persons, and I have heard Mr. John Bell make the same confession with regard to himself.
It only remains to speak of South Carolina, the early and constant marplot of republican institutions, where, by the Constitution, the suf- frage was vested "in every free while man, and no other person," with certain specified quali- ficalions.^ This was the only Stal(>, among the original Tliirtcen, unless (ieorgia be grouped with South Carolina, whicli at that time allowed :i discriniinalioii. founded on color, to liud a place in its Constitution. It was the only Stale which. afU'r uniting in a National Declaration, that "all men are created equal," openly and auda- ciously commenced the example t)f a"wbite man'sGovernment." Thisapostateidea, which
hassince played such a part as a disturber of the national peace, was then and there born, as the opposite idea was born in Massachusetts, under the inspiring words of James Otis. And the other States, in their constitutions, followed this patriot Voice. They spoke of ' ' persons, " "in- habitants," "freemen," or better still "men," without any prefix of ' ' white. ' ' Color was not mentioned. But even in South Carolina, which introduced the discreditable tyranny into her Constitution, this exclusion was more apparent than real. In point of fact, even as late as 1790, when the first census was taken, there were in this State only one thousand eight hun- dred and one free colored citizens. Of course their exclusion was wrong, mean, and unre- publican ; but I do not assert that it was on such^a scale as to justify the interference of the Nation to reform it, especially where the-e was no lapse of the State Government. On the other hand its sufferance cannot be interpreted into a waiver of the principles for which the Revolution was fought.
Such are the public acts of the States collect- ively and individually at the time of the adop- tion of the National Constitution, illustrating with rare harmony the American idea of a Re- public, and testifying against any exclusion founded on color. Add to these that the Na- tional Constitution, which carefully excepts "Indians not taxed'' from the basis of repre- sentation, pays an open homage to the princi- ple that there can be no taxation without repre- sentation. Add then, that it expressly founds the Government upon "the people," not only in the preamble, which begins " we, the people," but also in providing that the House of Repre- sentatives shall be ' ' chosen by the people of the several States." Add also the crowning fiict, that it recognizes no distinction of color— that it treats all with the same impartial justice — and who are you, sir, who will dare to ibict into this Magna Carta an oligarchical idea which can find no sanction in its republican text?
AMEIUCAX UEFIXITIOX OF A REPUBLICAX GOVERN- MEXT.
And here T bring this part of the argument to a close. We have seen the origin of the con- troversy which led to the Revolution, when Otis, with such wise hardihood, insisted upon Equal Rights, and then giving practical effect to the lofty demand, sounded the battle-cry that "Taxation without Representation is Tyr- anny." We have followed this controversy ia its anxious stages, where these ]n-incip!es were constantly asserted and ron.stantly denied, until it broke forth in battle; we have seen these principles adopted as the very frontlet of the Ke]mbfic, when it assumed its place in the fam- ily of nations, and then again when it ordained itsConstitulion ; we have seen them avowed and illustrated in memorable words by the greatest authorities of the time; lastly, we have seen them embodied in public acts of the States col-
23
ledtively and individually ; and now, out of this concurring, cumulative, and unimpeachable testimony, constituting a speaking aggregation absohitely without precedent, I offer you the American definition of a Republican form of government. It is in vain that you cite phi- losophers or publicists, or the examples of for- mer history. Against these I put the early and constant postulates of the Fathers, the corpo- rate declarations of the Fathers, the avowed opinions of the Fathers, and the public acts of the Fathers, all with one voice proclaiming: first, that all men are Equal in rights ; and sec- ondly, that Governmentsderivetheirjustpowers from the consent of the governed ; and here is the American idea of a Republic, which must be adopted in the interpretation of the National Constitution. You cannot reject it. As well reject the decalogue in determining moral du- ties, or as well reject the multiplication table in determining a question of arithmetic. _
Counter to this irresistible conclusion there can be only one suggestion having any seeming plausibility, and this is founded on the conteru- porary recognition of slavery. On this point it is enough if I remind you, first, that our fathers did not recognize slavery as a permanent part of our system, but treated it as exceptional and transitory, while they concealed it from view by words which might mean something else ; secondly, that the slave was always regarded, legally and politically, as a part of the family of his master, according to the nomenclature of Blackstone's Commentaries, which were much read at the time, where master and servant were grouped with husband and wife, parent and child, and, as in the case of wife and child, the slave icas represented by the head of the famil)/, who also paid the taxes on his account, so that, in his case, the cardinal principle of the Revo- lution, associating representation and taxation together, was not in any respect violated ; and thirdly, that by the acts of the Continental Congress, and by all the State Constitutions, except that of South Carolina, all distinction of color was discarded in determining the elect- ive franchise, and that one of the authorized expounders of the National Constitution at the time Alexander Hamilton announced in the Federalist, as if anticipating the very question now before us, if the laws were to restore
THE RIGHTS WHICH HAVE BEEX TAKEX AWAY, THE NEGROES COULD NO LONGER BE REFUSED AN EQUAL SHARE OF REPRESENTATION WITH OTHER
INHABITANTS. Such was the undci-stiinding. and such was the promise at the adoption of the Constitution. Such was the declared mean- ing of oar fathers, according to the contempo- rary testimo.-:y of Alexander Hamilton. Thore- fore, while confessing sorrowiully their incon- sistency in recognizing slavery, and throwing over their shame the mantle which the son of Noah threw over his father, we must reject eveiy argument or inference on this account
against the true idea of a Republic, which is none other than where all the citizens have an equalvoicein the Government. As Washington, by his august example, gave to mankind a new idea of political greatness, so did the Fathers, by their great e.xample, give to mankind a new idea of government. Do you ask again for authority? I offer it to you. It is an early Dictionary of James Otis, Samuel Adams, Pat- rick Henry, and Benjamin Franklin. It is in the Lexicon of the Revolution. It is in the Thesaurus of our national history. It is in the Collection of Public Acts. This new idea was the great discovery of our fathers. Rob them of this, and you take from them their highest title to gratitude. Columbus, venturing into an unknown sea, discovered a New World of space ; but our fathers, venturing likewise, discovered a New World of public duty. It is for us, their children, not to forget their discovery.
RECENT FRENCH DEFINITIONS.
After our own country, there is one other only which can help in determining what is a Repub- lican form of government, and this is France. There, as in the United States, a Republic has been declared. If in the former country it failed to be maintained ; still the generous ef- fort has been made, and we have its testimony. This is explicit. As the Provisional Govern- ment in 1848 proclaimed the Republic, it was careful, after proper deliberation to proclaim at the same time "universal suffrage," which Lamartine, standing on the steps of the Hotel de Ville, and speaking in the name of tlie gov- ernment, said was "the first truth and only basis of every National Republic." (Gamier Pag^s, Histoiredela Revolution., torn, i, p. 328.) The proclamation of the Republic M'as itself submitted to the vote of "all the citizens;" and on the terms of this submission another member of the Government, of solid sense and perfect fidelity, thus expresses himself:
" ]5y these words — nil the citizem — tho PrDvisional (rovoinuicnt intended to consucrato definitively tho funilanuntal principle of democracy; jt intended to prochiiin openly and forever the iualienablo, impre- scriptiliU) ri,i,'ht, inherent in each member of society, to p;ivtici|Kito<lirectlyintho government of his coun- try: it intended to pjt in practice ctfcctuiiUy and loyally tho great principles until then shut up in the domainof tho abstract theories of philosophy." — Jl/ul, torn. V, p. 3-18,
The same person, M. Garnier Pages, who was at once an eminent actor in these scenes and their most authentic historian, thus again dwells on the true idea of a Republic:
" The Republic, that Rovernment of «/i' '»)/ nil where each has his place, hisduty. ami liisright; the llepub- lie, that is Liberty itself, the liberty to do every iu»t and to put forth every tlKuuhf not injurious to an- other: the llepublic, that fraternal ground whcroare admitted all parties, the representatives of the past as well as those of the future, where every intelli- gence, and every association can develop its author- ity."—//jiW, torn, vii, p. 407.
To this authentic testimony of modern France, in harmony with our own country, I add tho definition of a very recent foreign publicist,
24
Nvho. after dwelling on Eqiu-ilityas the idol sen- timent of a Republic, says:
"This shows us the nature and the end of repub- lican government. It is a Government founded on the general interests and eqnAYity."— Block, Dictionnaire ae la Fohtuiuc, article, Jiepublique.
Admirable word.s ! in themselves a definition. And here, before closing this testimony, let me call attention to two authorities, contemporary -with our fethers, which stand apart, one Eng- lish and the other German. The first is that of Dr. Richard Price, the friend of John Adams, who very early appreciated the American Revo- lution, and vindicated it before the world. Here is his idea of good government, compendiouslv expressed :
_ "Lesitimatcgovernment consists only in the domin- ion of L'ouitl Laws m^de with common consent, aud not in the dominion of any man over other men."— j. Adams's Woi-Jm, vol. iv, p. 401.
The German was none other than that great thinker, Emanuel Kant,who, in his speculations on Perpetual Peace, says, that to this end every State should be a Republic, which he defines as follows :
That form of government where every citizen par- ticipates by his representative in the exercise of the legislative power, and especially iu that of deciding on the (luestions of peace and war."— VF/iea<o», ll'is- tory of Law of Nations, p. 751.
The statement of Kant is as simple as Pure Reason, which is the title of his great work. It claims plainly for ''every citizen" a share in the Government; and such is the definition fur- nished )jy this eminent philosopher, whose name, rarely quoted iu politics, is an unim- peachable authority.
REBEL .STATES ARE XOT REPUBLICAN GOVEHN- MEXTS.
Such Is the definition of a Republican form of government. It remains now that we should bring these lapsed States to this touchstone, and see their small title to recognition. Authentic figures are not wanting. The census of 18G0 discloses the population of the States in ques- tion. Hero is the table :
|
States. |
White pop- ulation. |
Colored popula- tion, slave and free, including Indians. |
|
Aiiib.ama |
626.271 321.243 77,747 591,550 ;i.33.901 029,912 2<H.300 826,722 420,K!il 1.017,299 |
430,930 111,307 02,677 465,736 350.546 437.404 362,080 412,403 283,079 183,324 549,019 |
|
Arkansas |
||
|
Florida Geor^'ia Louisiana Mi.ssi.-sippi North Carolina South Carolina Tenne.ssee Texas |
||
|
Virginia |
||
|
6.447,222 | 3,066,110 |
A glance at (his table is enough. Taking the sum total of tlic population in the eleven States, we find G,447,2li2 whites to a,GOG,110 colored
persons ; and you are now to decide, whether in the discharge of your duties under the Con- stitution, and bound to guaranty 'a Republican form of government, you will disfranchise this mighty mass, shutting them out from those EqualRights promised by our fathers, and from all voice in the government of their country. They surpass In numbers, by at least a million, the whole population of the colonies at the time our fathers raised the cry, "Taxation without Representation is Tyranny;" aud noWyou are to decide whether you will strip them of rep- resentation while you subject them to a grind- ing taxation by tariff and excise, acting directly aud Indirectly, which dwarfs into insignificance everything attempted by the British Parliament. Our fathers could not bear a stamp act, iu the making of which they had no voice, and they went forth to battle with the most formidable Power of the globe,.rathor than pay a tax of threepence on tea imposed by a Parliament in which they were not represented. Are you ready, sir, in disregard of this great pvecedent, and in disregard also of all the promises and examples of our past history, to thrust a single citizen out of all representation In the Govern- ment, while you consume his substance with taxation, subject him to stamp acts, compel him to pay a duty of twenty-five cents a pound on tea, and then follow him with your Imposts in all thobusiness of life ? Clearly if you do not recognize his title to representation, you must at least by careful legislation relieve "him from this intolerable taxation. Some of these mil- lions, whom you thrust out, already contribute largely to the public revenue. How. then, can you deny them representation ? Their money is not rejected. Why reject their votes? But if you reject their votes, you cannot take their money. As you can detect no color In their money, you ought to detect no color in their votes.
If looking at these States together the duty of Congress seems clear, it becomes clearer even when we look at them separately. Begin with Tennessee, which disfranchises 283,079 citizens, being more than a quarter of Its whole "people." Thus violating a dislinctlve prin- ciple of republican government, how can this State be recognized as republican ? This ques- tion is easier asked than answered. But Ten- nessee is the least ofienslve on the list. There is Virginia, which disl'rancliises54'J,011> citizens, being more than alhirdof its whole "people." There is Alabama, which disfranchises lotj, 030 citizens, being nearly one half of its whole "people." 'J'here Is Louisiana, which disfran- chises 3.30,54i; citizens, being one half of its whole " people." There is Missi.ssii)iii, which disfranchises 437, 40-1 citizens, being much more than one half of its whole "peoph'." And there is South Carolina, wliicli disfranchises 412.408 eitizens, being nearly two iliirds of Its whole "peoi)le." A Republic Is a ijyramld
25
standing on the broad mass of the people as a base ; but here is a pyramid balanced on its point. To call such a government "repub- lican" is a mockery of sense and decency. A monarch, "surrounded by republican institu- tions.'' whicli at one time was the boast of France, vrould be less offensive to correct prin- ciples, and give more security to Human Righrs.
It is not difficult to classify these States. They are axistocracies or oligarchies. An ar- istocracy, according to the etymology of the word, is the government of the best. An oli- garchy is the government of the few, and is not even an aristocracy, but an abuse of aristocracy, as despotism is the abuse of monarchy. Per- haps these States may be characterized in either way ; and yet the term aristocracy, especially in its origin, has something respectable which cannot be attributed to a combination, whose single distinctive element is the color of the skin.
The eminent publicist, Bodin, in his defini- tion of an aristocracy, says that it exists tchere a smalhr bodi/ of citizens governs the greater, and this definition has been adopted by others, especially by Montesquieu. But this is not sat- isfactory". Hallam, whose judgment is of the highest value, after discussing the merits of this definition, proposes the following most sug- gestive substitute:
"We misht better say, th<at the distinguishing char- acteristic of an aristocracy is the enjoyment of priyi- lesc>^ which are not commnnicrtble to other citizen>i sim- ply bu rin;/lhinfi they can thenifielves do to obtain them." — Hu/lam's Literature of Europe, vol. ii, cap. 4, sec. 52. These words completely characterize the aris- tocracy of aolor ; for such an aristocracy_ is plainly in the enjoyment of privileges, which are not communicable to other citizens, by any- thing they can themselves do to obtain them. To show that our rebel States are aristocra- cies or oligarchies is enough for the present occasion. But we must not forget that, born of Slavery, they have the spirit of that iniquity, so that they are essentially of a low type. Founded on the color of the skin, tlicy are, beyond all question, the most senseless and dis- g-usting of all history. Would j'ou know to what they might incline? Listen to the frank words of the greatest Venetian writer, the famous Father Paul, while he counsels the privileged class, in a state refined by art and elevated by glory, how to use their powers. " If a noble, " ' says' he, "injure a plebeian, justify him by all possible means ; but should that be found quite impossible, punish more in appearance than in reality. If a plebeian insult a noble, punish him with the greatest severity, that the commonalty may know how perilous it is to insult a noble." (Sarpi, Opinione per il perpetno Dominio di Vemzia, p. 13.) Such is the terrible rule laid dov.n in a document, which taught how to make the puwer of Venice perpetual. But this same spirit predominates still in the rebel Stales. It
rages there with more revolting cruelty than it ever raged in Venice. And such is the govern- ment which now claims recognition as " rci»ub- lican."
The pretension thus organized is hateful on another ground. It is nothing less than a Caste, which is at once irreligious and unrepublican. A Caste cannot exist except in defiance of the first principles of Christianity and the first prin- ciples of a llepublic. It is Heathenism in reli- gion and tyranny in government. The Brali rains and the Sudras in India, from generation to generation, have been separated, as the two races are now separated in these States. If a Sudra presumed to sit on a Brahmin's carpet he was punished with banishment. But our recent rebels undertake to play the part of Bramhins, and exclude citizens, with better title than themselves, i'rom essential rights, simply on the ground of Caste, which, according to its Portuguese origin, casta, is only another term for race.
But this pretension is in yet other respects hostile to good government. It is essentially a Monojioly in a couniiy which sets its face against all monopolies as unequal and immoral. If any monopoly deserves unhesitating judg- ment it must be that which absorbs the rights of others and engrosses political power. How vain it is to condeuin the petty monopolies of commerce and then allow this vast, all-embra- cing monopoly of Human Plights.
Clearly, most clearly, and beyond all ques- tion, such a government cannot be considered "republican in form." Call it an Oligarchy, call it an Aristocracy, call it a Caste, call it a Monopoly; but do not call it a Republic.
DUTY OF COXGRESS.
Of course 'such a government can exist only in defiance of the Constitution, and it is the duty of Congress to interfere against it. Pres- ident Johnson, in his annual message, says:
"In case of the usurpation of the irovernmont of a State bv one man or an Oiignrchy,\\ becomes thoduty of the United States to make good the guarautcc to that State of a Republican form of govern^ucnt."
The President forgets to mention an Aristoc- racy, and does not add, what is true, that the authority which must make good the guaran- tee is the sole judge of the exigency. To this end everything centers in Congress whose pow- ers are commensurate with the occasion. In aid of the "guarantee" clause are those other words in the Constitution, providing that Con- gress "shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carry- ing into execution the powers vested in the Government of the United States." Under this ample provision there is a duty to W per- formed, by any means which may soi in l)est. The jurisdiction is complolc and it H_in Con- gress'. If any authority i'or this proposition were needed it would be found in the words of Chief
26
Justice Taney, speaking for the Supreme Court of the United States:
" The fourth scotion of the fourth article of the Con- stitution of the United States provides that the Uni- ted States shall guaranty to every State in the Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and, on the applica- tion of the Legislature or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
"Under this article of the Constitution, it rests with Congress to dec ide tvhat government is th e establish ed- one Ml a State. For, as the Uiiited States guaraiity to each State a Republican government. Congress must neees- aarily decide ichat government is established in the State before it can determine whether it is Republican ornot."—7 Howard Rep. 42, Luther vs. Borden.
In the exercise of this power two courses at least are open. One is to impose an irrepealable condition upon the unrepublican States, requir- ing them, before recognition, to reform their governments to the satisfaction of Congress. The other,_and more direct course, is by Act of Congress, in performance of the "guarantee," and according to the plenary authority "for car- rying into execution the powers vested in the GoYerument of the United States," to provide all needful safeguards in the unrepublican States, and especially t» place the Equal Rights of All undor the guardianship of National Law.
Against the exercise of this power there are btft two arguments. First, that the Constitu- tion, by providing that "the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature," lias reserved to each State tJie power of excluding citizens merely on ac- count of color, even though constituting more than a majority of the population. The other argument is that, since certain States at the North have disfranchised the few colored per- sons within their borders, the United States are so far constrained by this examjile that they cannot protect the millions of freedmen in the rebel States from disfranchisement, and cannot save the Republic from the peril of such a crying injustice. I know not which of these two argu- ments is tlie least reasonable, or ratlier, which is the most reprehensible. They are Ijoth un- reasonable and 1)oth reprehensible. They looth do violence to the true principles of the Con- stitution, if not to common sense.
It is true that, according to the text of the Constitution, each State may determine the "qualifications" of electors, but this can have no application to an exigency like the present, where, at the close of a nrolonged and desper- ate rebellion, the United States are obliged to guaranty to certain States a republican form of government. In the performance of this "guarantee," the United States can look only rA the essential elements of such a government ; nor more nor less ; without regard to State laws. J5iit I am not willing to rest the argu- ment hen>. Kvon assumingtliatthere has been no lapse of State governments, so as to bring the "guarantee" into operation— assuming that
we are in a condition of assured peace — then I utterly deny that the power to determine the " qualifications' ' of electors can give any power to disfranchise actual citizens. It is "qualifi- cations" only which the States can determine, meaning, by this limited term, those require- ments of personal condition which are regarded as essential to the security of the franchise. These ".qualifications" cannot be in their na- ture permanent or insurmountable. Color can- not be a "qualification," any more than size or the quality of the hair. A permanent or insur- mountable "qualification" is equivalent to a deprivation of the suffrage — in other words, it is the tyranny of taxation without representa- tionj and this tyranny, I insist, is Rot intrusted to any State of this Union. This is the very ground taken by Mr. Madison, when, defend- ing the National Constitution in the Virginia convention, he said :
"Some States might regulate the elections on the principle ol Equality, and others might regulate them otherwise." « * * * "Should the people of any State, by any means, be deprived of the right of suffrage, it was judged proper that it shouldbe remedied by the General Government." * * s= * "If the elections be regulated properly bvthe State Legisla- tures, the congressional control will very probably never be exercised. This power ai.pears to be satis- factory and unliJ<cly to be abused as any part of the Constitntion."— Elliot's Debates, vol. iii, p. 347.
With these decisive words from one of the chief framers of the Constitution, backed by the reason of the case, I dismiss this objection to the little consideration it deserves. And I dismiss to the same indifference that other ob- jection, that our hands are tied because certain Northern States have done a wrong and mean thing. Pray, sir, how can the failure of these States affect the power of Congress in a sreat exigency under the Constitution of the United States? But duty on the present occasion is identical with power. No matter if this power has been long dormant, it is none the less vital. It is like that slumbering statute, which Cicero describes as a sword in the scabbard, tanquam gladiiis in vagina. It only remains that it should be drawn forth.
_ This duty has been fortified by the Constitu- tional Amendment, which, after providing for the abolition of slavery, empowers Congress to "enforce" it by "appropriate legislation," thus heaping Ossa upon Pelion. Clearly under these words Congress may do what, in its discretion, seems "appropriate" to this end, and there i.s no power to call its action in question. On this point, the authority of the Supreme Court, in the masterly judgment of Chief Justice Mar- shall, is most explicit:
"The government, which ha^ a right to do an act and has imposed on it the duty of performing that net must, according to the dictates of reason, be allowed to select t he means, and those who conteiKl that it may not select any appronriutr means, that one liarticular mode of eflecting the object is excepted, take upon tliemselves the burden of establishing that cxcen-
''"','•" 1 . *. 1, * •.,*• ..* "^"^ ."'," ''"^' ^^ 'cfT'ti- matc, let it bo within the scope ol the Constitution,
27
andaZ?mean«which are appropriate, which arc plainly adapted to that end, whicli are not prohibited, but con- sist with the letter and spirit ot the Constitution aro Constitutional.--4 Wheaton li. m-i21-McOullouah vs. JBunk of Maryland.
These words of the Chief Justice are reenforced by a kindred declaration from another great authority, Mr. Justice Story, speaking also for the Supreme Court, on an important occasion: "The Constitution unavoidably dealt in frcneral laneuaee It was not intended merely to provide lor the exigencies of a few years, but was to. endure through alonslapseofafres; theeventsot which were locked up in the inscrutable purposes of Frovu eiice. Hence the Constitution leaves it to the legislative power from time to time, to adopt its own means to effectuate legitimate objects."— 1 Wheaton.2i.325; Mar- tinis. Hunter.
Apply these words to the present question, and the concUision is irresistible. Whatever legislation shall seem to Congress "appropri- ate" to "enforce" the abolition of slavery; whatever "means" shall seem "proper to this end. must be within the powers ot Congress under the Constitutional Amendment, lou cannot deny this principle without setting aside those most remarkable judgments which stand as landmarks of constitutional history. But who can doubt that the abolition of the whole Black Code, in all its oligarchical pretensions, civil and political, is "appropriate" to "en- force' ' the abolition of Slavery ? Mark, it you please, the language of this grant. Congress may "enforce" abolition, and nobody can ques- tion the "means" which it thinks best to em- ploy. Let it not hesitate to adopt the "means" which promise to be the most effective. As the occasion is extraordinary, so the ' ' means emploved must be extraordinary.
But" the Senate has already by solemn vote asserted this very jurisdiction. You have, sir, decreed that colored persons shall enjoy the same civil rights as white persons; in other wov(h. that, with regard to civil rights, there shall be no OUgarchy, Aristocracy, Caste, or Monopoly, but that a}^ shall be equal betore the law without distinction of color. And this great decree you have made as "appropriate legislation" under the Constitutional Amend- ment "to enforce" the abolition of slavery. Surely you have not erred in this act. Beyond all question the protection of colored persons in civil rights is essential to complete the abo- lition of slavery ; but the protection of colored persons in political rights is not less essential; and the power is as ample in one case as in the other. In each you legislate for the main- tenance of colored persons in that Liberty which has been so tardily accorded, and the legislation is iust as "appropriate" in one case as in the other. The protection of colored persons in their civil rights by Act of Congress will be a great event. It will be great in itself, it will be greater still, because it establishes the power of Congress, without any further amendment of the Constitution, to protect colored persons in
all their rights, including of course the elective franchise. There are precedents of Congress, as well as of courts, which are landmarks; and this is one of them.
Therefore, as authority for Congress you have two sources in the Constitution itself, first, the guarantee clause, and, secondly, the Constitu- tional Amendment; each sufficient— the two together a twofold sufficiency. To estafelish the Equal Rights of All, no further amendment is needed. The actual text is exuberant. Instead of adding new words, it will be enough if you give to those which exist the natural force which belongs to them. Instead of neglecting them, use them. Instead of supplementing them, in- terpret them. An illustrious magistrate once retorted upon an advocate, who, dissatisfied with a ruling of the court, threatened to burn his books, "You had better read them;" and so would I say now to all who think the Constitution needs amendment, you had better read it. Yes, sir, read it in the principles pro- claimed by the Fathers before the Revolution ; read it in the declarations of the Fathers when they took their place as a .Republic ; read it in the avowed opinions of the Fathers ; read it in the Public Acts of the Fathers ; and in all this beaming light you will discern its true meaning. Then again read it in that other light which, as from" another sun, newly risen at mid-day, streams from the obligation of Congress to ' ' enforce' ' the abolition of slavery. And then asiain read it in the glowing illumination of the wlir. But, in whichever light you read it, you will find always the same irresistible meaning. Even if the text were doubtful, the war makes it clear. The victory which overthrew slavery has carried with it all those glosses and con- structions by which this wrong was originally fastened upon the Constitution. For generations the Constitution has been interpreted for Sla- very. From this time forward it must be in- terpreted, in harmony with the Declaration of Independence, so that Human Rights shall al- ways prevail. The promises of the Fathers must be sacredly fulfilled. This is the commanding rule, superseding all other rules. This is one of the great victories of the war— perhapsthe greatest. It is nothing less than the Emancipa- tion of the Constitution itself.
THK BALLOT, THE ONLY SUFFICIENT Gr.4.U.\.NTEE.
Mr. President, such is the testimony of his- tory, authority, and Constitution, which binds the judgment on this occasion, leaving no al- ternative. Thus far, I have done liltle but bring the diversified testimony together and weave it into one body. It is not I who speak. I am nothing. It is the cause, whose voice I am, which speaks to you. But there an- yet other things which, even at this late hour, crave to be said. And here, after this long review, I am brought back to more general considera- tions, and end as I began, by showing the ue-
28
cessity of Enfranchisement for the sake of pub- lic Security and Public Faith. I plead now for the ballot, as the Great Guarantee ; and the only Sufficient Guarantee — being in itself peace- maker, reconciler, schoolmaster, and protector — to which we are bound by every necessity and every reason ; and I speak also for the good of the States lately in rebellion, as well as for the glory an^ safety of the Republic, that it may be an example to mankind.
Let me be understood. What I especially ask is impartial suffrage, which is, of course, embraced in universal suffrage. What is uni- versal is necessai'ily impartial. For the pres- ent, I simply insist that all shall be equal before the law, so that, in the enjoyment of this right, there shall be no restriction which is not equally applicable to all. Any further question, in the nature of "qualification," belongs to another stage of the debate. And yet I have no hesitation in saying that uni- versal suffrage is a universal right, subject only to such regulations as the safety of ^ciety may require. These may concern (1) age, (2) character, (3) registration, (4) residence. N^o- body doubts that minors maybe excluded, and so, also, persons of infamous life. Registra- tion and residence are both prudential re- quirements for the safeguard of the ballot-box against the Nomads and Bohemians of politics, and to compel the exercise of this franchise ■where a person is known among his neighbors and friends. Education also, may, under cer- tain circumstances, be a requirement of pru- dence, especially valuable in a Republic, where so much depends on the intelligence of the peo- ple. These temporary restrictions do not in any way interfere with the right of suffrage, for they leave it absoluteli/ accessible to all. Even if im- pediments, they are such as may be easily over- come. At all events, thc}' are not in any sense insurmountable, and this is the essential re- quirement of republican institutions. No mat- ter under what depression of poverty, in what depth of obscurity, or with what diversity of complexion you have been born, you are, nev- ertheless, a citizen — the peer of every oilier cit- izen, and the ballot is your inalienable right.
'I'lie ballot is peacemalcer, and, are we not told. Blessed are the peacemakers? High among the Beatitudes let it be placed, for there- it belongs. Deny it, and the freedman will be the victim of a perpetual warfare. In ceasing to be a slave he only l)ccoraes a sacrifice. Grant it, and he is admitted to those Equal Rights wliicli allow no sacrifice. Plutarch records that the wise man of Alliens charmed the people by saying that Eqiialitij causes no War, and "bolh the rich and poor repeated it." And so master and slave will yet enjoy the transforming power of this principle'. The iimster will recognize the new citizen. The slave will staiid with tranquil self-respect in the presence of the master. Brule force dis- I
appears. Distrust is at an end. The master is no longer a tyrant. The freedmen is no longer a dependent. The ballot comes to him in his depression, and says, " Use me and be elevated." It cbmes to him in his passion, and says, "Use me and do not lieht." It comes to him in his daily thoughts, filling him with the strength and glory of manhood.
The ballot is reconciler. Next after peace is reconciliation. But reconciliation is more than peace. It is concord. Parties that have been estranged are brought into harmony. They learn to live together. They learn to work together. They are kind to each other, even if it be only as the Arab and his horse ; and this mutual kindness is a mutual advantage. Unquestionably, the ballot promotes this great boon, because it brings all into natural reL.tions of justice, without which reconciliation is a vain thing. Do you wish to see harmony truly prevail, so that industry, society, government, civilization, may all prosper, and the Republic may wear a crown of true greatness? Then do not neglect the ballot.
The ballot is schoohnaster. Reading and writing are of inestimable value, but the ballot teaches what these cannot teach. It teaches manhood. Especially is it important to a race whose manhood has been denied. The work of redemption cannot be complete if the ballot is left in doubt. The freedman already knows his friends by the unerring instinct of the iieart. Give him the ballot, and he will be educated into the princij)lcs of government. Deny him the ballot, and he will continue an alien in knowledge as in rights. His claim is excep- tional, as your injustice is exceptional. For generations you have shut him out from all education, making it a crime to teach him to read for himself the Book of Life. Let not the tyrann} of the past be an apology for any further exclusion. Prisoners for a long time immured in dungeons are sometimes blinded as they come forth into the light of day ; but this is no reason for continued imprisonment. To every freedman the ballot is the light of day.
The ballot is protector. Perhaps, at the present moment, this is its highest function. Slavery has ceased in name ; but this is all. The old masters still assert an inhuman power, and now by positive statutes seek to bind the freed- man in new chains. Let this conspiracy pro- ceed unchecked, and the freedman Avill be more nnhaiipy than the early Puritan, who, s"('king liberty of conscience, escaped iVomtiie "lords bishops" only to fall under the " tords elders." "J'hc master will still be master under another name, as according to Milton,
" New presbyter is but old priest writ larsc." Serfdom or apprenticeship is slavery in an- other guise. To save the freedman from this tyranny, with all its accumulated oiitrage, is
29
your solemn duty. For this we are now devi- sing guarantees ; but, believe mc, the only suf- ficient guarantee is the ballot. Let the lieed- man vote, and he will have inhinisclf under the law a constant, ever-present, sell-protecting power. The armor of citizenship will be his best security. The ballot will be to him sword and buckler — a sword with which to pierce his ene- mies, and a buckler on which to receive tlieir assault. Its possession alone will be a terror and a defense. The law, which is the highest reason, boasts that every man's house is his castle ; but the freedman can have no castle without the ballot. When the master kno vvs that he may be voted down, he will know that he must be iust, and everything is contained in justice. The ballot is like charity, which never faileth, and without which man is only as sound- ing brass or a tinkling cymbal. The ballot is the one thing needful, wUhout which rights of testimony and all other rights will be no better than cobwebs which the master will break through with impunity. To him who has the ballot all other things shall be given— protec- tion, opportunity, education, a homestead. The ballot is like the Horn of Abundance, out ol which overflow rights of every kind, with corn, cotton, rice, and all the fruits of the earth. _ Or better still, it is like the hand of the body, with- out which man, who is now only a little lower than the angels, musthave continued only alittle above the brutes. We are fearfully and won- derfully made ; but as is the hand in the work of civilization, so is the ballot in the work of government. "Give me the ballot and I can move the world," may be the exclamation of the race still despoiled of this right. There is nothing which it cannot open with almost fab- ulous power, like that golden mistletoe, offshoot of the sturdy oak, which, in the hands of the classical adventurer, unclosed the regions of an- other Avorld, and like that golden bough, it is renewed as it is used: " One plucked away, a second branch you see Shoot forth in gold and glitter from the tree. If I press these illustrations, it is only that I may bring home to your minds that supreme efficacy, which cannot be exaggerated. Though simple in character, there is nothing the ballot .cannot accomplish; like that homely house- hold lamp in Arabian story, which, at the call of its possessor, evoked a spirit, who did all things, from the building of a palace to the rock- ing of a cradle, and filled the air with an invis- ible presence. But it is as protector that it is of immeasurable power— like a fifteen-inch Columbiad pointed from a Monitor. Ay, sir, the ballot is the Columbiad of our political life, and every citizen who has it is a full-armed Monitor.
Hav-ing pleaded for the freedman, I now plead for the Republic ; for to each alike the ballot is a neccsaiUj. It is idle to expect^ any- true peace while the freedman is robbed of this
transcendent right and left a prey to thatycPige- ance which is ready to wreak upon him the disappointment of defeat. The country, sym- pathetic with him, will be in a condition of per- petual unrest. With him it will sufferaud with him alone can it cease to suffer. Only through him can you redress the balance of our politi- cal system and assure tlie safety of patriot cit- izens. Only through him can you save the national debt from the inevitable repudiation which awaits it when recent rebel9»in conjunc- tion with Northern allies once more bear sway. H'; is our^est guarantee. Use him. He was i once your fellow-soldier ; he has always been I your fellow-man. If he was willing to die for the Republic he is surely good enough to vote. And now that he is ready to uphold the Repub- lic, it will be madness to reject him. Had he voted originally, the acts of secession must have failed. Treason would have been voted down. You owe this tragical war and the debt now fastened upon the country to the denial of this right. Vacant chairs in once happy homes, in- numerable gvaves, saddened hearts, mothers, fathers, wives, sisters, brothers, all mourning lost ones, the poor now ground by a taxation they had never known before, all testily against that injustice l)y which the present freedman was not allowed to vote. Had he voted there would have been peace. If he votes now there will be peace. Without this you must have a standing army, which is a sorry substitute for justice. Before you is the plain alternative of the ballot-box or the cartridge box ; choose ye betv/een them.
Reason too in every way and with every voice cries out in unison with necessity. All poli- cies, all expediencies, all economies take up the cry. Nothing so impolitic as wrong ; noth- ing so inexpedient as tyranny ; nothing so bttle economical as the spirit of Caste. Justice is the highest policy, the truest expediency, and the most comprehensive economy. In this in- spiration act. Do you wish to save the national credit, now imperiled by fatal injustice, and especially to secure gold as the national cur- rency? Then do not let the question of Equal Rights disturb the country with its volcanic throes. Yon complain that labor is unorgan- ized and that the cotton crop has failed. Do you wish labor to smile and cotton to grow ? Then sow the land vs-ith Human Rights and en- circle it round about with justice. The freed- man will not, cannot work, while you deny his rights. Cotton will not, cannot grow in such an atmosphere. It is absurd to expect it._ In using the freedman as you now do you imitate those barbarous Irish wlio insisted upon plow- ing by the horse's tail, until an Act of Par- banient intcrfere'I '-0 require plowing by har- ness. Tlie inlinite folly must be corrected anion"- us, if for no higlier reason than because it is unprofitable. But it is contrary to nature, and on this account renders the whole social
30
system insecure. Where Human Rights are set at naught there can be no tranquillity except fliat of force, which is despotism. This most reasonable conclusion is sustained by the phi- losophy of history, which, speaking "by one of its oracles, the great Italian Vico tells us most sententiously that "nothing out of its natural state can either easily subsist or last long." Iruer words were never uttered as a statement of philosophy or as a warning to injustice en- acted into law.
GOOD AXD GLORY OF THE REPUBLIC.
_ Mr. President, already I have taken too much time, and still the great theme, in its various and multitudinous relations, continues to open before us. At each step it rises in some new aspect— assuming every shape of interest and ot duty— -now with voice of command and then with voice of persuasion. The national se- curity, the national faith, the good of the freed- man, the concerns of business, agriculture, jus- tice, peace, reconciliation, obedience to God- such are some of the forms it takes. In the name of all these, I speak to-day, hoping to do something for my country, and especially for that unhappy portion which has been arrayed in arms against us. The people there are my fel- low-citizens, and gladly would I hail them, if they would permit it, as no longer a " section," no longer ''the South," but an integral part of the Republic— under a Constitution which knows no North and no South and cannot tol- ei-ate any "sectional" pretensions. Gladly do I offer my best efforts in all sincerity for their welfare. But I see clearly that there is noth- ing in the compass of mortal power so impor- tant to them in every respect, morally, politi- cally, and economically— that there is nothing with such certain promise to them of beneficent results— that there is nothing so sure to make their land smile with industry and fertility as the decree of Equal liights which I now invoke. Let the decree go forth to cover them with bless- ings, sure to descend upon their children in successive generations. They have given us war; we give them peace. They have raged against us in the name of Slavery. Wo send them back the benediction of Justice for all. They menace hate ; we offer in return all the sacred charities of country together with ob- livion of the past. This is our " Measure for Measure." 1 his is our retaliation. This is our only revenge.
AH the omens are with the Republic which must yet win its sublimest triumphs. 'J'iniid or perverse counsels may postpone the gladsome consummation ; but the contest now begun can end only when slavery is completely trans- formed by a metamorphosis, which shall sub- stitute Justice for Jnjuslice, Riches for Poverty, and Rcauty for Deformity. J'^rom history wo learn, not only tin; Past, but the Future. Jiy the study of what has been we know what must
be, according to unerring law. Call it, if yoa please, the logic of events, and infer the inev- itable conclu.sion. Or call it, if you please, the Rule of Three, and from the results of certain forces determine the proportionate results of increased forces. There can be no mistake in the answer. And so it is plain that the Equal i;ights of All will be established. Amid all seeming vicissitudes the work goes on. Soon or late the final vietory will be won. I believe soon. Speeches cannot stop it; crafty machin- ations cannot change it. Against its irresisti- ble movement politicians are as impotent as those old conjurors, who imagined that, '•By rhymes they could pull down full soon, i"rom lofty sky the wading moou."
These verses, which shine on the black-letter page of the great lawyer, Sir Edward Coke, aptly describe the incantations of our day to pull down Justice from her lofty sky. It can- not be done. In this conviction I can observe \yhat comes to pass without losing faith. I can listen with composure to arguments which ought not to be made, and I can see with equal coln- posure how individual opinions swing between Congress and the President. It is not to the oscillations of the pendulum that we look for the measure of time, but to the face of the pub- lic clock and the striking of the church bell. The indications of that clock and the striking ot that bell leave no room for doubt.
In the fearful tragedy now drawing to a close there is a destiny, stern and irresistible as that ot the Greek Drama, which seems to master all that IS done, hurrying on the death of Sla- very and Its whole brood of sin. There is also a Christian Providence which watches this bat- tle for ri,2:ht, caring especially for the poor and downtrodden who have no helper. The freed- man still writhing under cruel oppression now lifts his voice to Go(l the avenger. It is for ns to save ourselves from righteous judgment, ^ever with impunity can you outrage human nature. Our country, which is guilty still, it; paying still the grievous penalty. Therefore by every motive of self-preservation we are summoned to be just. And thus is the cause associated mdissolubly with the national life.
Rut 111 saving the Republic we elevate it. In overthrowing an oppressive injustice we give full
SCOl" '"''-■•'
l^^]]': *" ""^ pnnciples of our government and tulfili that " Idea of a perfect Commonwealth," which has entered into the visions of philoso- phy and poetry. " I am all that has been, that IS, and that shall be, and none among mortals has hitherto lifted my veil;" such was the enigma cut on the pavement of the temple of Minerva. For ages it remained unanswered: but the answer is now at hand. 'The Republic is all that has been, that is, and that shall be; and It IS your duty to lift the veil. To do less than this were a failure, for such was the aspi- ration and promise of the Fathers when they as- sumed their first vows in the family of nations.
31
To do this will fix the example of American Institutions. So long as slavery endured, it ■was impossible ; so long as a Black Code, the wretched counterpart of slavery, endures in any form, it is impossible. To attain this idea we must proclaim the rule of Justice. Slavery thus far has been the very pivot, round which the Republic has revolved, while all its policy at home and abroad has radiated from this ter- rible center. Hereafter the Equal Rights of All will take the place of Slavery, and the Re- public will revolve on this glorious pivot, whose infinite, 4ar- reaching radiations will be the liap- piness of the Human Family. There is nothing that the imagination can picture which will not be ours. Where justice is supreme nothing can be wanting. There will be room for every business and for every charity. The fields will nod with increase ; industry will be cpiickened t.ounimagined success, and life itself will be raisea lu'cv uigiiAv co^xrioo Tkor-o ^^ai be mat repose which comes from harmony, and also that simplicity which comes from one prevail- ing law, both of which are essential to the idea of the Republic. Our country will cease to be a patchwork where different States vary in the rights they accord, and will become a Plural Unit with one Constitution, one Libert}', and one Universal Franchise. With all these things the Republic will be a synonym for justice and peace, for these things will be inseparable from its name. In our longings we need not repair to philosophy or poetry. Nor need we go back to the memorable sage, who declared that the best government was where every citizen rushed to the defense of the humblest as if he were the State, for all this will be ours. Nor need we go back to that patriot king, in ancient tragedy, who, inspired by the Republican idea, exclaimed :
"The people I made supreme, And on this city tcith an equal right For all to vote, its freedom have bestowed."
Here at last, among us, all this will be assured, and the Republic will be of such renown and virtue that all at home or abroad who bear the American name may exclaim with more than Roman pride, "lam an American citizen,"' ""'1 if danger approaches, they may repeat the •'*h more than Roman confidence, ",1 - +!tle will be a suflicient
•mine if all this ise is before you '" '-• o mity, infinite as
human aspn-a... Uhc vision of a
Republic. Do not turn i„.,..^ from it. Vindi- cate the great cause, 1 intreatyou, by the sup- pression of all oligarchical pretensions and the establishment of those Equal Rights, without which Republican Government is a name only, and nothing more. Strike at the Black Code,
as you have already struck at the Slave Code. There is nothing to choose between them. Strike at once ; strike hard. You have already proclaimed Emancipation ; proclaim Enfran- chisement also. And do not,stultlfy yourselves by setting at naught the practical principle of the Fathers, that all just government stands only on the consent of the governed, and its insep- arable corollary, that taxation ■witliout repre- sentation is tijranini. What was once true is true forever, although we may for a time lose sight of it, and this is the case with those im- perishable truths to which you have been, alas! so indifferent. Tims far the work is only half clone. See that it is finished. Save the freed- man from the outrage which is his daily life. As a slave he was " a tool without a soul." If you have ceased to treat him according to this ancient definitio;i, it is only because you treat him even as something less. In your cruel phi- losophy he is only a "cipher," without the protection which the slave sometimes found in the self-interest of the master, or, rather let me say he is only a "cipher" where rights are concerned, but a numeral counted by millions where taxes are to be paid. The freedman is compelled not only to pay taxes; he must fight also, and he must obey the laws ; three things which he cannot escape. But, according to the primal principle of Republican Government, he has an indefeasible right to a voice in de- termining how to be taxed, when to fight, and what laws to obey, all of which can be secured only through the ballot. Thus again, do I re- turn to the same conclusion, which meets us at every point and at every stage, as a command- ment which cannot be disobeyed.
Would you secure all the just fruits of this terrible war and trample out "the Rebellion in its pernicious assumptions, as in its arms? Then do not hesitate ; and this is the last stage of the argument. The Rebellion began in two assumptions, both proceeding from South Carolina : first, the sovereignty of the States, with the pretended right of secession ; and, secondly, the superiority of the white race, with the pretended right of Caste, Oligarchy, and Monopoly, on account of color. The first was often announced in every way. The sec- ond showed itself at the l:)eginning, when South Carolina alone, among the thirteen States, al- lowed her Constitution to be degraded by an exclusion on account of color; but it did not receive an authoritative statement tmtil a later day, when that wicked evangelist, jMr. Calhoun, taking issue witli the Declaration of Independ- ence, audaciously announced in the Senate that to declare all were born free and equal was "the most dangerous of all political errors; and that ithad done more to retard the cause of civilization, and is doing more at present than all other causes combined ; that we now begin to experience the danger of admittingso great an error to have a place in the Declara-
32
tion of Independence." (Calhoun's Speeches, vol. iv, p. 54.) These two assumptions are kindred in efifrontery. All agree that the dogma of State sovereignty must be repelled ; but this is less offensive than that other dogma, having the same origin, that the Declaration of Inde- pendence is "the most dangerous of all polit- ical errors." To repel such an effrontery is not enough ; it must be scorned.
The gospel, according to Calhoun, is only another statement of the imposture, that this august Republic, founded to sustain the rights of Human Nature, is nothing but "a vhite man s Government." The whole assumption is ignoble, utterly unsupported 1)y history, and insulting to the Fathers, while it is offensively illogical and irreligious. It is illogical, inas- much as our fathers, when they declared that all men are created equal, gave expression to a truth of political science, whiob, fi-^i-m tUo no, ture of the case, admits no exception. As an axiom it is without exception ; for it is the essence otf 'an axiom, whether in geometry or morals, to be universal. As an abstract truth it is also without exception, according to the require- ment of such truth. And finally, as a self-evi- dent truth, so announced in the great Declara- tion , it is without exception ; for only such truth can be self-evident. Thus, whether axiom, ab- stract truth, or self-evident truth, it is always universal. But the assumption is not only illogical, it is irreligious, inasmuch as it flies in the face of that living truth which appears twice at the Creation : first, when God said, "Let us make man in our image ;" and, secondly, in the Unity of the race, then divinely appointed, and which appears again in the gospel, when it said, " God that made the world, and all things therein, hath made of one blood all nations of men." According to the best testimony now, the population of the earth — emljracing Cau- casians, Mongolians, Malays, Africans, and Americans — is about thirteen hundred millions, of whom only three hundred and seventy-five millions are "white men," or little less than one fourth, so that, in claiming exclusive rights for "white men," you degrade nearly three- quarters of the Human Family, made in the "imago of God" and declared to be of "one blood," while you sanction a Caste offensive
to religion, an Oligarchy inconsistent with Be- publican Government, and a Monopoly which has the whole world for its footstool.
Against this assumption I protest with mind, soul, and heart. It is false in religion, false in statesmanship, and false in economy. It is an extravagance, which, if enforced, is foolish tyranny. Show me a creature, with erect coun- tenance looking to heaven, made iu the image of God, and I show you a max, who, of what- ever country or race, whether darkened by equatorial sun or blanched by northern cold, is with you a child of the Heavenly Father, and equal with you in all the rights of Hu- man Nature. You cannot deny these rights without impiety. And so has God linked the national welfare with national duty, you cannot deny these rights without peril to the Kopubllc. It is not enough that you have given Liberty. Ry.+he same title that we claim Liberi.v '^*' ."^ claim Equality also. One curtnot be denied without the other. What is Liberty without Equality? What is Equality without Liberty? One is the complement of the other. The two are necessary to round and complete the circle of American citizenship. They are the two lobes of the mighty lungs through which the people breathe the breath of life. They are the two vital principles of a Kepublican Government, without which Government, although repub- lican in name, cannot be remiblican in fact. These two vital principles belortg to those divine statutes which are graven on the heart of Uni- versal Man, even upon the heart of the slave who forgets them, and upon the heart of the master who denies them ; and whether forgotten or denied, they are more enduring than marble or brass, for they share the perpetuity of the Human Family.
The lloman Cato, after declaring his belief in the immortality of the soul, added, that if this were an error, it was an error which he loved. And now, declaring my belief in Lib- erty and Equality as the God-given birthright of all men, let me say, in the same spirit, if this be an error, it is an error which I love; if this be a fault, it is a fault which I shall be slow to renounce ; if this be an illusion, it is an illusion which I pray may wrap the world in its angel if' forms.
X
^ ;-«=.'**u^"*
j Ml
f ft: M
■«. Wj
m m M yf fi
WVi
l-V r*'.?' XVi' i»»o.: .•'^■-' »^^' ,^ V ii • <
fW V'W «* « M *l "^ > i^- /^ «7l/
if \f '-sr W >!if 4^ w # ii '^ -^ .« ,# :'^..--:..-
f i« '^J sif ft >t .*f ,^.
:■ ■;{ "'i -^4 •■4' ?4 ,M n "
■•ii -^4 Mn nM :4y-
■ W^ f( ■■■* '-^^ M m: ^ .
■ if; W I «l frf i^'
W .# ITS :i*M.5«
ii if ,*f:a5 :iS <« n
m..Kj'
-i ItM
f'MM
i/:r.c Wj
^■. it ^'^ f \ ■■' 4
|
^ ■■ |
|
|
^^H ^^H ^^H ^^H |
|
|
^^H ^^H HH ^IH |
|
|
^^^H ^^^^, ^^^H ^^^1 ■■ ■ |
|
|
1 ■■■ |
|
|
jI^B-. ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^« |
|
|
mSbuk |
/ >/■ i'l'
I pv :'i i- i ^.
liS..i(,'4i)'>
^&M.MM.
■tj%,#"j
'MM MM..
'Mi m
H '4 U ^i ' ' m M A '^. 4 U W n ^
4 '^1 M J
■'^A f^
m ■¥: W f'. r^i ^L --^^ u:--^ ---.- (
■'/ 'rf 54 -t «f^' ?it M. y4 ,^i: ,■•*?.
. w\i w irs«^ *?' % .ft' ■*4
Vfi W.l I'M: W-'li IT'S. «*»• ■ »^k. -.• -^>. .,
. X.. \^/ i*.j: ».j r*» ifi, nw. ai, ?..i %
>M' ii3,ij. rj**! -^j^ .«•♦. ^v. -^T. — ■, ,••• . -•
4 *r.- w w Si .!fi/f K,^JK-
=: !^ ■%! «t n ^« M .««^..^/ - 'fl ^f «t il? » w *t .1 *■ .«^ ,
.•- Vj- W V* '«f' ««f » «^. ,5^- .^^ .
■•...I *,././ *.i W a,- ».< *•■? JU y
!? \d »(■ ^Si^ liS, « l«f & .?: / ^
, i^' /■» '•-•i' <iu4 "S/! '..Mik.'' V," jil ti .
■;« rf« ^?4| :-!
»»'^. WW. wi ■'• »
-^ ?|f *^ «t .^
_ _■ M' '^ «^i
, -tfi ^^f u '^f '^i^' ^# W ^^M ■''■ ^"^iif '■ ■'^^r ■': ■ Mf W ^'^ A