History of the Antislavery Measures of the Thirty-seventh and Thirty-eighth United States Congresses, 1861-65, by Henry Wilson, 1865.

CHAPTER III.

THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

THE NATIONAL CAPITAL. — SLAVERY. — MR. WILSON'S RESOLUTION. — THE DISTRICT COMMITTEE. MR. WILSON'S BILL. — MR. MORRILL'S REPORT, WITH AMENDMENTS. MR. WILSON'S BILL TO REPEAL THE SLAVE CODE. — COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS ADOPTED. MR. MORRILL'S AMENDMENTS, — MR. DAVIS'S AMENDMENTS, — MR. DOOLITTLE'S AMENDMENT, — REMARKS BY MR. DAVIS. — MR. HALE, — MR. DOOLITTLE, — MR, POMEROY. — MR. WILLEY, — MR, SAULSBURY. — MR. KING. — MR. DAVIS. — MR. WILSON. — MR. KENNEDY. — MR. SAULSBURY. — MR. HARLAN. — MR. WILKINSON, — MR. SAULSBURY'S AMENDMENT. — MR. SUMNER, — MR. WRIGHT, — MR. FESSENDEN, — MR. DAVIS'S AMENDMENT. — MR. CLARK'S AMENDMENT. — MR. WILLEY'S AMENDMENT. — MR. CLARK'S AMENDMENT. — MR. DAVIS, — MR. MORRILL. — MR. m'6oU- OALU — MR. BUMNEU'S AMENDMENT. — MR. WRIGHT'S AMENDMENT, — MR. browning's AMENDMENT. — MR. WILMOT. — MR. COLLAMER'S AMENDMENT. — MR. DOOLITTLE'S AMENDJIENT, — MR. POWELL. — MR. BAYARD, — PASSAGE OF THE BILL. — HOUSE. — MR. STEVENS'S MOTION. — MR. THOMAS, — MR. NOXON. — MR. BLAIR. — MR. CRITTENDEN. — MR. BIDDLE, — MR. FESSENDEN. — MR. ROLLINS, — MR. BLAKE. — MB. VAN HORNE, — MR. ASHLEY. — MR. HUTCHINS. — MR. WRIGHT'S AMENDMENT. MR. HICKMAN, MR. WADSWORTH, — MR. HARDING'S AMENDMENT, — MR. train's AMENDMENT. — MR. LOVEJOY. — MR. WICKLIFFE'S AMEND MENT. MR. Holman's AMENDMENT. MB. COX. MR, MENZIKS'. AMENDMENT. — PASSAGE OF THE BILL.

THE first Congress under the Constitution was deeply absorbed by the question of the permanent location of the scat of the Federal Government. The Eastern States would have been content to let it remain in New York. Pennsylvania sought to win it back to Philadelphia. Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia would fix It on the Potomac. The conflicting Page 39 claims of sections defeated. In 1789, all propositions for the permanent location of the seat of Government ; but it was determined at the next session, by three majority in the House of Representatives, to locate it on the banks of the Potomac. Clothed by the Constitution with the " power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever " over the District, Congress, instead of providing a code of humane and equal laws for the government of the national capital, enacted, in 1801, that the laws of Maryland and Virginia should continue in force. By this act, the colonial slave-codes of Maryland and Virginia were accepted, reaffirmed, and re-enacted. Washington and Georgetown adopted oppressive and inhuman ordinances for the government of slaves and free persons of color. For half a century the slave-trade was carried on, to the lasting dishonor of the nation ; and for two generations the public men of the country were surrounded by an atmosphere tainted by the breath of the slave, and by the binding and perverting influences of the social life of slaveholding society.

On the 4th of December, 1861, after the announcement of the Standing Committees of the Senate, Mr. Wilson (Rep.) of Massachusetts introduced a resolution, that all laws in force relating to the arrest of fugitives from service, and all laws concerning persons of color, within the District, be referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia ; and that the committee be instructed to consider the expediency of abolishing slavery in the District, with compensation to loyal holders of slaves. The committee to whom the resolution was referred consisted of Mr. Grimes (Rep.) of Page 40 Iowa, Mr. Dixon (Rep.) of Connecticut, Mr. Morrill (Rep.) of Maine, Mr. Wade (Rep.) of Ohio, Mr. Anthony (Rep.) of Rhode Island, Mr. Kennedy (Dem.) of Maryland, and Mr. Powell (Dem.) of Kentucky. Mr. Grimes, chairman of the committee, Mr. Morrill, and Mr. Wade, were recognized by their associates and by the country as thorough and uncompromising opponents of slavery in every form. Mr. Dixon and Mr. Anthony were fair representatives of the feelings and views of conservative Republicanism. Mr., Kennedy came into the Senate a type of the moderate, conservative, respectable Whigism of the Border slave States ; but was soon borne, the many others of that halting, timid school, by the current of events, into the ranks of Democracy, Mr. Powell was an original Democrat, of the faith and creed of the slaveholding school, and an earnest, bold, and adroit advocate of its policy. In moving the reference of his resolution to this committee, Mr. Wilson expressed the hope that the chairman " would deal promptly with the question."

Mr. Wilson of Massachusetts, on the 16th of December, obtained leave to introduce a bill for the release of certain persons held to service or labor in the District of Columbia ; which was read twice, and ordered to be printed. The bill provided for the immediate emancipation of the slaves, for the payment to their loyal owners of an average sum of three hundred dollars, for the appointment of a commission to assess the sum to be paid, and the appropriation of one million of dollars. On the 22d of December, on the motion of Mr. Wilson, the bill was referred to the District Committee. Page 41

Mr. Morrill, on the 13th of February, 1862, reported back from the Committee on the District of Columbia the bill, introduced by Mr. Wilson on the 16th of December, for the release of certain persons held to service or labor in the District of Columbia, with amendments. Mr. Wilson, on the 24th of February, introduced a bill to repeal certain laws and ordinances in the District of Columbia relating to per sons of color, and moved its reference to the District Committee. This bill proposed to repeal the act of Congress extending over the District the laws of Maryland concerning persons of color, to annul and abrogate those laws, to repeal the acts giving the cities of Washington and Georgetown authority to pass ordinances relating to persons of color, to abrogate those ordinances, and to make persons of color amenable to the same laws to which free white persons are amenable, and to subject them to the same penalties and punishments. Mr. Wilson briefly recited the laws and ordinances it was intended to repeal and abrogate. Mr. Wilmot (Rep.) of Pennsylvania thought the Senate should act promptly upon the bill for the abolition of slavery in the District. "We should be the most derelict in our duty of any body that ever sat in the seats of power, if we adjourn this Congress without the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia." Mr. Wilson would say to the senator from Pennsylvania, that the bill was very carefully prepared ; that it had been reported, with very slight amendments, by the committee ; and that it should be taken up for action at an early day. "The bill," he said, "which I have introduced this morning, is only following up that bill, Page 42 and repealing the Hack code of the District, — the laws applicable to persons of color in the District. It Is a necessary bill to be passed also ; and I hope, when we have done that, we shall go a step further, and offer to the State of Maryland the same terms that we offer to the people of the District, and clear this thing out of our neighborhood."

On the 27th of February, the Senate, on motion of Mr. Morrill, made the bill for the abolition of slavery in the District the special order for the 5th of March. The bill on the 12th, on motion of Mr., Morrill, was taken up ; and the Senate, as In Committee of the Whole, proceeded to its consideration. The amendments reported by the committee were agreed to : arid Mr. Morrill then moved to add an amendment, that no claim shall be paid for any slave brought into the District after the passage of the act, or which originates in or by virtue of any transfer heretofore made, or which shall hereafter be made, by any person who has in any manner aided or sustained the Rebellion against the Government of the United States ; and it was agreed to. Mr. Morrill moved still further to amend the bill by adding, that any person who shall kidnap or in any manner transport out of said District any person dis charged or freed by the provisions of this act, or any free person, with intent to ye-enslave or sell such per son into slavery, or shall re-enslave any of said persons, the person so offending shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor ; and, on conviction, shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary not less than five nor more than twenty years. Mr. Howard (Rep.) of Michigan would strike out " misdemeanor," and insert " felony," Page 43

Mr. Morrill accepted the suggestion ; and the amendment as modified was agreed to. Mr. Morrill then moved that all acts of Congress and all laws of the State of Maryland in force in said District, and all ordinances of the cities of Washington or Georgetown, inconsistent with the provisions of this act, are hereby repealed ; and the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. Davis (Opp.) of Kentucky moved to add as a new section, that all persons liberated under this act shall be colonized out of the limits of the United States; ' and the sum of a hundred thousand dollars, out of any money, shall be expended, under the direction of the President of the United States, for that purpose. Mr. Doolittle (Rep.) of Wisconsin "understood the effect of tills amendment to be to colonize them, whether they are willing to be colonized or not. If the amendment of the senator was to offer to appropriate the sum of a hundred thousand dollars to be used for transporting and colonizing such of the free colored persons of this District as might desire to be colonized, I should vote for the amendment ; but, as it is, I cannot vote for It." Mr. Davis thought he was " better acquainted with negro nature than the honorable senator from Wisconsin, He will never find one slave in a hundred that will consent to be colonized when liberated. The liberation of the slaves in this District and in any State of the Union will be just equivalent to settling them in the country where they live ; and whenever that policy is inaugurated, especially in the States where there are many slaves, it will inevitably and immediately intro duce a war of extermination between the two races. . . . The negroes that are now liberated, and that remain in Page 44 this city, will become a sore and a burden and a charge upon the white population. They will be criminals. They will become paupers. They will be engaged in crimes and in petty misdemeanors. They will become a charge and a pest upon this society ; and the power which undertakes to liberate them ought to relieve the white community in which they reside, and in which they will become a pest from their presence." Mr. Davis emphatically asserted, that "whenever any power, constitutional or unconstitutional, assumes the responsibility of liberating slaves where slaves are numerous, they establish, as Inexorably as fate, a conflict between the races, that will result in the exile or the extermination of the one race or the other. I know it. We have now about two hundred and twenty-five thousand slaves in Kentucky. Think you, sir, that we should ever submit to have those slaves manumitted and left among us? No, sir; no, never: nor will any white people in the United States of America, where the slaves are numerous. If, by unconstitutional legislation, you should, by laws which you shrink from sub mitting to the tests of constitutionality in your courts of justice, liberate them, without the intervention of the courts, the moment you reorganize the white Inhabitants of those States as States of the Union, they would re duce those slaves again to a state of slavery, or they would expel them and drive them upon you or south of you, or they would hunt them like beasts, and exterminate them. ... I know what I talk about. Mr. President, the loyal people of the slave States are as true to this Union as any man in the Senate Chamber or in any of the free States : but never, never, will they Page 45 submit, by unconstitutional laws, to have their slaves liberated and to remain domiciled among them ; and the policy that attempts it will establish a bloody La Vendue in the whole of the slave States, ray own included."

On the 18th, the bill was taken up, the pending question being Mr. Davis's amendment ; and Mr. Doo little proposed to amend the amendment, so as to make it read, "with their own consent." Mr. Hale (Rep.) of New Hampshire delivered an earnest and effective speech for the passage of the bill. "I may remark," he said, "that, of all the forms scepticism ever assumed, the most insidious, the most dangerous, and the most fatal, is that which suggests that it Is unsafe to perform plain and simple duty, for fear that disastrous consequences may result therefrom. This question of emancipation, wherever it has been raised in this country, so far as I know, has rarely ever been argued upon the great and fundamental principles of right. The inquiry is never put, certainly in legislative circles. What is right? what is just? what is due to the individuals that are to be affected by the measure ? but. What are to be the consequences ? Men entirely forget to look at the objects that are to be effected by the bill, in view of the inherent rights of their man hood, in view of the great questions of humanity, of Christianity, and of duty ; but what are to be the con sequences; what is to be its effect upon the price of sugar, tobacco, cotton, and other necessaries and luxuries of life. The honorable senator from Kentucky looks upon it in that point of view entirely. . . . But now, sir, let me close by reading to the senator from Kentucky predictions of the consequences that will follow Page 46 emancipation, exceedingly different from those which he has predicted. He predicts pauperism, degradation, crime, burdens upon society. That is the dark picture which fills his imagination as the consequences that are to follow the putting away of oppression from the midst of us. Let me read to him a different prediction : — " '

6. Is not this the fast that I have chosen ? — to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke ? " '

7. Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house ? When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him ; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh ? '

"What are to be the consequences? Not pauperism, degradation, and crime, but, — " '

8. Then shall thy light break forth as the morning, and thine health shall spring forth speedily ; and thy righteousness shall go before thee. The glory of the Lord shall be thy rearward. "

9. Then shalt thou call, and the Lord shall answer ; thou shalt cry, and he shall say. Here I am. If thou take away from the midst of thee the yoke, the putting-forth of the finger, and speaking vanity ;

" ' 10. And if thou draw out thy soul to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted soul ; then shall thy might rise in obscurity, and thy darkness be as the noonday.

" ' 11. And the Lord shall guide thee continually, and satisfy thy soul in drought, and make fat thy bones ; and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not.

'"12. And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places. Thou shalt raise up the foundations of many Page 47 generations ; and thou shalt be called, the repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in.' — Isa., chapter 58.

"Now, sir, this nation has an opportunity, if I may say so, — and I say it reverently, — of putting the Almighty to the test, and of seeing whether the consequences that his prophet has foretold or his senator has predicted will follow as the result of this measure."

Mr. Doolittle then addressed the Senate in advocacy of the policy of colonizing persons made free by the enactment of the pending bill, Mr. Pomeroy (Rep.) of Kansas followed in decided opposition to the policy of making compensation to the masters for the slaves. to be emancipated by the passage of the measure, "I am really," he declared, "a friend to the bill; and I desire at the proper time — I believe it is not in order now — to propose an amendment, striking out all of the bill, except the first and eighth sections. The first section of the bill extends over this District the ordinance of 1787 ; and I think there is no doubt as to the effect of that. The eighth section simply prohibits men from taking colored persons out of the District to sell them after they have been made free. The first section frees them : the eighth section prevents their being kidnapped, I do not know what necessity there is for any further provision in the bill." Mr. Willey (Union) of Virginia addressed the Senate on the 20th, in opposition to the measure. " This bill l," he asserted, is a part of a series of measures already initiated, all looking to the same ultimate result, — the universal abolition of slavery by Congress."

The Senate resumed, on the 24th, the consideration of the bill ; the pending question being Mr. Doolittle's Page 48 amendment to Mr. Davis's amendment. Mr. Saulsbury (Dem.) of Delaware was in favor, if the slaves were liberated, of colonizing them ; yet, not believing that Congress has any constitutional power either to pass a bill to liberate the slaves in the District or to appropriate money to colonize them, he should vote against the amendment and the bill. Mr. King (Rep.) of New York " did Intend to vote for this bill ; and I prefer to vote for it in the simplest shape in which it can be presented. Although I am disposed to look with favor upon the proposition submitted by the senator from Wisconsin, when this subject comes to be considered upon a more extended scale ; yet, as it relates merely to the District, I am inclined to vote against any amendments which go to extend the character of the bill beyond a simple proposition to emancipate the negroes in the District." The question being taken on Mr. Doolittle's amendment to Mr. Davis's amendment. It was agreed to, — yeas 23, nays 16, The question on Mr. Davis's amendment as amended was then taken, — yeas 19, nays 19 : so it was lost,

Mr. Davis then addressed the Senate at great length in opposition, to the bill, "You have originated,", he said, " in the Northeast, Mormonism and free love, and that sort of ethereal Christianity that is . preached by Parker and by Emerson and by others, and all sorts of mischievous Isms ; but what right have you to force your isms upon us ? What right have you to force your opinions upon slavery or upon any other subject on an unwilling people ? What right have you to force them on the people of this District ? Is it from your love for the slaves, your devotion to benevolence and humanity. Page 49 your belief in the equality of the slaves with yourselves ? Why do you not go out into this city, and hunt up the blackest, greasiest, fittest old negro wench you can find, and lead her to the altar of Hymen ? You do not believe in any such equality ; nor do I. Yet your emissaries proclaim here that the slaves, when you liberate them, shall be citizens, shall be eligible to office in this city. A few days ago, I saw several negroes thronging the open door, listening to the debate on this subject ; and I suppose, in a few months, they will be crowding white ladies out of these galleries."

Mr. Wilson of Massachusetts, on the 25th, addressed the Senate in favor of the bill he had introduced early in the session. "This bill, to give liberty to the bond man," he said, "deals justly, ay, generously, by the master. The American people, whose moral sense has been outraged by slavery and the black codes enacted in the interests of slavery in the District of Columbia, whose fame has been soiled and dimmed by the deeds of cruelty perpetrated in their national capital, would stand justified in the forum of nations if they should smite the fetter from the bondman, regardless of the desires or interests of the master. With generous magnanimity, this bill tenders compensation to the master out of the earnings of the toiling freemen of America. . . , In what age of the world, in what land under the whole heavens, can you find any enactment of equal atrocity to this iniquitous and profligate statute, this 'legal presumption' that color is evidence that man, made in the image of God, is an 'absconding slave'? This monstrous doctrine, abhorrent to every manly impulse of the heart, to every Christian sentiment of the soul, to Page 50 every deduction of human reason, which the refined, hu mane, and Christian people of America have upheld for two generations, which the corporation of Washington enacted into an imperative ordinance, has borne its legitimate fruits of injustice and inhumanity, of dishonor and shame. Crimes against man, in the name of this abhorred doctrine, have been annually perpetrated in this national capital, which should make the people of America hang their heads in shame before the nations, and in abasement before that Being who keeps watch and ward over the humblest of the children of men, , , , Here the oath of the black man affords no protection whatever to his property, to the fruits of his toil, to the personal rights of himself, his wife, his children, or his race. Greedy avarice may withhold from him the fruits of his toil, or clutch from him his little acquisitions ; the brutal may visit upon him, his wife, his children, insults, indignities, blows ; the kidnapper may enter his dwelling, and steal from his hearthstone his loved ones ; the assassin may hover on his track, im perilling his household ; every outrage that the depravity of man can visit upon his brother man may be perpetrated upon him, upon his family, his race : but his oath upon the Evangelists of Almighty God, though his name may be written in the Book of Life, neither protects him from wrong, nor punishes the wrong-doer. This Christian nation, in solemn mockery, enacts that the free black men of America shall not bear testimony in the judicial tribunals of the District of Columbia, Although the black man is thus mute and dumb before the judicial tribunals of the capital of Christian America, his wrongs we have not righted here will go up to Page 51 a higher tribunal, where the oath of the proscribed negro Is heard, and his story registered by the pen of the recording angel. . , . These colonial statutes of Maryland, re-affirmed by Congress in 1801 ; these ordinances of Washington and Georgetown, sanctioned in advance by the authority of the Federal Goverment, — stand this day unrepealed. Such laws and ordinances should not be permitted longer to insult the reason, per vert the moral sense, or offend the taste, of the people of America, Any people mindful of the decencies of life would not longer permit such enactments to linger before the eye of civilized man. Slavery is the prolific mother of those monstrous enactments. Bid slavery disappear from the District of Columbia, and it will take along with it this whole brood of brutal, vulgar, and indecent statutes. . , , This bill for the release of persons held to services or labor in the District of Columbia, and the compensation of loyal masters from the treasury of the United States, was prepared after much reflection and some consultation with others. The Committees on the District of Columbia, in both Houses, to whom it was referred, have agreed to it, with a few amendments calculated to carry out more completely its original purposes and provisions. I trust that the bill as it now stands, after the adoption of the amendments proposed by the senator from Maine (Mr. Morrill), will speedily pass without any material modifications. If it shall become the law of the land, it will blot out slavery for ever from the national capital, transform three thousand personal chattels into freemen, obliterate oppressive, odious, and hateful laws and ordinances, which press with merciless force upon persons, bond or Page 52 free, of African descent, and relieve the nation from the responsibilities now pressing upon it. An act of beneficence like this will be hailed and applauded by the nations, sanctified by justice, humanity, and religion, by the approving voice of conscience, and by the blessing of Him who bids us ' break every yoke, undo the heavy burden, and let the oppressed go free.'"

"Why," asked Mr. Kennedy of Maryland, "seek to impose upon us principles and measures of policy which we do not want, and which tend only to still further derange and embarrass us, — tend further to surround us with complicated questions from which we have no escape ? Why not allow us to work out our own des tiny, and to accommodate ourselves as best we can to the disadvantages which this unhappy revolution has thrown around us ? . . . What possible benefit can occur to the North by the abolition of slavery in this District, when it is to be so deleterious and so injurious in its results to a sister State of this Union? What earthly consideration of good is to result to the people of the North, that does not bring a tenfold corresponding evil, not only upon the people here, but upon the people of my State?"

Mr. Saulsbury moved to amend by inserting as a new section, that "tho persons liberated under this act shall. within thirty days after the passage of the same, be removed, at the expense of the Federal Goverment, into the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas, Oregon, and California; and that said persons shall be Page 53 distributed to and among the said States, pro rata, according to the population of the same." " If it is the spirit of philanthropy and a love of freedom," he said, " that prompts you gentleman to set these three thousand shaves in the District of Columbia free, render that philanthropy and that love of freedom sublime in the sight of ail human kind by taking into your own em brace, in your own midst, the slaves thus liberated. Prove that you are sincere." "

I regret," said Mr. Harlan (Rep. ) of Iowa, " very much that senators depart so far from the proprieties, as I consider it, of this Chamber, as to make the allusions they do. It is done merely to stimulate a prejudice which exists against a race already trampled under foot. I refer to the allusions to white people embracing colored people as their brethren, and the invitations by senators to white men and white women to marry colored people. Now, sir, if we were to descend into an investigation of the facts on that subject, it would bring the blush to the cheeks of some of these gentlemen, I once had occasion to direct the attention of the Senate to an illustrious example from the State of the senator who inquired if any of us would marry a greasy old wench. It is history, that an illustrious citizen of his State, who once occupied officially the chair that you, sir, now sit in, lived notoriously and publicly with a negro wench, and raised children by her. ... I refer to a gentleman who held the second office in the gift of the American people ; and I never yet have heard a senator on this floor denounce the conduct and the association of that illustrious citizen of our country. I know of a family of colored or mulatto children, — the Page 54 children, too, of a gentleman who very recently occupied a seat on the other side of the Chamber, — who are now at school in Ohio ; yes, sir, the children of a senator, who very recently, not to exceed a year since, occupied a seat on this floor, a senator from a slave State. I do not desire to consume the time of the Senate and of the country in calling attention to these acts ; it is humiliating enough to know that they exist : but, if senators who represent slaveholding States will perpetually drag this subject to the attention of the Sen ate and of the country, let there take the logical consequences of their own folly, and bear the shame which an investigation of facts must inflict on themselves and their constituents."

Mr. Saulsbury followed in reply to Mr. Harlan, and closed by saying, " Senators, abandon now, at once and for ever, your schemes of wild philanthropy and universal emancipation ; proclaim to the people of this whole country everywhere, that you mean to preserve the Union established by Washington and Jefferson and Madison and the fathers of the Republic, and the rights of the people as secured by that glorious instrument which they helped to frame, and your Union never can be destroyed : but go on with your wild schemes of emancipation, throw doubt and suspicion upon every man simply because he fails to look at your questions of wild philanthropy as you do, and the God of heaven only knows, after wading through scenes be fore which even the horrors of the French revolution 'pale their ineffectual fires,' what ultimately may be the result."

Mr. Wilkinson (Rep,) of Minnesota addressed the Page 55 Senate, on the 26th of March, in an earnest and eloquent speech in favor of the bill. " If there be a place upon the face of the earth," he said, "where human slavery should be prohibited, and where every man should be protected in the rights which God and Nature have given him, that place is the capital of this great Republic, It is an insult to the enlightened public sentiment of the age, that those who meet here from the free States of the Union, and the representatives of the free governments of the earth, — lovers of liberty, — should be compelled, in the capital of this free Republic, daily to witness the disgusting and shocking barbarities which a state of human slavery continually presents to their view. It is a shame, that here, upon common ground, the representatives of the loyal and free North, those who have never failed to discharge every duty to their country, should be treated with contumely and contempt, and even hissed, as they have been in the Capitol of the nation and in the galleries of the Senate, by the slaveholding influence of this District." At the close of Mr. Wilkinson's speech, the vote was taken on Mr. Saulsbury's proposition to colonize the liberated slaves among the loyal States, and it was unanimously rejected ; Mr. Saulsbury finally voting against his own amendment.

On Monday, the 31st of March, the Senate resumed the consideration of the bill ; and Mr. Sumner addressed the Senate in an elaborate and eloquent speech in favor of its speedy passage. He said, " Mr. President, with unspeakable delight I have this measure, and the prospect of its speedy adoption. ... It is the first instalment of that great debt which we all owe to an enslaved race.

Page 56 and will be recognized in history as one of the victories of humanity. At home, throughout our own country, it will be welcomed with gratitude ; while abroad it will quicken the hopes of all who love freedom. Liberal institutions will gain everywhere by the abolition of slavery at the national capital. Nobody can read that slaves were once sold in the markets of Rome, beneath the eyes of the sovereign pontiff, without confessing the scandal to religion, even in a barbarous age ; and no body can hear that slaves are now sold in the markets of Washington, beneath the eyes of the President, without confessing the scandal to liberal institutions. For the sake of our good name, if not for the sake of justice, let the scandal disappear. . . . Amidst all present solicitudes, the future cannot be doubtful. At the national capital, slavery will give way to freedom : but the good work will not stop here ; it must proceed. What God and Nature decree, rebellion cannot arrest. And as the whole wide-spread tyranny begins to tumble, — then, above the din of battle, sounding from the sea and echoing along the land, above even the exultations of victory on well-fought fields, will ascend voices of gladness and benediction, swelling from generous hearts wherever civilization bears sway, to commemorate a sacred triumph, whose trophies. Instead of tattered banners, will be ransomed slaves."

On the 1st of April, Mr. Wright (Union) of Indiana spoke in opposition to the enactment of the measure. He had presented a bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, being in substance the measure proposed by Mr. Lincoln in 1848. It provided for the gradual extinction of slavery. He thought, " if slavery Page 57 was let alone, there would be no slavery here in ten years." The pending question being the amendment offered by Mr. Pomeroy " to settle the account between master and slave," he said he had offered the amendment in good faith, as a friend of the measure, so that "the commission could weigh out justice, give compensation where it was due." — "The fundamental law of the land," declared Mr. Fessenden (Rep.) of Maine, "is broad and clear. We need no excuse on the subject at all. Congress, under the Constitution, is gifted with all power of legislation over this District, and may do any thing in it that any legislature can do in any State of the Union, unless expressly restrained by the Constitution which gives it its powers ; and there being a specific grant of all powers of legislation in this District, and there being no restraint upon it which would touch the question, it follows as a matter of necessity that the constitutional power exists ; and it includes as well the power to vote money. . . . This question of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, I have stated, has been one that has always been near to my heart. Gentlemen say it is a bad time to take it up : it will be attended -with injury. With regard to one point of injury, I have spoken ; but do gentlemen believe any other injury is to follow? Whom do we injure ? The slaves ? The slave will bear the injury. Do we injure the owner ? What claim have the owners of slaves in the District of Columbia upon us ? They have, in my judgment, been holding slaves here without law since the foundation of the Government ; and they have been able to do it, because it has been in their power to secure a majority always in Congress which Page 58 was invincible, that could not be overcome." Mr. Davis moved to strike out the proviso to the third section, limiting the average sum to be paid to three hundred dollars, — yeas 11, nays 30, Mr., Browning (Rep,) of Illinois "never doubted the existence of the power in Congress, under the Constitution, to pass this or any other legislative measure affecting the District of Columbia, The grant of power Is as broad and ample as it is possible for our language to make it," Mr. Clark (Rep.) of New Hampshire moved an amendment of eleven sections, as a substitute for the original bill. "I do not pro pose this amendment," he said, "for the purpose of impeding the passage of the bill, or of impeding the abolition of slavery in this District. I desire to accomplish it. It is a measure to which I gave my heart long ago, and it is a measure to which I am ready and desirous to give my hand now. I do it with the intention of offering to the Senate a better bill, as I conceive it to be." Mr. Morrill, in reply to Mr. Clark, asserted " that this bill originally, as submitted to the committee, was prepared with very great care, and it has received the best consideration that the committee was able to bestow upon it ; and I will say to my honorable friend who criticises the original bill, and who thinks that his is much better, that there was not a single question to which he alludes that did not receive the attention of the committee ; and, if I understand the bill of the committee ^ there is not a single provision of his bill but is provided for in the bill of the committee, except the feature of referring it to the Court of Claims." Mr. Willey proposed to amend Mr. Clark's

Page 59 amendment so as to submit the bill to the legal voters of the District. Mr. Willey averred that he intended to vote for the President's resolution tendering the aid of the Government to the loyal States. "It meets," he said, " ray approbation ; and the more I think about it, the more I believe it is correct, and that it will be a balm to heal the bleeding wounds of our country at last." — " If we are going," said Mr. Pomeroy, " to leave this question to the people to vote upon it, I insist that the senator from Virginia should amend his amendment by striking out at least two words, ' free white.' If he will strike out those two words, and let every person who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years vote, there will at least be fairness in submitting this question to a vote of the people. As the question affects both parties alike, and as it is as much for the interest of the colored man as the white man, I should Uke to know why he may not vote on it." Mr. Willey's amendment was rejected, — yeas 13, nays 24.

Mr. Clark moved to strike out the third section of the original bill, and Insert a new section in lieu of it. This amendment was advocated by Mr. Clark, opposed by Mr. Morrill, and rejected, Mr. Wright, on the 2d of April, presented the memorial of the Board of Aldermen of Washington, expressing " the opinion that the sentiment of a large majority of the people of this community is adverse to the unqualified abolition of slavery in this District at the present critical juncture in our national affairs."

Mr. Davis of Kentucky made a very long, desultory harangue against the bill and all kindred measures. "Massachusetts," he said, "was the hot-bed, the very Page 60 place of origin, of every political heresy that has been set up in any part of the country. . „ . I hardly know of any political, religious, or social mischievous and noxious ism but what had Its origin in Massachusetts. ... It has been frequently inquired, ' What brought about this war ? ' I shall not enter into that subject at any length ; but I will tell you what I religiously believe, — that the States of Massachusetts and South Carolina and their mischievous isms have done more to bring about our present troubles than all other causes."

Mr. Morrill said in reply, that " the sentiments which the honorable senator puts forth here are sentiments directly adverse to the principles of the common law. I know they are opinions and principles reaching far back into the early period of the world ; but allow me to say to the honorable senator, they are barbarian in their origin. They were never inculcated and never adopted in civilized nations. Where civilization has advanced, where the doctrines of Christian civilization are recognized, these notions are held to be antiquated, barbarian ; and they do not enter into the jurisprudence of any civilized or Christian nation on the globe."

Mr. M'Dougall, on the 3d, addressed the Senate in an elaborate speech in opposition to the measure ; and Mr. Ten. Eyck preferred a system of gradual emancipation, but would vote for the original bill as amended. He was not sure but the postponement of the measure until the Border slave States have acted on the President's proposition would cure the evil. "If Maryland and Delaware should vote to abolish slavery according to the plan proposed by the President and the resolution we passed yesterday, slavery in this District would Page 61 speedily die out of itself. Like an exhausted candle, it would flicker in its socket, and soon be gone for ever, and not a single wave of popular feeling be created to disturb or agitate the surrounding sections of country interested in the institution." Mr. Sumner moved to amend, by introducing in the fifth section, after the words " courts of justice," the words " without the exclusion of any witness on account of color." Mr. Morrill said the bill provided that the claimant may be summoned before the commissioners, and that the party for whose service compensation is claimed may testify ; but the amendment extends that to other persons, and he did not object to it. On motion of Mr. Saulsbury, the yeas and nays were taken on Mr. Sumner's amendment, — yeas 26, nays 10. Mr. Clark's substitute was rejected, without a division.

Mr. Wright moved to strike out all after the enacting clause of the bill, and insert as a substitute the amendment he had proposed, providing for a system of gradual emancipation. Mr. Wright declared he had offered it " because it embodies principles which I like. The object of presenting it as an amendment is, that, if adopted, it may be referred back to the committee for perfection." The amendment was rejected, — yeas 10, nays 27.

Mr. Clark moved to insert at the end of section two, " that he has not borne arras against the United States during the present Rebellion." Mr. Trumbull moved to add that " the oath of the party to the petition shall not be evidence of the facts therein stated ; " and the amendment to the amendment was agreed to, and the amendment as amended adopted. Mr. Browning Page 62 moved to make the sum appraised and apportioned five in lieu of three hundred dollars, one-half to be paid to the master, and the other half paid to the slave, on satisfactory evidence that he has removed and settled outside the United States. Mr. Browning would com bine emancipation and colonization. "I believe," he declared, " that we cannot do any substantial good to the colored people of this country without combining with whatever action we take upon this subject a system of colonization, or adopting measures that will lead to voluntary colonization on their part. It is not legal and political equality and emancipation alone that can do much for the elevation of the character of these people. We may confer upon them all the legal and political rights we ourselves enjoy : they will still be in our midst, a debased and degraded race, incapable of making progress, because they want that best element and best incentive to progress, social equality, which they never can have here." — "Why does not the gentleman," asked Mr. Wilmot, "make his amendment consistent with his argument, and propose compulsory colonization? If the races cannot live together, then surely we should adopt compulsory emigration. The amendment of the senator goes but a short way towards the argument that he advances."

" This inducement," replied Mr. Browning, " for voluntary emigration, is perfectly consistent with all that I have said on that point. I do not propose now to discuss a system of compulsory emigration. We are acting upon too small a scale to justify us in broaching so momentous a question as that is at this time. The time may come, the time possibly will come, when Page 63 compulsory colonizati6n may be found necessary for the good of both races ; and, if it does come, I apprehend I, for one, shall be found ready to meet it, and to take my share of the responsibility of enforcing it." Mr. Browning's -amendment was rejected,

Mr. Collamer (Rep.) of Vermont, for the better security of emancipated persons, moved to add two additional sections, providing that the claimants shall file, with the clerk of the Circuit Court in the District, descriptive lists of the persons for whom they claim compensation ; and that the clerk shall give on demand, to each person made free or manumitted by this act, a certificate under the seal of said court, setting out the name and description of such person, and stating that such person was duly manumitted and made free by ¦virtue of this act ; and these provisions were incorporated in the bill. Mr. M'Dougall offered as a substitute the amendment previously offered by Mr. Wright and rejected, — yeas 10, nays 25. The bill was then reported to the Senate, and the amendments adopted in Committee of the Whole concurred in.

Mr. Doolittle thought his amendment appropriating a hundred thousand dollars to aid in the colonization and settlement of such free persons of African descent as may desire to emigrate to the republics of Hayti or Liberia, or such other country beyond the limits of the United States as the President may determine, had been voted down because some senators thought it connected in some way with a system of compulsory colonization. He renewed his amendment, and demanded the yeas and nays ; and they were ordered, — yeas 27, nays 10. " I regard the bill," said Mr. Powell, " as unconstitutional, Page 64 impolitic, unjust to the people of the District of Columbia, and bad faith to the people of Virginia and Maryland, , , , This bill is unjust to the people of the District of Columbia, because it deprives them of one of their domestic institutions. It is unjust to them in another respect ; because, while you pretend to pay them, you do not give them a fourth of the value of their property. The highest amount you give a citizen for his negro is three hundred dollars, while every one in this Senate knows that many of those negroes are worth three or four times that amount." Mr. Wilson of Massachusetts remarked, that the senator from Kentucky was mistaken. "The average sum to be paid is three hundred dollars ; but for some may be paid eight or nine hundred or a thousand dollars, and for others but a very small sum indeed." Mr. Bayard (Dem.) of Delaware had hoped "to obtain the floor, on the passage of the bill, at an earlier hour ; and though it is certainly, personally, very inconvenient to me to speak at this time, I have to perform a duty which I owe, not to my own constituents, for they have no particular nor immediate interest in the bill, but a duty that I think I owe, as a member of this body, to my country, . . . I concede, without the slightest reservation, that the authority of the General Government , over the District of Columbia precisely the same as the authority of a State over its territory ; that no constitutional objection can arise to the action of Congress in abolishing slavery in this District, other than those that could be made within the boundaries of a State under similar provisions of a State constitution. The effect of this bill, in my judgment, will be deleterious, Page 65 and most deleterious first to the city of Washington, next to the State of Maryland, then to the State of Virginia, and then by the effect of its indirect influence to the State of Kentucky and the State of Missouri ; and, if you succeed in compelling by force of arms the other slaveholding States to return into the Union, the effect will permeate through the entire mass of those States,"

At the close of Mr. Bayard's speech, the presiding officer stated that the question was on the passage of the bill, upon which the yeas and nays had been ordered. The question was taken, and resulted — yeas 29, nays 14. Thus the bill "for the release of certain persons held to service or labor in the District of Columbia," introduced by Mr. Wilson into the Sen ate, Dec. 16, 1861, passed the Senate, April 3, 1862. In the House of Representatives, on the 10th of April, Mr., Stevens (Rep.) of Pennsylvania moved that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union. The motion was agreed to ; and Mr. Stevens moved that all the preceding bills on the calendar be laid aside, and that the committee take up the bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. Mr. Webster (Union) of Maryland objecting, the chairman, Mr. Dawes (Rep.) of Massachusetts, stated that he would call the calendar in order. Mr. Stevens said he would move to lay the bills aside until he reached the bill he had indicated. When the Senate bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia was reached, Mr. Webster moved to lay it aside ; but the motion failed, and the bill was before the Committee of the Whole for consideration. "I Page 66 avail myself," said Mr. Thomas (Opp.) of Massachusetts, " of the indulgence of the committee to make some suggestions upon subjects now attracting the attention of Congress and of the country, — the relation of the 'seceded States' (so called) to the Union, the confiscation of property, and the emancipation of slaves in such States."

On the llth, Mr. Stevens moved that the debate upon the bill be closed in one hour after the Committee of the Whole resumes its consideration ; but the motion was lost, — yeas 57, nays 64. Mr. Nixon (Rep.) of New Jersey said, "The gradual emancipation of the slave would have been more in harmony with the past modes of dealing with this question, and more in accordance with my views of public policy. But If immediate emancipation, with just compensation, shall prove to be the sentiment of the House, I am prepared to exercise an express constitutional power, and vote to .remove for ever the blot of slavery from the national capital," Mr. Blair (Rep.) of Missouri said, "The charge has frequently been heard here and elsewhere, that the President is without a policy in his administration, I shall endeavor to show that this imputation is unfounded, to explain my conceptions of his policy, and to demonstrate that it is wise in every aspect, and commends itself to the lovers of the Union and of freedom," Mr. Crittenden (Union) of Kentucky followed in opposition to the bill and to the policy of emancipation, " You may produce," he said, " much mischief by this measure. What is the good? Slavery has been, under one influence or another, disappearing from this district for years. It has been decaying and going out. Your bill Page 67 would not, probably, have a thousand slaves to act upon. What, then, is the deep anxiety to pass this measure? Why should Congress, at a time like this, devote its attention with so much earnestness, and apparently with so much purpose, to this measure? Let slavery alone. It will go out like a candle. No disturbance will follow it. No violation of public feeling will follow. No apprehension will result from it. This measure will create discontent among the people else where, and will lead them to consider it but as an augury of what is to come afterwards. The good you can do by it is little, is minute, in comparison to the great question involved." — "We are deliberating here to day," said Mr. Bingham of Ohio, " upon a bill which illustrates the great principle that this day shakes the throne of every despot upon the globe ; and that is, whether man was made for government, or goverment made for man. Those who oppose this bill, whether they intend it or not, by recording their votes against this enactment, reiterate the old dogma of tyrants, that the people are made to be governed, and not to govern. I deny that proposition. I deny it, because all my convictions are opposed to it. I deny it, because I am sure that the Constitution of my country is against it. I cannot forget, if I would, the grand utterance of one of the illustrious men of modem times, — of whom Guizot very fitly said, that his thoughts impress themselves indelibly wherever they fall, — standing amid the despotisms of Europe, conscious of the great truth that all men are of right equal before the law, that thrones may perish, that crowns may turn to dust, that sceptres may be broken and empires overthrown, but that the Page 68 rights of men are perpetual, he proclaimed to listening France the strong, true words, ' States are born, live, and die upon the earth ; here they fulfil their destiny : but, after the citizen has discharged every duty that he owes to the State, there abides with him the nobler part of his being, his immortal faculties, by which he ascends to God and the unknown realities of another life.' I would illustrate that utterance of the French thinker by incorporating in our legislation this day a provision, that every human being, no matter what his complexion, here within the limits of the capital of the Republic, shall be secure in the enjoyment of his Inherent rights ; that the citizen is more than the State ; that the protection of his rights is of more concern than any or all mere State policies. I would pass this bill, not only for the sake of giving present relief to the unfortunate human beings for whose special relief it is designed, and who, if I am rightly informed, are being carried hourly away from your capital in order to perpetuate their too-long-endured captivity, not only to burst their fetters, not only to kindle a new joy in their humble homes by inspiring in them a sense of personal security and safety, but I would pass this bill for the purpose as well of giving a new assurance that the Republic still lives, and gives promise not to disappoint the hopes of the struggling nations of the earth."

"A great truth," said Mr. Riddle (Rep.) of Ohio, " is weakened by what men call elucidation. Illustration obscures it ; logic and argument compromise it ; and demonstration brings it to doubt. He who permits himself to be put on its defensive is a weak man or a coward. A great truth is never so strong as Page 69 when left to stand on its simple assertion. The thing right for ever remains right, under all possible circumstances and conditions, in all times, places, and seasons. Nor can it be changed at all. Not all power, nor the combination of all power, no matter how employed or applied, can change it in the least. It matters not at all how men call it: though the unanimous world conspire to call it ill, and tag it out with all vile epithets ; though all obscene mouths make it com mon, and lewd tongues toss it into sewers, and delicate and refined ears may not hear it, — it is nowise changed. No matter what all happens to it ; though cast out, exiled, banished, and outlawed, marked and for ever banned, made leprous with contumely and reproach ; though prisoned, tried, condemned, and executed, and its body, like carrion, cast to vultures, — it still lives, is Still right ; holds its old place and old sceptre. Nor can any man, by any power, under any circumstances, for any thing, be absolved from the allegiance he owes it." — "I did not rise," said Mr. Fessenden (Rep.) of Maine, " to discuss the merits of this bill. The hour for its discussion has passed. The hour in which to put upon it the seal of the nation has come. I trust it is, indeed, the harbinger of that brighter, brightest day at hand, when slavery shall be abolished wherever it exists in the land. This will be the one finality which will give us a righteous and a lasting peace."

Mr. Rollins (Rep.) of New Hampshire said, "It is one of the most beautiful traits of human nature, that while the sons of men are struggling to bear the burdens of human life, and perform the works assigned to our common nature, they sometimes step aside, or stop in Page 70 their Way, to minister to the wants of the needy, who, sitting by the wayside, lift their eyes and hands to beg for charity. This nation, which, like a giant, walks along the pathway of nations, girded as with iron, sternly to meet and overwhelm its fratricidal foes, while marching steadily on to its work, feels it no hinderance to listen to the humble cry of a few hundred of its feeblest children who grind in the prison-house of its deadly foe. The abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia is, to the few slaves therein, a deed of jus tice and mercy that this people cannot omit to perform at this golden opportunity. Slavery has forfeited all claims to any implied obligation for immunity in the capital of the nation by its mad attempt to tear down the pillars of that Government under which it claimed protection. Justice demands that the arch enemy of our Government and instigator of all our present calamity, who still lurks in this chosen centre of the Republic, as Satan did in the garden of Eden, should be expelled, and that the glittering sword of power should guard the gate against its entrance for evermore, Mercy — if the act of emancipation may have that quality — de mands for the victims of this too-long-endured oppression their restoration to the primal rights of humanity. This is the quality that will give to this act, about, as I trust, to be consummated, its crowning grace and virtue, and commend It to the admiration of good men all over the world, and win for it the approval of Heaven, where mercy has its seat." — " Of the moral effects of the measure upon the country and upon the world," said Mr. Blake (Rep.) of Ohio, "I need not speak. That it will elevate us in the eyes of all civilized nations, Page 71 is not doubted ; that it will awaken a thrill of patriotic pride and enthusiasm in the great heart of the nation, no man doubts. Even the opponents of emancipation on this floor have not ventured to shock the moral sense of the House by an absolute defence of slavery as a thing desirable in itself. No man has ventured to assert that the measure will be injurious to the general interests of the District. The respected and venerable gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Crittenden) did declare that he was no friend of slavery ; that, if the adoption of slavery were now an original proposition before the House, he would vote against it. I rejoice, sir, at such declarations as these, coming, as I have no doubt they do, from a truly loyal, patriotic heart : they are the har binger of better days for the Republic. But, sir, I expect no applause in South Carolina and Mississippi for the passage of this bill, and none from traitors any where. It is our duty to abolish slavery here, because Congress, by the Constitution, has the power to do it ; and, slavery being a great wrong and outrage upon humanity, we should at once do right, and pass this bill." — "I would rather close this debate," said Mr. Van Horn (Rep.) of New York, "and come directly to the vote' upon it, and content myself with recording my name in its favor. Indeed, it needs no defence. Upon its face it bears the marks of humanity and of jus tice. Every line and every syllable is pregnant with a just and true sentiment, and already hallowed with the sublime spirit of a noble purpose. Throughout it there breathes a spirit akin to that which runs through all the wonderful teachings of Him who spake as never man spake, and inspired the hearts of those whose immortal Page 72 sayings -will outlast all the monuments that time can erect." Mr. Ashley (Rep.) of Ohio said, "The struggles and hopes of many long years are centred in this eventful hour. The cry of the oppressed, ' How long, O Lord ? how long ? ' is to be answered to-day by the American Congress. A sublime act of justice is now to be recorded where it will never be obliterated ; and, so far as the action of the representatives of the people can decree it, the fitting words of the President, spoken in his recent special message, 'initiate and emancipate, '.shall have a life co-equal with the Republic. God has set his seal upon these priceless words ; and they, with the memory of him who uttered them, shall live in the hearts of the people for ever. The golden morn, so anxiously looked for by the friends of freedom in the United States, has dawned. A second national jubilee will henceforth be added to the calendar. The brave words heretofore uttered in behalf of humanity in this hall, like ' bread cast upon the waters,' are now ' to return after many days,' and find vindication of their purposes in a decree of freedom." — " Discussion will go on," said Mr. Hutchins (Rep.) of Ohio, "should go on, till slavery is extinct. It has only a 'contraband' existence anywhere. It has rebelled against the lawful and rightful authority of the Government, and its presence is in the way of permanent peace! Our fathers honestly supposed that it would disappear before the march of Christian civilization. They were mistaken. While we strive to imitate their wisdom, and seek to emu late their patriotism, let us be warned by their mistake. I am more anxious to vote than to detain the committee longer by remarks. This bill will make the national Page 73 capital free ; and then the statue of Liberty, fashioned by our own Crawford, will be a fitting ornament on the finished dome of the Capitol."

Mr. Stevens moved that the committee rise, for the purpose of closing the debate ; and the motion was agreed to. Mr. Stevens then moved that all debate close in Committee of the Whole in one minute after the committee shall resume the consideration of the question. Mr. Richardson (Dem.) of Illinois moved to amend, so as to allow one Hour, — yeas 56, nays 73. Mr. Wright (Dem.) of Pennsylvania moved to amend the first section so as to provide " that this act shall not go into operation unless the qualified citizens of the District of Columbia shall, by a majority of votes polled, approve and ratify the same." — "I would recommend to my colleague," said Mr. Stevens, "with great respect, an amendment in another document. It is somewhere provided that the wicked shall be damned. I would suggest to my colleague that he propose a proviso to that, ' providing that they consent thereto.', It would be just as decent an amendment as the one which he has proposed." Mr. Wright's amendment was lost. Mr. Wadsworth (Opp.) of Kentucky moved to strike out of the second section the words, "loyal to the United States." The provision he "held to be unconstitutional."- "I oppose," said Mr. Hick man (Rep.) of Pennsylvania, "this amendment. My objection is, that a man who is disloyal forfeit the protection which ho would otherwise be entitled to from the Government ; that he cannot claim the protection of the Constitution which he repudiates and attempts to cast off; and it is not for us to confer rights upon Page 74 him which he distinctly disclaims." Mr. Wadsworth's amendment was rejected, Mr. Train (Rep.) of Massachusetts said, "I offer the following amendment to the third section : 'That any person feeling himself aggrieved by the determination of the commissioners in the amount of compensation awarded, may, within three months from the time when the final report of said commissioners shall be filed, appeal to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia, and either party may be entitled to a trial by jury in that court, and the judgment in the case shall be final upon all parties.' This amendment," said Mr. Train, "does not affect the bill, so far forth as it goes to the question of emancipation, but simply the proceedings in fixing the compensation." Mr. Train's amendment was lost, — ayes 53, noes 63, Mr. Harding (Opp.) of Kentucky moved to strike out the proviso limiting the sum appraised to $300, "You do not," said Mr. Harding, " consult the people of the District as to whether they are willing to sell or not. Not at all. You have the power to buy, and you will buy ; you have the power to fix your own price, and you will fix it, I say I have more respect for a man who will walk up and take my property, without thus mocking me with a consideration," Mr. Lovejoy (Rep.) of Illinois opposed the amendment. He said, "The gentleman thinks it is worse to take a thing for one-half of its value than it is to rob a man of his property outright, if I understood his remarks, I wonder which is worse, — to rob a man of his horse, or to rob him of his wife and child? That is the question I would like to ask him. Look at this which I hold in my hand : —

Page 75

Georgetown, D.C, June 12, 1861.

‘I hereby give my consent to let James Harod have the privilege of buying his wife and child for the sum of $1,100. James Harod is himself free. 'Louis Mackall, Jun.'

"Now talk about robbery. Every slave here has been robbed and stolen, and every man who holds a slave is a man- thief ; and here, in this nineteenth century, in the Federal city of this Christian Republic, lofty and eminent among the nations of the earth, challenging respect and imitation, is this man, Mackall, who proposes to let a free man have the privilege of buying his wife and child, which he had stolen from him, for eleven hundred dollars, — this Mackall, a woman-thief, a child-thief. I How much did he give for this woman ? He took her for a debt. And here let me say, for fear that ray time may expire, this woman-thief, Mackall, after giving a pledge that this man might buy his own wife and child, flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, seized the woman and child, and a babe, six months old, born since, and sent them into a slave-pen in Baltimore ; and yet here brazen men stand up and talk about robbing, because we give only three hundred dollars apiece, on an average, to deliver these poor oppressed beings from a condition of brutism. It is the sublimity of impudence,"

Mr. Wickliffe said, " I have no hope of success ; but I feel it to be ray duty to move to strike out the words, ' -without the exclusion of any witness on account of color,' where they Occur. I presume it is intended to let a man's servant come in, and swear that he is a Page 76 disloyal man. I do hope the friends of this bill will not so far outrage the laws of this District as to authorize slaves or free negroes to be witnesses in cases of this kind." Mr. Stevens said, "I trust that this committee will not so far continue an outrage as not to allow any man of credit, whether he be black or white, to be a witness ; " and the amendment was rejected.

Mr. Wickliffe moved to strike out all after the enacting clause, and insert the bill moved in the Senate by Mr. Wright of Indiana, Mr. Holman (Rep.) of Indiana would amend the amendment by striking out the fifth section, requiring the authorities of Washing ton and Georgetown to provide active and efficient means to arrest fugitive slaves. Mr. Cox (Dem.) of Ohio opposed the motion, "because, if the bill is to pass in any shape at all, I should like to see this substitute passed in its entirety." Mr. Vallandigham (Dem.) said that "there were not ten men in the Thirty-sixth Congress of the United States who would have recorded their votes in favor of the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. There are many on that side of the House who believe and know that assertion to be true ; and yet behold, to-day, what is before the Congress of the United States 1 In the language of the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky, ' availing themselves of the troubles of the times, we have this bill brought forward as the beginning of a grand scheme of emancipation ; and there is no calculation where that scheme is to end." Mr. Holman's motion to amend the amendment was rejected ; and Mr. Wickliffe's amendment was lost, — ayes 34, noes 84.

Page 77 Mr. Menzies (Union) of Kentucky moved to amend by striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting as follows : " That the children of persons held to service for life in the District of Columbia, who may be born after the first day of May, 1862, shall be free ; and, at the' age of eighteen years, may assert their freedom against all persons. Any person who may be brought into said District after the first day of May, 1862, for the benefit of his or her owner or hirer, shall thereby become free. Any person who may deprive a person entitled to freedom, according to the first section of this act, of the power and means of asserting such freedom, shall be guilty of felony, and shall be punished, on conviction thereof in any court of competent juris diction, by confinement in the penitentiary not less than five nor more than twenty years." The amendment was disagreed to. The committee, on motion of Mr. Stevens, rose ; and Mr. Dawes reported that the Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union had instructed him to report the bill back to the House, without amendment. Mr. Stevens demanded the previous question ; and it was ordered, — yeas 92, nays 39. Mr. Holman demanded the yeas and nays on the passage of the bill. They were ordered ; and the question was taken, — yeas 92, nays 38.

The bill thus passed the House, and was approved by the President on the sixteenth day of April, 1862. By the enactment of this bill, three thousand slaves were instantly made for ever free, slavery made impossible in the capital of the United States, and the black laws and ordinances concerning persons of color repealed Page 78 and abrogated. The enfranchised bondmen, grateful for this beneficent act of national legislation, assembled in their churches, and offered up the homage and gratitude of their hearts to God for the boon of personal freedom.

Source: Wilson, Henry. History of the Antislavery Measures of the Thirty-Seventh and Thirty-Eighth United States Congresses, 1861-1865, Boston: Walker, Fuller, & Co., 1865.