THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

Mr. Sherman followed in an earnest speech, in the course of which the following passage occurred.Mr. Sherman.The Senator from Massachusetts now for the first time in the Senate has stated his opposition to this bill.Mr. Sumner.Allow me to correct the Senator. The Senator was not here, when, at two o’clock in the morning, I denounced this amendment as I have, to-day, and much more severely.Mr. Sherman.He now states that the ground of his opposition is, that the bill does not disfranchise the whole Rebel population of the Southern States.Mr. Sumner.I beg the Senator’s pardon. I take no such ground. I say it does not provide proper safeguards against the Rebel population. I have not opened the question to what extent the disfranchisement should go.The motion of Mr. Sherman was agreed to, and the bill, with the Senate amendment, was returned to the House, which proceeded promptly to its consideration. The substitute of the Senate was concurred in, with a further amendment,—(1.) excluding from the conventions, and also from voting, all persons excluded from holding office under the recent Constitutional Amendment; (2.) declaring civil governments in the Rebel States provisional only and subject to the paramount authority of the United States; (3.) conferring the elective franchise upon all, without distinction of color, in elections under such provisional governments; and (4.) disqualifying all persons from office under provisional government who are disqualified by the Constitutional Amendment. The vote of the House was,—Yeas 128, Nays 46.February 20th, in the Senate, Mr. Williams moved concurrence with the House amendments. After brief remarks by Mr. Sherman, Mr. Sumner said:—

Mr. Sherman followed in an earnest speech, in the course of which the following passage occurred.

Mr. Sherman.The Senator from Massachusetts now for the first time in the Senate has stated his opposition to this bill.Mr. Sumner.Allow me to correct the Senator. The Senator was not here, when, at two o’clock in the morning, I denounced this amendment as I have, to-day, and much more severely.Mr. Sherman.He now states that the ground of his opposition is, that the bill does not disfranchise the whole Rebel population of the Southern States.Mr. Sumner.I beg the Senator’s pardon. I take no such ground. I say it does not provide proper safeguards against the Rebel population. I have not opened the question to what extent the disfranchisement should go.

Mr. Sherman.The Senator from Massachusetts now for the first time in the Senate has stated his opposition to this bill.

Mr. Sumner.Allow me to correct the Senator. The Senator was not here, when, at two o’clock in the morning, I denounced this amendment as I have, to-day, and much more severely.

Mr. Sherman.He now states that the ground of his opposition is, that the bill does not disfranchise the whole Rebel population of the Southern States.

Mr. Sumner.I beg the Senator’s pardon. I take no such ground. I say it does not provide proper safeguards against the Rebel population. I have not opened the question to what extent the disfranchisement should go.

The motion of Mr. Sherman was agreed to, and the bill, with the Senate amendment, was returned to the House, which proceeded promptly to its consideration. The substitute of the Senate was concurred in, with a further amendment,—(1.) excluding from the conventions, and also from voting, all persons excluded from holding office under the recent Constitutional Amendment; (2.) declaring civil governments in the Rebel States provisional only and subject to the paramount authority of the United States; (3.) conferring the elective franchise upon all, without distinction of color, in elections under such provisional governments; and (4.) disqualifying all persons from office under provisional government who are disqualified by the Constitutional Amendment. The vote of the House was,—Yeas 128, Nays 46.

February 20th, in the Senate, Mr. Williams moved concurrence with the House amendments. After brief remarks by Mr. Sherman, Mr. Sumner said:—

I differ from the Senator [Mr.Sherman], when he calls this a small matter. It is a great matter.

I should not say another word but for the singular speech of the Senator yesterday. He made somethinglike an assault on me, because I required the very amendments the House have now made; and yet he is to support them. I am glad the Senator has seen light; but he must revise his speech of yesterday. The Senator shakes his head. What did I ask? What did I criticize? It was, that the bill failed in safeguard against Rebels. I did not say how many to exclude. I only said some must be excluded, more or less. None were excluded. That brought down the cataract of speech we all enjoyed, when the Senator protested with all the ardor of his nature, and invoked the State of Ohio behind him to oppose the proposition of the Senator from Massachusetts. And now, if I understand the Senator from Ohio, he is ready to place himself side by side with the Senator from Massachusetts in support of the amendment from the House embodying this very proposition. I am glad the Senator is so disposed. I rejoice that he sees light. To-morrow I hope to welcome the Senator to some other height.

Mr. Cowan[of Pennsylvania]. Excelsior!

Mr. Sumner.And I hope the word may be applicable to my friend from Pennsylvania also. [Laughter.]

But there was another remark of the Senator which struck me with astonishment. He complained that I demanded these safeguards now, and said that I had already in the bill all that I had ever demanded before,—that universal suffrage, without distinction of race or color, was secured; and, said he, “the Senator from Massachusetts has never asked anything but that.” Now I can well pardon the Senator for ignorancewith regard to what I have said or asked on former occasions. I cannot expect him to be familiar with it. And yet, when he openly arraigns me with the impetuosity of yesterday, I shall be justified in showing how completely he was mistaken.

Here Mr. Sumner referred to his speech before the Massachusetts Republican State Convention, September 14, 1865, entitled “The National Security and the National Faith, Guaranties for the National Freedman and the National Creditor,” and showed how completely at that time he had anticipated all present demands.[88]He then continued:—

And yet, when I simply insisted upon some additional safeguard against the return of Rebels to power, the Senator told us that I was asking something new. Thank God, the other House has supplied the very protection which I desired; it has laid the foundation of a true peace. That foundation can be only on a loyal basis.

Two Presidents—one always to be named with veneration, another always most reluctantly—have united in this sentiment. Abraham Lincoln insisted that the new governments should be founded on loyalty; that, if there were only five thousand loyal persons in a State, they were entitled to hold the power. His successor adopted the same principle, when, in different language, he compendiously said, “For the Rebels back seats.” What is now required could not be expressed better. “For the Rebels back seats,” until this great work of Reconstruction is achieved.

Mr. Sherman, and Mr. Stewart, of Nevada, spoke especially in reply to Mr. Sumner, congratulating him upon his acceptance of the result. Mr. Sumner followed.

I am sorry to say another word; and yet, if silent, I might expose myself to misunderstanding. I accept the amendments from the other House as the best that can be had now; but I desire it distinctly understood that I shall not hesitate to insist at all times upon applying more directly and practically the true principles of Reconstruction. There is the Louisiana Bill on our table. The time, I presume, has passed for acting on it at this session; but in the earliest days of the next session I shall press that subject as constantly as I can. I believe you owe it to every one of these States to supply a government in place of that you now solemnly declare illegal. In such a government you will naturally secure a true loyalty, and I wish to be understood as not in any way circumscribing myself by the vote of to-day.

It may be that it will be best to require of every voter the same oath required of all entering Congress, which we know as the test oath. At least something more must be done; there must be other safeguards than those supplied by this very hasty and crude act of legislation. I accept it as containing much that is good, some things infinitely good, but as coming short of what a patriotic Congress ought to supply for the safety of the Republic.

Let it be understood, then, that I am not compromised by this bill, or by blandishments of Senators over the way [Messrs.ShermanandStewart]. I listen to them of course with pleasure, and to all their expressions of friendship I respond with all my heart. I like much to go with them; but I value more the safety of my country. When Senators, even as powerful as the Senator from Ohio and the Senator from Nevada, take acourse which seems to me inconsistent with the national security, they must not expect me to follow.

After further debate, late in the evening of February 20th the vote was reached, and the House amendments were concurred in,—Yeas 35, Nays 7. The effect of this was to pass the bill.March 2d, the bill was vetoed. The House, on the same day, by 138 Yeas to 51 Nays, and the Senate, by 38 Yeas to 10 Nays, passed the bill by a two-thirds vote, notwithstanding the objections of the President, so that it became a law.[89]

After further debate, late in the evening of February 20th the vote was reached, and the House amendments were concurred in,—Yeas 35, Nays 7. The effect of this was to pass the bill.

March 2d, the bill was vetoed. The House, on the same day, by 138 Yeas to 51 Nays, and the Senate, by 38 Yeas to 10 Nays, passed the bill by a two-thirds vote, notwithstanding the objections of the President, so that it became a law.[89]

Remarks in the Senate, on the Bill to establish a Department of Education, February 26, 1867.

MR. PRESIDENT,—I am unwilling that this bill should be embarrassed by any question of words. I am for the bill in substance, whatever words may be employed. Call it a bureau, if you please, or call it a department; I accept it under either designation. The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.Dixon] has not too strongly depicted the necessity of the case. We are to have universal suffrage, a natural consequence of universal emancipation; but this will be a barren sceptre in the hands of the people, unless we supply education also. From the beginning of our troubles, I have foreseen this question. Through the agency and under the influence of the National Government education must be promoted in the Rebel States. To this end we need some central agency. This, if I understand it, is supplied by the bill before us.

Call it a bureau or a department; but give us the bill, and do not endanger it, at this moment, in this late hour of the session, by unnecessary amendment. Sir, I would, if I could, give it the highest designation. If there is any term in our dictionary that would impart peculiar significance, I should prefer that. Indeed,I should not hesitate, could I have my way, to place the head of the Department of Education in the Cabinet of the United States,—following the practice of one of the civilized governments of the world. I refer to France, which for years has had in its Cabinet a Minister of Education. But no such proposition is before us. The question is simply on a name; and I hope we shall not take up time with regard to it.

The bill passed both Houses of Congress, and became a law.[90]

Remarks in the Senate, on a Resolution directing the Erection of such Monuments, February 27, 1867.

Mr. Poland, of Vermont, introduced a resolution directing the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate to see that monuments were placed in the Congressional burial-ground, in memory of Senators who had died at Washington since July 4, 1861. On the question of taking up this resolution for consideration, Mr. Sumner remarked:—

Originally there was a reason for these monuments. Senators and Representatives dying here found their last home in the Congressional burial-ground, and these monuments covered their remains. At a later day, with increasing facilities of transportation, the custom of burial here has ceased; but the monuments, being only cenotaphs, were continued until 1861, when this custom was suspended. Meantime Death has not been less busy here, and the question is, whether the former custom shall be revived, and cenotaphs be placed in an unvisited burial-ground, to mark the spot where the remains of a Senator might have been placed, had they not been transported to repose among his family, kindred, and neighbors.

I cannot but think that the suspension of this custom of monuments, which occurred at the beginning of the war, was notice or indication that the occasion for themhad passed; and I doubt sincerely the expediency of reviving the custom, unless where an associate is actually buried here. If those dying here, but buried elsewhere, are to be commemorated by Congress in any monumental form, it seems to me better that it should be a simple tablet of stone or brass in the Capitol, where it would be seen by the visitors thronging here, and perhaps arrest the attention of their successors in public duty, teaching how Death enters these Halls. But why place an unsightly cenotaph in a forlorn burial-ground,—I may add, at considerable cost? I cannot doubt that the time has come for this expense to cease.

The resolution was referred to the Committee on the Contingent Expenses of the Senate.

Speech in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution giving the Thanks of Congress to Cyrus W. Field, March 2, 1867.

By a joint resolution introduced by Mr. Morgan, of New York, the President was requested “to cause a gold medal to be struck, with suitable emblems, devices, and inscription, to be presented to Mr. Field,” and to “cause a copy of this joint resolution to be engrossed on parchment, and transmit the same, together with the medal, to Mr. Field, to be presented to him in the name of the people of the United States of America.”March 2d, the joint resolution was considered. After a speech from Mr. Morgan, Mr. Sumner said:—

March 2d, the joint resolution was considered. After a speech from Mr. Morgan, Mr. Sumner said:—

MR. PRESIDENT,—I rejoice in every enterprise by which human industry is quickened and distant places are brought near together. In ancient days the builders of roads were treated with godlike honor. I offer them my homage now. The enterprise which is to complete the railroad connection between the Pacific and the Atlantic belongs to this class. But this is not so peculiar and exceptional as that which has already connected the two continents by a telegraphic wire. It is not so historic. It is not itself so great an epoch.

It is not easy to exaggerate the difficulty or the value of the new achievement.

The enterprise was original in its beginning and in every stage of its completion. It began by a telegraphline connecting St. John’s, the most easterly port of America, with the main continent. This was planned at the house of Cyrus W. Field, by a few gentlemen, among whom were Peter Cooper, Moses Taylor, Marshall O. Roberts, and David Dudley Field. New York and St. John’s are about twelve hundred miles apart. When these two points were brought into telegraphic association, the first link was made in the chain destined to bind the two continents together. Out of this American beginning sprang efforts which ended in the oceanic cable.

In other respects our country led the way. The first soundings across the Atlantic were by American officers in American ships. The United States ship Dolphin first discovered the telegraphic plateau as early as 1853, and in 1856 the United States ship Arctic sounded across from Newfoundland to Ireland, a year before Her Majesty’s ship Cyclops sailed the same course.

It was not until 1856 that this American enterprise showed itself in England, where it was carried by Mr. Field. Through his energies the Atlantic Telegraphic Company was organized in London, with a board of directors composed of English bankers and merchants, among whom was an American citizen, George Peabody. By conjoint exertions of the two countries the cable was stretched from continent to continent in 1858. Messages of good-will traversed it. The United States and England seemed to be near together, while Queen and President interchanged salutations. Then suddenly the electric current ceased, and the cable became a lifeless line. The enterprise itself hardly lived. But it was again quickened into being, and finally carriedto a successful close. British capital, British skill, contributed largely, and the society had for its president an eminent Englishman, the Right Honorable James Stuart Wortley; but I have always understood that our countryman was the mainspring. His confidence never ceased; his energies never flagged. Twelve years of life and forty voyages across the Atlantic were woven into this work. He was the Alpha and the Omega of a triumph which has few parallels in history.

Englishmen who took an active part in this enterprise have received recognition and honor from the sovereign. Some have been knighted, others advanced in service. Meanwhile Cyrus W. Field, who did so much, has remained unnoticed by our Government. He has been honored by the popular voice, but it remains for Congress to embody this voice in a national testimonial. If it be said that there is no precedent for such a vote, then do I reply that his case is without precedent, and we must not hesitate to make a precedent by this expression of national gratitude. Thanks are given for victories in war: give them now for a victory of peace.

The joint resolution passed both Houses without a division, and was approved by the President.[91]

Resolutions and Speeches in the Senate, March 7 and 11, 1867.

March 7th, the following resolutions were introduced by Mr. Sumner, and on his motion ordered to lie on the table and be printed.“Resolutionsdeclaring certain further guaranties required in the Reconstruction of the Rebel States.“Resolved, That Congress, in declaring by positive legislation that it possesses paramount authority over the Rebel States, and in prescribing that no person therein shall be excluded from the elective franchise by reason of race, color, or previous condition, has begun the work of Reconstruction, and has set an example to itself.“Resolved, That other things remain to be done, as clearly within the power of Congress as the elective franchise, and it is the duty of Congress to see that these things are not left undone.“Resolved, That among things remaining to be done are the five following.“First. Existing governments, now declared illegal, must be vacated, so that they can have no agency in Reconstruction, and will cease to exercise a pernicious influence.“Secondly. Provisional governments must be constituted as temporary substitutes for the illegal governments, with special authority to superintend the transition to permanent governments republican in form.“Thirdly. As loyalty beyond suspicion must be the basis of permanent governments republican in form, every possible precaution must be adopted against Rebel agency or influence in the formation of these governments.“Fourthly. As the education of the people is essential to the national welfare, and especially to the development of those principles of justiceand morality which constitute the foundation of republican government, and as, according to the census, an immense proportion of the people in the Rebel States, without distinction of color, cannot read and write, therefore public schools must be established for the equal good of all.“Fifthly. Not less important than education is the homestead, which must be secured to the freedmen, so that at least every head of a family may have a piece of land.“Resolved, That all these requirements are in the nature of guaranties to be exacted by Congress, without which the United States will not obtain that security for the future which is essential to a just Reconstruction.”March 11th, on motion of Mr. Sumner, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions. Mr. Williams, of Oregon, was not prepared to vote on these resolutions until they had received the consideration of some committee, and he moved their reference to the Committee on the Judiciary.Mr. Sumner said:—

March 7th, the following resolutions were introduced by Mr. Sumner, and on his motion ordered to lie on the table and be printed.

“Resolutionsdeclaring certain further guaranties required in the Reconstruction of the Rebel States.“Resolved, That Congress, in declaring by positive legislation that it possesses paramount authority over the Rebel States, and in prescribing that no person therein shall be excluded from the elective franchise by reason of race, color, or previous condition, has begun the work of Reconstruction, and has set an example to itself.“Resolved, That other things remain to be done, as clearly within the power of Congress as the elective franchise, and it is the duty of Congress to see that these things are not left undone.“Resolved, That among things remaining to be done are the five following.“First. Existing governments, now declared illegal, must be vacated, so that they can have no agency in Reconstruction, and will cease to exercise a pernicious influence.“Secondly. Provisional governments must be constituted as temporary substitutes for the illegal governments, with special authority to superintend the transition to permanent governments republican in form.“Thirdly. As loyalty beyond suspicion must be the basis of permanent governments republican in form, every possible precaution must be adopted against Rebel agency or influence in the formation of these governments.“Fourthly. As the education of the people is essential to the national welfare, and especially to the development of those principles of justiceand morality which constitute the foundation of republican government, and as, according to the census, an immense proportion of the people in the Rebel States, without distinction of color, cannot read and write, therefore public schools must be established for the equal good of all.“Fifthly. Not less important than education is the homestead, which must be secured to the freedmen, so that at least every head of a family may have a piece of land.“Resolved, That all these requirements are in the nature of guaranties to be exacted by Congress, without which the United States will not obtain that security for the future which is essential to a just Reconstruction.”

“Resolutionsdeclaring certain further guaranties required in the Reconstruction of the Rebel States.

“Resolved, That Congress, in declaring by positive legislation that it possesses paramount authority over the Rebel States, and in prescribing that no person therein shall be excluded from the elective franchise by reason of race, color, or previous condition, has begun the work of Reconstruction, and has set an example to itself.

“Resolved, That other things remain to be done, as clearly within the power of Congress as the elective franchise, and it is the duty of Congress to see that these things are not left undone.

“Resolved, That among things remaining to be done are the five following.

“First. Existing governments, now declared illegal, must be vacated, so that they can have no agency in Reconstruction, and will cease to exercise a pernicious influence.

“Secondly. Provisional governments must be constituted as temporary substitutes for the illegal governments, with special authority to superintend the transition to permanent governments republican in form.

“Thirdly. As loyalty beyond suspicion must be the basis of permanent governments republican in form, every possible precaution must be adopted against Rebel agency or influence in the formation of these governments.

“Fourthly. As the education of the people is essential to the national welfare, and especially to the development of those principles of justiceand morality which constitute the foundation of republican government, and as, according to the census, an immense proportion of the people in the Rebel States, without distinction of color, cannot read and write, therefore public schools must be established for the equal good of all.

“Fifthly. Not less important than education is the homestead, which must be secured to the freedmen, so that at least every head of a family may have a piece of land.

“Resolved, That all these requirements are in the nature of guaranties to be exacted by Congress, without which the United States will not obtain that security for the future which is essential to a just Reconstruction.”

March 11th, on motion of Mr. Sumner, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions. Mr. Williams, of Oregon, was not prepared to vote on these resolutions until they had received the consideration of some committee, and he moved their reference to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. Sumner said:—

MR. PRESIDENT,—The Senator from Oregon has made no criticism on the resolutions, but nevertheless he objects to proceeding with them now; he desires reference, he would have the aid of a committee, before he proceeds with their consideration. If I can have the attention of the Senator, it seems to me that this will be as good as a committee. The resolutions are on the table; they are plain; they are unequivocal; they are perfectly intelligible; and they make a declaration of principle and of purpose which at this moment is of peculiar importance.

Congress has undertaken to provide for the military government of the Rebel States, and has made certain requirements with regard to Reconstruction, and there it stops. It has presented no complete system, and it has provided no machinery. From this failure our friends at the South are at this moment in the greatest anxiety. They are suffering. Former Rebels, or persons representing the Rebellion, are moving under ourbill to take a leading part. Already the Legislature of Virginia, packed by Rebels, full of the old Rebel virus, has undertaken to call a convention under our recent Act. Let that convention be called, and what is the condition of those friends to whom you owe protection? Unless I am misinformed by valued correspondents, the position of our friends will be very painful. I have this morning a letter from Mr. Botts,—I mention his name because he is well known to all of us, and I presume he would have no objection to being quoted on this floor,—in which he entreats us to provide some protection for him and other Unionists against efforts already commenced by Rebels or persons under Rebel influence.

I am anxious for practical legislation to that end; but, to pave the way for such legislation, I would have Congress, at the earliest possible moment, make a declaration in general terms of its purposes. The Senator says these resolutions do not propose practical legislation. I beg the Senator’s pardon: they do not propose what we call legislation, but they announce to these Rebel States what we propose to do; they foreshadow the future; they give notice; they tell the Rebels that they are not to take part in Reconstruction; and they tell our friends and the friends of the Union that we mean to be wakeful with regard to their interests. Such will be their effect. They are in the nature of a declaration. At the beginning of the war there was a declaration, which has been often quoted in both Houses, with regard to the purposes of the war. Very often in times past declarations of policy were made in one House or the other, and sometimes by concurrent resolutions of the two Chambers. If the occasion requires,the declaration ought to be made. In common times and under ordinary circumstances there would be no occasion for such a declaration, but at this moment there seems peculiar occasion; you must give notice; and the failure of our bill to meet the present exigency throws this responsibility upon us.

The next question is as to the character of the notice. It begins in its title by declaring that certain further guaranties are required in the Reconstruction of the Rebel States. Can any Senator doubt that such guaranties are required? I submit that on that head there can be no question. I am persuaded that my excellent friend from Oregon will not question that general statement.

Mr. Sumner then took up the several points of the resolutions in order and explained them. Coming to that declaring the necessity of a homestead for the freedman, he proceeded:—

I believe that all familiar with the processes of Reconstruction have felt that our work would be incomplete, unless in some way we secured to the freedman a piece of land. Only within a few days, gentlemen fresh from travel through these States have assured me, that, as they saw the condition of things there, nothing pressed upon their minds more than the necessity of such a provision. The more you reflect upon it, and the more you listen to evidence, the stronger will be your conclusion as to this necessity.

Do you ask as to the power of Congress? Again I say, you find it precisely where you found the power to confer universal suffrage. To give a homestead will be no more than to give a vote. You have done the one, and now you must do the other. We are told that to him that hath shall be given; and as you havealready given the ballot, you must go further, and give not only education, but the homestead. Nor can you hesitate for want of power. The time for hesitation has passed.

Mr. Fessenden[of Maine]. I should like to ask my friend a question, with his permission.Mr. Sumner.Certainly.Mr. Fessenden.The Senator put the granting of the ballot on the ground that without it the Government would not be republican in form, as I understood his argument.Mr. Sumner.Yes.Mr. Fessenden.Now I should like to know if he puts the possession by every man of a piece of land on the same ground.Mr. Sumner.I do not.Mr. Fessenden.The Senator assimilated the two, and said, that, having done the one, we must do the other. I supposed, perhaps, the same process of reasoning applied to both.Mr. Sumner.No; the homestead stands on the necessity of the case, to complete the work of the ballot.Mr. Grimes[of Iowa]. Have we not done that under the Homestead Law?Mr. Sumner.The freedmen are not excluded from the Homestead Law; but I would provide them with a piece of land where they are.Mr. Fessenden.That is more than we do for white men.

Mr. Fessenden[of Maine]. I should like to ask my friend a question, with his permission.

Mr. Sumner.Certainly.

Mr. Fessenden.The Senator put the granting of the ballot on the ground that without it the Government would not be republican in form, as I understood his argument.

Mr. Sumner.Yes.

Mr. Fessenden.Now I should like to know if he puts the possession by every man of a piece of land on the same ground.

Mr. Sumner.I do not.

Mr. Fessenden.The Senator assimilated the two, and said, that, having done the one, we must do the other. I supposed, perhaps, the same process of reasoning applied to both.

Mr. Sumner.No; the homestead stands on the necessity of the case, to complete the work of the ballot.

Mr. Grimes[of Iowa]. Have we not done that under the Homestead Law?

Mr. Sumner.The freedmen are not excluded from the Homestead Law; but I would provide them with a piece of land where they are.

Mr. Fessenden.That is more than we do for white men.

Mr. Sumner.White men have never been in slavery; there is no emancipation and no enfranchisement of white men to be consummated. I put it to my friend, I ask his best judgment, can he see a way to complete and crown this great and glorious work without securing land? My friend before me [Mr.Grimes] asks,“How are we to get the land?” There are several ways. By a process of confiscation we should have had enough; and I have no doubt that the country would have been better, had the great landed estates of the South been divided and subdivided among the loyal colored population. That is the judgment of many Unionists at the South. I say nothing on that point; but clearly there are lands through the South belonging to the United States, or that have fallen to the United States through the failure to pay taxes. It has always seemed to me that in the exercise of the pardoning power it would have been easy for the President to require that the person who was to receive a pardon should allot a certain portion of his lands to his freedmen. That might have been annexed as a condition. A President properly inspired, and disposed to organize a true Reconstruction, could not have hesitated in such a requirement. That would have been a very simple process. I am aware that Congress cannot affect the pardoning power; but still I doubt not there is something that can be done by Congress. Where Congress has done so much, I am unwilling to believe it cannot do all that the emergency requires. Let us not shrink from the difficulties. With regard to the homestead there may be difficulties, but not on that account should we hesitate. We must assure peace and security to these people, and, to that end, consider candidly, gently, carefully, the proper requirements, and then fearlessly provide for them.

There is still another, which I have not named in these resolutions, though I have employed it in the careful and somewhat extended Reconstruction Bill which I have laid on the table of the Senate, and which sometime I may try to call up for discussion,—and that is, the substitution of the vote by ballot for the voteviva voce. Letters from Virginia, and also from other parts of the South, all plead for this change. They say, that, so long as the voteviva vocecontinues, it will be difficult for the true Union men to organize; they will be under check and control from the Rebels. I have a letter, received only this morning, from a Unionist, from which I will read a brief passage.

…

Now does my excellent friend from Oregon, who wishes to bury this effort in a committee, doubt the concluding resolution? Can he hesitate to say that every one of these requirements is in the nature of a guaranty, without which we shall not obtain that complete security for the future which our country has a right to expect? There they are. That the illegal governments must be vacated. Who can doubt that? That provisional governments must be constituted as temporary substitutes for the illegal governments. Who can doubt that? That the new governments must be founded on an unalterable basis of loyalty, and to that end no Rebels must be allowed to exert influence or agency in the formation of the new governments. Who can doubt that? Then, again, education: who can doubt? Certainly not my friend from Oregon: he will not doubt the importance of education as a corner-stone of Reconstruction. It is a golden moment. We have the power. Let us not fail to exercise it. Exercising it now, we can shape the destinies of that people for the future. There remains the homestead. I see the practical difficulties; but I do not despair. Let us apply ourselves to them, and I do not doubt that we can secure substantiallyto every head of a family among the freedmen a piece of land, and we may then go further, and, in the way of machinery, provide a vote by ballot instead of a voteviva voce.

Now I insist that all these are in the nature of guaranties of future peace, and we should not hesitate in doing all within our power to secure them. I hope, therefore, that Senators will act on these resolutions without reference to a committee. I see no occasion for a reference. There is one objection, at least, on the face: it will cause delay. Let these resolutions be adopted and go to the country, and you will find that the gratitude of the American people, and of all Union men at the South, will come up to Congress for your act.

Mr. Dixon, of Connecticut, deprecated the adoption of the resolutions. The bill recently passed “purported to be final.… It provided certain terms, harsh and severe in the extreme, upon which the States formerly in rebellion should be restored to the Union.” He then remarked: “These resolutions come from the right quarter. Whatever may be my opinion of his [Mr.Sumner’s] political views, I will say for that Senator, that for the last two years he has been prophetic; what he has announced, what he has declared, what he has said must be law, has become law upon many subjects.… Let us know what is coming; let us see the worst.… While I was very glad to find—if I understood them correctly—that the Senator from Maine [Mr.Fessenden] and some other Senators about me did not coincide with the views of the Senator from Massachusetts, I could not forget that two years ago I heard a Senator on this floor say that upon another subject there was not a single Senator here who agreed with the Senator from Massachusetts; and yet upon that very subject I believe every Senator on the majority side of the Senate now, if not at heart concurring with him, acts and votes with him.”Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, opposed the resolutions. It seemed to him “not exactly fair or just or ingenuous to the Southern people to add new terms, or require of them additional guaranties, as conditions to the admission of representation.”Mr. Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, voted for the recent bill because he thought he saw in opinions of Mr. Sumner, “and a few others who concur with him, that, if the measure then before the Senate was not adopted, harsher, much harsher, measures would in the end be exacted of the South.”Mr. Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey, thought the resolutions “unfair to Congress and unfair to the country.”Mr. Sumner said in reply:—

Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, opposed the resolutions. It seemed to him “not exactly fair or just or ingenuous to the Southern people to add new terms, or require of them additional guaranties, as conditions to the admission of representation.”

Mr. Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, voted for the recent bill because he thought he saw in opinions of Mr. Sumner, “and a few others who concur with him, that, if the measure then before the Senate was not adopted, harsher, much harsher, measures would in the end be exacted of the South.”

Mr. Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey, thought the resolutions “unfair to Congress and unfair to the country.”

Mr. Sumner said in reply:—

The objects which I seek in Reconstruction are regarded in very different lights by myself and by Senators who have spoken. The Senator from New Jersey, the Senator from Maryland, and the Senator from Ohio all regard these requirements as in the nature of burdens or penalties. Education is a burden or penalty; a homestead is a burden or penalty. It is a new burden or penalty which I am seeking—so these distinguished Senators argue—to impose upon the South. Are they right, or am I right? Education can never be burden or penalty. Justice in the way of a homestead can never be burden or penalty. Each is a sacred duty which the nation owes to those who rightfully look to us for protection.

Now, at this moment, in the development of events, the people at the South rightfully look to us for protection. They rightfully look to us, that, in laying the foundation-stone of future security, we shall see that those things are done which will make the security real, and not merely nominal. And yet, when I ask that the security shall be real, and not merely nominal, I am encountered by the objection that I seek to impose new burdens,—that I am harsh. Sir, if I know my own heart, I would not impose a burden upon any human being. I would not impose a burden even upon those who have trespassed so much against the Republic.I do not seek their punishment. Never has one word fallen from my lips asking for their punishment, for any punishment of the South. All that I ask is the establishment of human rights on a permanent foundation. Is there any Senator who differs from me? I am sure that my friend from Ohio seeks the establishment of future security; but he will allow me to say, that to my mind he abandons it at the beginning,—he fails at the proper moment to require guaranties without which future security will be vain.

This is not the first time that the Senator from Ohio has set himself against fundamental propositions of Reconstruction. When, now more than four years ago, I had the honor of introducing into this Chamber a proposition declaring the jurisdiction of Congress over this whole question, and over the whole Rebel region, I was met by the Senator, who reminded me that I was alone, and did not hesitate to say that my position was not unlike that of Jefferson Davis.

Here Mr. Sumner sent to the desk the speech of Mr. Sherman, April 2, 1862, and the Secretary read what he said of Mr. Sumner’s position.

I have not called attention to these remarks in any unkind spirit, for I have none for the Senator; I have no feeling but kindness and respect for him; but as I listened to him a few minutes ago, remonstrating against the position I now occupy, I was carried back to that early day when he remonstrated, if possible, more strenuously against the position I then occupied. I had the audacity then to assert the paramount power of Congress over the whole Rebel region. That was the sum and substance of my argument; and you have heard the answer of the Senator. And now, in thelapse of time, the Senator has ranged himself by my side, voting for that measure of Reconstruction which is founded on the jurisdiction of Congress over the whole Rebel region.

As time passed, the subject assumed another character. It was with regard to the suffrage. A year ago I asserted on this floor that we must give the suffrage to all colored persons by Act of Congress and without Constitutional Amendment, founding myself on two grounds. One was the solemn guaranty in the Constitution of a republican form of government; and I undertook to show that any denial of rights on account of color was unrepublican to such extent that the government sanctioning it could not be considered in any just sense republican. I then went further, and insisted, that, from the necessity of the case, at the present moment, Congress must accord the suffrage to all persons at the South, without distinction of color. I argued that the suffrage of colored citizens was needed to counterbalance the suffrage of the Rebels.[92]One year has passed, and now, by Act of Congress, you have asserted the very power which the Senator from Ohio, and other distinguished Senators associated with him, most strenuously denied. That Senator and other Senators insisted that it could be only by Constitutional Amendment. I insisted that it could be under the existing text of the Constitution; nay, more, that from the necessity of the case it must be in this way. And in this way it has been done.

But, in doing it, you have unhappily failed to make proper provision for enforcing this essential security.You have provided no machinery, and you have left other things undone which ought to be done. And now, urging that these things should be done, I am encountered again by my friend from Ohio, whom I had encountered before on these other cardinal propositions; and he now, just as strenuously as before, insists that it is not within our power or province at this moment to make any additional requirements of the Rebel States. He is willing that the bill in certain particulars shall be amended. I do not know precisely to what extent he would go; but he will make no additional requirements, as he expresses it, in the nature of burdens. Sir, I make no additional requirements in the nature of burdens. I have already said, I impose no burdens upon any man; but I insist upon the protection of rights. And now, at this moment, as we are engaged in this great work of Reconstruction, I insist that the work shall be completely done. It will not be completely done, if you fail to supply any safeguards or precautions that can possibly be adopted.

A great orator has told us that he had but one lamp by which his feet were guided, and that was the lamp of experience.[93]There is one transcendent experience, commanding, historic, which illumines this age. It is more than a lamp; it is sunshine. I mean the example afforded by the Emperor of Russia, when he set free twenty million serfs. Did he stop with their freedom? He went further, and provided for their education, and also that each should have a piece of land. And now, when I ask that my country, a republic, heir of all the ages, foremost in the tide of time, should do on this questiononly what the Emperor of Russia has done, I am met by grave Senators with the reproach that I am imposing new burdens. It is no such thing. I am only asking new advantages for all in that distracted region, with new securities for my country, to the end that it may be safe, great, and glorious.

After remarks by Mr. Howard, of Michigan, the resolutions, on motion of Mr. Frelinghuysen, were laid on the table,—Yeas 36, Nays 10.March 12th, the resolutions were again considered, when Mr. Morton, of Indiana, spoke in favor of education, and Mr. Howe, of Wisconsin, sustained the resolutions generally.July 3d, Mr. Sumner made another attempt to have them considered, speaking specially upon the importance of a homestead for freedmen.

After remarks by Mr. Howard, of Michigan, the resolutions, on motion of Mr. Frelinghuysen, were laid on the table,—Yeas 36, Nays 10.

March 12th, the resolutions were again considered, when Mr. Morton, of Indiana, spoke in favor of education, and Mr. Howe, of Wisconsin, sustained the resolutions generally.

July 3d, Mr. Sumner made another attempt to have them considered, speaking specially upon the importance of a homestead for freedmen.

Speech in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution giving the Thanks of Congress to George Peabody, March 8, 1867.

March 5th, Mr. Sumner asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to bring in the following joint resolution, which was read twice and ordered to be printed.“Joint Resolutionpresenting the thanks of Congress to George Peabody.“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the thanks of Congress be, and they hereby are, presented to George Peabody, of Massachusetts, for his great and peculiar beneficence in giving a large sum of money, amounting to two million dollars, for the promotion of education in the more destitute portions of the Southern and Southwestern States, the benefits of which, according to his direction, are to be distributed among the entire population, without any distinction, except what may be found in needs or opportunities of usefulness.“Sec. 2.And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the President to cause a gold medal to be struck, with suitable devices and inscriptions, which, together with a copy of this resolution, shall be presented to Mr. Peabody in the name of the people of the United States.”March 8th, on motion of Mr. Sumner, the joint resolution was taken up for consideration, when the latter said:—

March 5th, Mr. Sumner asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to bring in the following joint resolution, which was read twice and ordered to be printed.

“Joint Resolutionpresenting the thanks of Congress to George Peabody.“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the thanks of Congress be, and they hereby are, presented to George Peabody, of Massachusetts, for his great and peculiar beneficence in giving a large sum of money, amounting to two million dollars, for the promotion of education in the more destitute portions of the Southern and Southwestern States, the benefits of which, according to his direction, are to be distributed among the entire population, without any distinction, except what may be found in needs or opportunities of usefulness.“Sec. 2.And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the President to cause a gold medal to be struck, with suitable devices and inscriptions, which, together with a copy of this resolution, shall be presented to Mr. Peabody in the name of the people of the United States.”

“Joint Resolutionpresenting the thanks of Congress to George Peabody.

“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the thanks of Congress be, and they hereby are, presented to George Peabody, of Massachusetts, for his great and peculiar beneficence in giving a large sum of money, amounting to two million dollars, for the promotion of education in the more destitute portions of the Southern and Southwestern States, the benefits of which, according to his direction, are to be distributed among the entire population, without any distinction, except what may be found in needs or opportunities of usefulness.

“Sec. 2.And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the President to cause a gold medal to be struck, with suitable devices and inscriptions, which, together with a copy of this resolution, shall be presented to Mr. Peabody in the name of the people of the United States.”

March 8th, on motion of Mr. Sumner, the joint resolution was taken up for consideration, when the latter said:—

MR. PRESIDENT,—I hope sincerely that there can be no question on this resolution. It expresses the thanks of Congress for an act great in itself, and also great as an example.

I recall no instance in history where a private person during life has bestowed so large a sum in charity.Few after death have done so much. The bequest of Smithson, which Congress accepted with honor, and made the foundation of the institution bearing his name and receiving our annual care, was much less than the donation of Mr. Peabody for purposes of education in the South and Southwestern States, to be distributed among the whole population, without any distinction other than needs or opportunities of usefulness to them.

I hail this benefaction as of especial value now: first, as a contribution to education, which is a sacred cause never to be forgotten in a republic; secondly, as a charity to a distressed part of our country which needs the help of education; and, thirdly, as an endowment for the equal benefit of all, without distinction of caste. As it is much in itself, so I cannot but think it will be most fruitful as an example. Individuals and communities will be moved to do more in the same direction, and impartial education may be added to recent triumphs.

I am not led to consider the difference between the widow’s mite and the rich man’s endowment, except to remark, that, when a charity is so large as to become historic, it is necessarily taken out of the category of common life. Standing apart by itself, it challenges attention and fills the mind, receiving homage and gratitude. Such, I am sure, has been the prevailing sentiment of our country toward Mr. Peabody. In voting this resolution, Congress will only give expression to the popular voice.

I should be sorry to have it understood that the thanks of Congress can be won only in war. Peace also has victories deserving honor. A public benefactoris a conqueror in the perpetual conflict with evil. He, too, meets the enemy face to face. Let him also have the reward of victory.

Already in England our benefactor has signalized himself by a generous endowment of the poor. The sum he gave was large, but not so large as he has given for education in our country. The sentiments of the British people found expression through the Queen, who honored him with a valuable present, her own portrait, and an autograph letter declaring her grateful sense of his beneficence. Kindred sentiments may justly find expression through Congress, which is empowered to write the autograph of the American people.

If it be said that such a vote is without precedent, I reply that this is a mistake. You voted thanks to Mr. Vanderbilt for the present of a steamer, and to Mr. Field for generous enterprise in establishing the telegraphic cable between the two continents. But even if there were no precedent, then, do I say, make a precedent. Your vote will be less unprecedented than his generosity.

At this moment, when we are engaged in the work of Reconstruction, this endowment for education in the Southern and Southwestern States is most timely. Education is the foundation-stone of that Republican Government we seek to establish. On this account, also, I would honor the benefactor.

I have not asked a reference to a committee, because it seemed that the resolution was of such a character that the Senate would be glad to act upon it directly. The thanks we offer will be of more value, if promptly offered.

Back to Index Next