It had not been intended to fight a general battle at such a distance as Gettysburg from our base, unless attacked; but, being unexpectedly confronted by the opposing army, it became a matter of difficulty to withdraw through the mountains with our large trains. At the same time the country was unfavorable for collecting supplies while in the presence of the main army of the enemy, as he was enabled to restrain our foraging parties by occupying the passes of the mountains with both regular and local troops. Encouraged by the successful issue of the engagement of the first day, and in view of the valuable results that would ensue from the defeat of the army of General Meade (who had succeeded General Hooker), General Lee thought it preferable to renew the attack.
General Meade held the high ridge above described, along which he had massed a large amount of artillery. General Ewell occupied the left of our line, General Hill the center, and General Longstreet the right. In front of General Longstreet the enemy held a position, from which, if he could be driven, it was thought that our army could gain the more elevated ground (Round-Top) beyond, and thus enable our guns to rake the crest of the ridge. That officer was directed to endeavor to carry this position, while General Ewell attacked directly the high ground on the enemy's right, which had already been partially fortified. General Hill was instructed to threaten the center of the line, in order to prevent reënforcements to either wing, and to avail himself of any opportunity that might present itself to attack. After a severe struggle Longstreet succeeded in getting possession of and holding the ground in his immediate front. Ewell also carried some of the strong positions which he assailed, and the result was such as to lead to the belief that he would ultimately be able to dislodge the force in his front. The battle ceased at dark. These partial successes determined Lee to continue the assault on the next day. Pickett, with three of his brigades, joined Longstreet on the following morning, and our batteries were moved forward to the position gained by him on the day before. The general plan of attack was unchanged, except that one division and two brigades of Hill's corps were ordered to support Longstreet.
General Meade, in the mean time, had strengthened his line with earthworks. The morning was occupied in necessary preparations, and the battle recommenced in the afternoon of the 3d, and raged with great violence until sunset. Our troops succeeded in entering the advanced works of the enemy, and getting possession of some of his batteries; but, our artillery having nearly expended its ammunition, the attacking columns became exposed to the heavy fire of the numerous batteries near the summit of the ridge, and, after a most determined and gallant struggle, were compelled to relinquish their advantage and fall back to their original positions with severe loss.
Owing to the strength of the enemy's position and the exhaustion of our ammunition, a renewal of the engagement could not be hazarded, and the difficulty of procuring supplies rendered it impossible to continue longer where we were. Such of the wounded as could be removed and a part of the arms collected on the field were ordered to Williamsport. The army remained at Gettysburg during the 4th, and at night began to retire by the road to Fairfield, carrying with it about four thousand prisoners. Nearly two thousand had been previously paroled; but the numerous wounded that had fallen into our hands after the first and second day's engagements were left behind. Little progress was made that night, owing to a severe storm, which greatly embarrassed our movements. The rear of the column did not leave its position near Gettysburg until after daylight on the 5th. The march was continued during that day without interruption by the enemy, except an unimportant demonstration upon our rear in the afternoon, when near Fairfield, which was easily checked. The army, after a tedious march, rendered more difficult by the rains, reached Hagerstown on the afternoon of the 6th and morning of the 7th of July.
The Potomac was so much swollen by the rains, that had fallen almost incessantly since our army entered Maryland, as to be unfordable. A pontoon-train had been sent from Richmond, but the rise in the river gave to it a width greater than was expected, so that additional boats had to be made by the army on its retreat. Our communication with the south side was thus interrupted, and it was found difficult to procure either ammunition or subsistence, the latter difficulty being enhanced by the high water impeding the working of the mills. The trains with the wounded and prisoners were compelled to wait at Williamsport for the subsiding of the river or the construction of additional pontoon-boats. The enemy had not yet made his appearance, but, as he was in a condition to obtain large reënforcements and our want of supplies was daily becoming more embarrassing, it was deemed advisable to recross the river. By the 13th a good bridge was thrown over at Falling Waters. On the 12th Meade's army approached. A position had been previously selected to cover the Potomac from Williamsport to Falling Waters, and an attack was awaited during that and the succeeding day. This did not take place, though the two armies were in close proximity, the enemy being occupied in fortifying his own lines.
General Meade, in his testimony before the Committee on the Conduct of the War, said that he ordered an attack on our forces on the morning of the 14th, and, if it had been made, it was his opinion that "it would have resulted disastrously." When asked the reasons for that opinion, he replied:
"If I had attacked the enemy in the position which he then occupied—he having the advantage of position, and being on the defensive, his artillery in position, and his infantry behind parapets and rifle-pits—the very same reasons and causes which produced my success at Gettysburg would have operated in his favor there, and be likely to produce success on his part."
Our preparations being completed, and the Potomac, though still deep, being pronounced fordable, the army commenced to withdraw to the south side on the night of the 13th. Ewell's corps forded the river at Williamsport, those of Longstreet and Hill crossed upon the bridge. Owing to the condition of the roads the troops did not reach the bridge until after daylight on the 14th, and the crossing was not completed until 1 P.M., when the bridge was removed. General Lee said that the enemy offered no serious interruption, and the movement was attended with no loss of material except a few disabled wagons and two pieces of artillery, which the horses were unable to move through the deep mud. During the slow and tedious march to the bridge, in the midst of a violent storm of rain, some of the men lay down by the way to rest. Officers sent back for them failed to find many in the obscurity of the night, and these, with some stragglers, a few of Heth's division most remote from the bridge, were captured. On the following day the army marched to Bunker Hill, in the vicinity of which it encamped for several days. Owing to the swollen condition of the Shenandoah River, the campaign which was contemplated when the Potomac was recrossed, could not be immediately commenced. Before the waters had subsided, the movements of the enemy required us to cross the Blue Ridge and take position south of the Rappahannock.
The strength of our army at Gettysburg is stated at 62,000 of all arms.[79] The report of the Army of the Potomac under General Meade, on June 30, 1863, states the force present at 112,988 men. Before the Committee on the Conduct of the War, General Meade, in reference to his force at Gettysburg, said, "Including all arms of the service, my strength was a little under 100,000 men—about 95,000."
If the strength of General Lee's forces, according to the last accessible report before the movement northward, be compared with that made after his return into Virginia, there is a decrease of nineteen thousand of the brave men who had set the seal of invincibility upon the Army of Northern Virginia.
General Lee, in his report, noticing the large loss of men and officers, says:
"I can not speak of these brave men as their merits and exploits deserve. Some of them are appropriately mentioned in the accompanying reports, and the memory of all will be gratefully and affectionately cherished by the people in whose defense they fell.
"The loss of Major-General Pender is severely felt by the army and the country. . . . Brigadier-Generals Armistead, Barksdale, Garnet, and Semmes, died as they had lived, discharging the highest duty of patriots with devotion that never faltered, and courage that shrank from no danger."
The testimony of General Meade, above mentioned, contains this statement respecting his losses:
"On the evening of the 2d of July, after the battle of that day had ceased, and darkness had set in, being aware of the very heavy losses of the First and Eleventh Corps on the 1st of July, and knowing how severely the Third Corps, the Fifth Corps, and other portions of the army, had suffered in the battle of the 2d of July—in fact, as subsequently ascertained, out of the twenty-four thousand men killed, wounded, and missing, which was the amount of my losses and casualties at Gettysburg—over twenty thousand of them had been puthors de combatbefore the night of the 2d of July."
Thus closed the campaign in Pennsylvania. The wisdom of the strategy was justified by the result. The battle of Gettysburg was unfortunate. Though the loss sustained by the enemy was greater than our own, theirs could be repaired, ours could not.
Had General Lee been able to compel the enemy to attack him in position, I think we should have had a complete victory, and the testimony of General Meade quoted above shows that he was not at all inclined to make the experiment. If General Lee, by moving to the right, would only have led General Meade to fall back on his preferred position of Pipe Creek, his ability to wait and the impossibility under such circumstances for General Lee to supply his army for any length of time seem to me an answer to that point in the criticism to which our great Captain has been subjected. To compel Meade to retire would have availed but little to us, unless his army had first been routed. To beat that army was probably to secure our independence. The position of Gettysburg would have been worth nothing to us if our army had found it unoccupied. The fierce battle that Lee fought there must not be considered as for the position; to beat the great army of the North was the object, and that it was of possible attainment is to be inferred from the various successes of our arms. Had there been a concentrated attack at sunrise on the second day, with the same gallantry and skill which were exhibited in the partial assaults, it may reasonably be assumed that the enemy would have been routed. This, from the best evidence we have, was the plan and the expectation of General Lee. These having failed, from whatever cause, and Meade having occupied in force the commanding position of Round-Top, it must be conceded that it would have been better to withdraw than to renew the attack on the third day. The high morale and discipline of our army, together with the unqualified confidence of the men in their commanding General, excluded the supposition that they would be demoralized by retreat. Subsequent events proved how little cause there was to fear it. It is not admitted that our army was defeated, and the enemy's claim to a victory is refuted by the fact that, when Lee halted on the banks of the Potomac, Meade, instead of attacking as a pursuing general would a defeated foe, halted also, and commenced intrenching.
The Battle of Gettysburg has been the subject of an unusual amount of discussion, and the enemy has made it a matter of extraordinary exultation. As an affair of arms it was marked by mighty feats of valor to which both combatants may point with military pride. It was a graceful thing in President Lincoln if, as reported, when he was shown the steeps which the Northern men persistently held, he answered, "I am proud to be the countryman of the men who assailed those heights."
The consequences of the battle have justified the amount of attention it has received. It may be regarded as the most eventful struggle of the war. By it the drooping spirit of the North was revived. Had their army been there defeated, those having better opportunities to judge than I or any one who was not among them, have believed it would have ended the war. On the other hand, a drawn battle, where the Army of Northern Virginia made an attack, impaired the confidence of the Southern people so far as to give the malcontents a power to represent the Government as neglecting for Virginia the safety of the more southern States.
In all free governments, the ability of its executive branch to prosecute a war must largely depend upon public opinion; in an infant republic, this, for every reason, is peculiarly the case. The volume given to the voice of disaffection was therefore most seriously felt by us.
Shattered, it is true, but not disheartened, the Army of Northern Virginia after recrossing the Potomac rose like the son of Terra, with renewed vigor, and entered on the brilliant campaign hereafter to be generally described.
Early in October General Lee, with two corps (Ewell's and Hill's), the First Corps of his army having been temporarily detached for service in Tennessee, crossed the Rapidan to attack the flank of the enemy, or to compel him to retreat. It resulted in the capture of fifteen hundred prisoners, and forced Meade's army back to Alexandria and Centreville. The campaign was an unbroken success, with the exception of a rash and ill-conducted affair at Bristoe Station, where our advance engaged a corps, and was repulsed, losing a number of men and five guns. Thus, without a general battle, a large portion of the State was for the time liberated.
On November 7th the enemy advanced upon our force at Kelly's Ford, of the Rappahannock River, effected a crossing, and, rushing upon two brigades who were at Rappahannock Station defending the bridges, overwhelmed and captured most of them, taking between twelve and fifteen hundred men, and four pieces of artillery. The movements of the enemy were concealed by the darkness, and his attack was a surprise.
On November 26th the army under General Meade crossed the Rapidan, with the intention of interposing between the widely separated wings of his adversary. Instead of being successful, this movement resulted in an entire failure. General Meade found Lee's army posted behind Mine Run, and ready to receive an attack whenever he was disposed to make it. "Meade declared, it is related, that he could carry the position with a loss of thirty thousand men; but, as that idea was frightful, there seemed nothing to do but retreat." [80] Lee had inaugurated that system of breastworks which did him good service in his long campaign with General Grant. When the troops were halted in a wood, the men felled the large trees, heavy logs were dragged without loss of time to the prescribed line, where they were piled upon one another in double walls, which were filled in rapidly with earth; so that, in a short space of time, defenses which would turn a cannon-shot were often constructed. In front, for some distance, the felled timber made a kind of abatis. As General Meade did not attack, General Lee, on the night of December 1st, determined to assail his adversary on the next morning; but, when the dawn broke over the hills, his camps were seen to be deserted. General Meade had abandoned the campaign, and was in full retreat toward the Rapidan. Pursuit was immediately made, but he had too much the start, and reached the north side of the Rapidan before he could be overtaken. Both armies then retired to their original positions. We captured about seven hundred prisoners, four hundred mules and horses, and destroyed or secured one hundred and twenty wagons.
[Footnote 79: "Four Years with General Lee."]
[Footnote 80: "Life of General R. E. Lee," by J. E. Cooke.]
Subjugation of the States of Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Virginia.—Object of a State Government; its Powers are "Just Powers"; how exercised; its Duty; necessarily sovereign; its Entire Order; how founded; how destroyed.—The Crime against Constitutional Liberty.—What is the Government of the United States?—It partakes of the Nature of a Limited Partnership; its Peaceful Objects.— Distinction between the Governments of the States and that of the United States.—Secession.—The Government of the United States invades the State; refuses to recognize its Government; thus denies the Fundamental Principle of Popular Liberty.—Founded a New State Government based on the Sovereignty of the United States Government.—Annihilation of Unalienable Rights.—Qualification of Voters fixed by Military Power.—Condition of the Voter's Oath.— Who was the Sovereign in Tennessee?—Case of Louisiana.— Registration of Voters.—None allowed to register who could not or would not take a Certain Oath; its Conditions.—Election of State Officers.—Part of the State Constitution declared void.—All done under the Military Force of the United States Government.
The most painful pages of this work are those which now present the subjugation of the State governments by the Government of the United States. The patriot, the lover of his country and of the liberties of mankind, can not contemplate these facts without a feeling of grief which will not be comforted. That the work of the fathers of the republic, that the most magnificent system of constitutional government which the wisdom of man has devised, should be turned from its object, changed from its order, rendered powerless to protect the unalienable rights and sovereignty of the people, and made the instrument by which to establish and maintain imperialism, is a revolution unlike any other that may be found in the history of mankind. The result established the truthfulness of the assertion, so often made during the progress of the war, that the Northern people, by their unconstitutional warfare to gain the freedom of certain negro slaves, would lose their own liberties.
It has been shown that the governments of the States were instituted to secure certain unalienable rights of the citizens with which they were endowed by their Creator, and that among these rights were life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that they derived their just powers from the consent of the governed; and that these powers were organized by the citizens in such form as seemed to them most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Where must the American citizen look for the security of the rights with which he has been endowed by his Creator? To his State government. Where shall he look to find security and protection for his life, security and protection for his personal liberty, security and protection for his property, security and protection for his safety and happiness? Only to his State government.
The powers which the State government possesses for the security of his life, his liberty, his property, his safety, and his happiness, are "just powers." They have been derived from the unconstrained consent of the governed, and they have been organized in such form as seems most likely to effect these objects.
Is the citizen's life in danger from violence? The State guarantees his protection, and it is its duty to rescue him from danger and obtain redress from the offender, whether an individual or a foreign nation. Are the freedom and personal liberty of the citizen in danger from unlawful arrest and imprisonment? The State guarantees both, and it is its duty to secure and preserve his freedom. Is the property of the citizen in danger of a violent and unjust seizure and unlawful detention or destruction? The State government guarantees his title, restores the property, or obtains damages. Is the personal property of the citizen in danger of robbery or abduction? The State government throws over it the shield of its protection, and regards the burglar and the robber as the enemies of society. It is unnecessary to proceed further with this enumeration.
The duty of the State government is to give to its citizens perfect and complete security. It is necessarily sovereign within its own domain, for it is the representative and the constituted agent of the inherent sovereignty of the individuals. For the performance of its duty of protection it may unite with other sovereignties; and also, for better safety and security to its citizens, it may withdraw or secede from such Union.
It will be seen that the entire order of the State government is founded on the free consent of the governed. From this it springs; from this it receives its force and life. It is this consent alone from which "just powers" are derived. They can come from no other source, and their exercise sources a true republican government. All else are usurpations, their exercise is a tyranny, and their end is the safety and security of the usurper, to obtain which the unalienable rights of the people are sacrificed. The "just powers," thus derived, are organized in such form as shall seem to the governed to be most likely to secure their safety and happiness. It is the governed who determine the form of the government, and not the ruler nor his military force, unless he comes as a conqueror to make the subjugated do his will. The object, or end, for which these "just powers" are derived from the consent of the governed and organized in such form as seems most likely to effect that object, is solely to secure the unalienable rights of men—such as life, liberty, property, justice, peace and order, and the pursuit of happiness.
It will now be seen by the reader that, whenever any one of the features of this order is perverted in its origin or progress, or thwarted, or caused to deviate from its natural operation by any internal or external interference, the order is destroyed, and the State government, which represents it, is subverted, turned from its object, changed from its natural purpose, rendered powerless to protect the unalienable rights of its citizens, and made an instrument to strengthen the hands of despotism. The commission of such a subversion of the peaceful and fraternal States of this once happy republic is fearlessly charged upon the Government of the United States, as in itself constituting a monstrous crime against constitutional liberty; and it is asserted that, when the circumstances attending the deed are considered—the rage against a whole people, the pillage, the arson, the inciting of servile war, the slaughter of defenseless non-combatants, the devastation of whole peaceful regions, the indiscriminate destruction of property—no parallel can be found in the annals of mankind.
What, then, is the Government of the United States? It is an organization of a few years' duration. It might cease to exist, and yet the States and the people continue prosperous, peaceful, and happy. Unlike the governments of the States, which find their origin deep in the nature of man, it sprang from certain circumstances which existed in the course of human affairs. Unlike the governments of the States and of separate nations, which have a divine sanction, it has no warrant for its authority but the ratification of the sovereign States. Unlike the governments of the States, which were instituted to secure generally the unalienable rights of man, it has only the enumerated objects, and is restrained from passing beyond them by the express reservation of all delegated functions. It keeps no records of property, and guarantees to no one the possession of his estate. Marriage, from which springs the family and the State, it can neither confirm nor annul. It partakes of the nature of an incorporation for certain purposes, beyond which it has neither influence nor authority. It is an anomaly among governments, and arose out of the articles of agreement made by certain friendly States, which proposed to form a society of States and invest a common agent with specified functions of sovereignty. Its duration was intended to be permanent, as it was hoped thus to promote the peaceful ends for which it was established; but, to have declared itperpetual, would have been to deny the right of a people to alter or abolish their government when it should cease to answer the ends for which it was instituted.
The objects which its creation was designed to secure to the States and their people were of a truly peaceful nature, and commended themselves to the approbation of men. They were stated by its authors in a form called "the preamble" of their work, which is in these words:
"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States."
Mankind must contemplate with horror the fact that an organization established for such peaceful and benign ends did, within the first century of its existence, lead the assault in a civil war that brought nearly four millions of soldiers into the field, destroyed thousands and thousands of millions of treasure, trampled the unalienable rights of the people under foot, subverted and subjugated the governments of the States, and ended by establishing itself as supreme and sovereign over all. Some Christian writer has suggested the thought that there may not be a spot of the earth's surface in the Old World but has witnessed the commission of some human crime or been wet with human gore. How nearly true this may be of the New World's once-vaunted asylum for the victims of despotism, misrule, and oppression, these pages can bear some testimony. After all, it is the civil disorders, the violations of rights, and the perversions of wise and useful institutions, that are the most disastrous in their consequences. They last for ages; and often, too often, the lapse of time brings no remedy to the suffering people. In their despair, they say the past is gone for ever—a new era has opened; but what horrors may be developed in its revolving years no mortal can foresee, so they hug the chains they feel powerless to break.
How distinct in its nature and objects was the Government of the United States from the governments of the States, may be seen from that which has already been said. The former was established by common consent to look after the common interests. It was to make peace or war with foreign nations, protect the frontiers, extend the boundaries, decide disputes between citizens of different States, and administer general affairs in a manner to promote the peace, the order, and the happiness of all. But, to the fostering care of the State government, the man, the citizen, the head of the family, the parent, the child, the woman, the scholar, and the Christian all looked with full confidence as to their natural and divinely sanctioned protector against all foes within or without; and relied upon its ever-present arm for the safety and security of their persons, their homes, their property, and their institutions. How wofully the confiding people were betrayed when the usurper came, let some of the Northern States answer!
Now let us proceed to notice the acts of the Government of the United States, which subjugated the State governments. The details in the case of Tennessee have been already stated. In that instance, the government of the State, which derived its powers from the consent of the governed, so that they were "just powers," found, in the discharge of its duty to protect the institutions of its people, that there were no means by which it could fulfill that duty but by a withdrawal from the Union, so as to be rid of the Government of the United States, and thus escape the threatened dangers of usurpation and sectional hostility. It therefore resolved to withdraw from the Union, and the people gave their assent to this resolution; so that the State no longer considered itself a member of the Union, nor recognized the laws and authority of its Government. The Government of the United States, then, with a powerful military force, planted itself at Nashville, the State capital. It refused to recognize the State government, or any organization under it, as having any existence, or to recognize the people otherwise than as a hostile community. It said to them, in effect: "I am the sovereign and you are the subjects. If you are stronger than I am, then drive me out of the State; if I am stronger than you are, then I demand an unconditional surrender to my sovereignty." It is evident that the Government of the United States was not there by the consent of those who were to be governed. It had not, therefore, any "just powers" of government within the State of Tennessee. For, says the Declaration of Independence of our fathers, governments "derive their 'just powers' from the consent of the governed." It is further evident that, by this action, the Government of the United States denied the fundamental principle of popular liberty—that the people are the source of all political power. In this instance, it not only subverted the State government, but carried that subversion to the extent of annihilation. It, therefore, proceeded to establish a new order of affairs, founded, not on the principle of the sovereignty of the people, which was wholly rejected, but on the assumption of sovereignty in the United States Government. It appointed its military Governor to be the head of the new order, and recognized no civil or political existence in any man, except some of its notorious adherents, until, betraying the State, he had taken an oath of allegiance to the sovereignty of the Government of the United States. Now commenced a system of denial of unalienable rights, for the methods of the usurper are the same everywhere. Freedom of speech was suppressed by the imposition of fines on those using "seditious" language, and the demand of security for their future humility. The freedom of the press was suppressed by suspension of publications and the confiscation of the offices. Personal liberty was destroyed by arrests, imprisonment, and exile.
In process of time, an effort was made to erect a form of State government which should be subservient and subject to the United States Government. For this purpose, no one could be a voter until he had bound himself by an oath to support and defend the Government of the United States. Under the State governments, manhood, which came by nature, and residence, which came by one's own will, were sufficient qualifications for the voter.
It will be apparent from this statement that the voter's right to cast his ballot came not to him as an unalienable right, but rested upon the permission of the Government of the United States, as his sovereign, to whom his allegiance was due, and to whom he was required, in the first instance, to bind himself by an oath of allegiance without any mention whatever of a State government. Indeed, a little later, the same oath was required with additional conditions before a man was permitted to vote for a State constitutional convention, or for delegates to such a convention. These conditions were, that he would faithfully support all acts of Congress and all proclamations of the President of the United States, passed or made during the rebellion, having reference to slaves. Thus, the voter's right was made to rest, not only upon his binding himself in allegiance to the United States as his sovereign, but in the binding by oath his consent to certain unconstitutional acts and proclamations expressly designed to destroy one of the most important institutions of the State. This, sustained by a military force, was exacted by the United States Government as the lord paramount—the sovereign within the State. At the same time, the action of the voter, which should be perfectly free and unconstrained (for, under American political principles, he is the sovereign over all), is limited and bound down by an oath faithfully to support certain acts to which it was presumable he had ever been conscientiously opposed.
Under these circumstances, who was the sovereign in Tennessee? The Government of the United States. Where was the government of the State of Tennessee and the sovereign people? The former was subverted and overthrown, and the latter subjugated. The approval by Tennessee, under such circumstances, of Article XIII, as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibiting the existence of slavery, was of no force; for consent given by a party under constraint has neither legal nor moral validity. The State Constitution was so amended as to contain certain new provisions prescribed by the Government of the United States by a so-called convention of delegates elected by the voters above specified, and then submitted to these voters, and said to be ratified by them. They were little more in numbers than a handful of the people of Tennessee. Was this a Constitution amended and approved by the consent of the people of Tennessee, the only sovereigns known under our institutions, or was it a Constitution amended and voted for by a small fraction of its population acting under the authority of the Government of the United Stales, as the only sovereign in the State? Admitting, even, that those who voted for the amended Constitution were the only legal voters in the State, the Government of the United States was no less an unlawful intruder and usurper when it prescribed the amendments of the Constitution and designated the voters. Nevertheless, this work was recognized by it, as constituting a republican State government under the Constitution.
Let us next notice some points in the subversion of the State government of Louisiana. One of the earliest steps taken for a civil organization, after the occupation of New Orleans, was to make a registration of voters. The United States Government was in possession by military force, and the object was to secure its permanent supremacy. Therefore, the oath which was administered to the person applying for registration contained this condition:
"I now register myself as a voter, freely and voluntarily, for the purpose of organizing a State government in Louisiana, loyal to the Government of the United States."
It was also announced, with the approval of the military Governor, that any person swearing falsely to any material part of the oath would be deemed to be guilty of perjury, and be liable to prosecution and punishment. The effect of this measure was to secure a registration only of persons who would maintain the supremacy of the Government of the United States. A proclamation was next issued by the commander of the United States forces for an election of State officers under the laws and Constitution of the State. It was declared that these officers, when thus elected, would constitute the so-called civil government of the State, under the Constitution and laws of Louisiana, "except so much of the said Constitution and laws as recognize, regulate, or relate to slavery," which were also declared to be inoperative and void. It was further provided, in the same proclamation, as follows:
"In order that the organic law of the State may be made to conform to the will of the people and harmonize with the spirit of the age, as well as to maintain and preserve the ancient landmarks of civil and religions liberty, an election of delegates to a convention for the revision of the Constitution will be held," etc.
The effect of these acts was to establish a number of persons, pledged to support the Government of the United States, as the only qualified voters in the State, and to elect so-called State officers and delegates to a so-called Constitutional Convention by their ballots. But this was a work that could be done only by the sovereign people acting through their lawful State government. It was not so done, because the Government of the United States, with a powerful military force, had taken possession of New Orleans, refused to recognize the officers of the State government, and sought to capture and imprison them, although it recognized the validity of the State Constitution in part, and commanded these things to be done as if it was the ultimate sovereign over all.
Thus the government of the State was subverted, the Constitution of the State in part set aside, and the sovereignty of the people trampled down by a power that had no rightful authority for such acts. Subsequently, a so-called convention was held, a so-called new Constitution adopted, complying with the views of the Government of the United States, the amendment to the Constitution of the United States as above mentioned was adopted, the State Representatives were admitted to seats in Congress, and the people acquiesced in the fraud which they had not the power to correct.
The proceedings in the States of Arkansas and Virginia, which resulted in an entire subversion of the State Governments, the destruction of the sovereignty of the people, and the establishment of the supremacy of the Government of the United States, have been stated on a preceding page.
Subjugation of the Border States, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri.—A Military Force invades Maryland and occupies Baltimore.—MartialLaw declared.—A Military Order.—Banishment from the State.—Civil Government of the State suspended.—Unalienable Rights of theCitizens invaded.—Arrests of Citizens commenced.—Number.—Caseof John Merryman.—Opinion of Chief-Justice Taney.—Newspapersseized.—Houses searched for Arms.—Order of Commanding General toMarshals to put Test to Voters.—The Governor appeals to thePresident.—His Reply.—Voters imprisoned.—Statement of theGovernor.—Result of the Election.—State ConstitutionalConvention.—Emancipation hardly carried.—First Open Measures inKentucky.—Interference at the State Election by the United StatesGovernment.—Voters excluded.—Martial Law declared.—Soldierskeeping the Polls.—The Vote.—Statement of the Governor.—Attemptto enroll Able-bodied Negroes.—The Governor visits Washington.—The Result.—Arrests, Imprisonment, and Exile of Citizens.—Suspension of the Writ ofHabeas Corpusby President Lincoln.—Interference with the State Election.—Order to the Sheriffs.—Proclamation of the Governor.—Enlistment of Slaves.—Emancipationby Constitutional Amendment.—ViolentMeasuresin Missouri.—TheGovernor calls out the Militia.—His Words.—The Plea of theInvader.—"The Authority of the United States is Paramount," saidPresident Lincoln.—Bravery of the Governor.—Words of theCommanding General.—Troops poured into the State.—Proceedings ofthe State Convention.—Numberless Usurpations.—ProvisionalGovernor.—Emancipation Ordinance passed.
If the State government is instituted with certain powers which become "just powers" by the formal consent of the governed, for the purpose of enforcing security to the unalienable rights of man, it must be evident that any interference with those rights by which their enjoyments diminished, endangered, or destroyed, is not only an obstruction to the operation of the "just powers" of the State government, but is subversive of the purpose which it was instituted to effect.
In this manner the State government of Maryland was subjugated. A military force, under the authority of the Government of the United States, occupied the city of Baltimore at a time when no invasion of the State was threatened, and when there had been no application of the Legislature, or of the Executive, for protection against domestic violence, which circumstances alone could give a constitutional authority for this organized military force to occupy the State. The commanding General, Schenck, soon issued an order, of which the following is an extract:
"Martial law is declared and hereby established in the city and county of Baltimore, and in all the counties of the Western Shore of Maryland. The commanding General gives assurance that this suspension of civil government within the limits defined shall not extend beyond the necessities of the occasion. All the civil courts, tribunals, and political functionaries of State, county, or city authority, are to continue in the discharge of their duties as in times of peace, only in no way interfering with the exercise of the predominant power assumed and asserted by the military authority."
It will be noticed that this military force of the Government of the United States had no constitutional permission to come into Maryland and exercise authority; that the commanding General says that the civil government of the State is suspended within certain limits; that this suspension will be continued according to the necessities of the occasion; that the courts and political functionaries may discharge their duties, only in no way interfering with the exercise of the predominant military power. Now, where were the "just powers" of the State government at this time? They were suspended in a part of the State, says the commanding General, and for so long a time as the military authority may judge the necessities of the occasion to require, and that the courts and political functionaries may discharge their duties while recognizing the supremacy of the military power. Thus was the State government subjugated.
A further subversion of the State government was now commenced by an invasion and denial of some of the unalienable rights of the citizens, for the security of which that government was instituted. The Constitution of the United States says:
"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." [81]
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." [82]
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed,nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." [83]
"Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or ofthe press." [84]
The Declaration of Independence says:
"That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men."
Immediately upon the issue of the order of the commanding General, the arrests of citizens commenced by provost-marshals. The family residence of a lady was forced open; she was seized, put on board of a steamer, and sent to the Confederate States. A man was arrested for being "disloyal" to the United States Government, and held for examination. Another was charged with interfering with the enrollment; he was held for further examination. Another, charged with being "disloyal" to the United States Government, took the oath of allegiance, and was released. A woman charged with the attempt to resist the enrollment was arrested, and subsequently released. A man, on a charge of "disloyalty," took the oath, and was released. Another, charged with having given improper information to enrolling officers, was released on furnishing the information. Another, charged with having powder in his possession, was released on taking the oath of allegiance. Two others, charged with abuse of the negroes laboring on the fortifications, were held for examination. Another, charged with rendering assistance to wounded Confederate soldiers, and expressing treasonable sentiments, took the oath of allegiance and was released. Another, charged with being a soldier in the Confederate army and paroled, was ordered to be sent across the lines. A man, charged with treasonable language, was ordered to be sent across the lines. Two others, charged with aiding Confederate soldiers, took the oath of allegiance and were discharged. Another, charged with receiving letters from Confederates for the purpose of delivery, took the oath of allegiance, and was discharged. Another, charged with expressing treasonable sentiments, was held for examination. Two, charged with cheering for Jefferson Davis, took the oath and were released.
One case more most be stated. On May 25, 1861, John Merryman, a most respectable citizen of the State, residing in Baltimore County, was seized in his bed by an armed force, and imprisoned in Fort McHenry. He petitioned the Chief-Justice of the United States that a writ ofhabeas corpusmight be issued, which was granted. The officer upon whom it was served declined to obey the writ. An attachment was issued against the officer. The marshal was refused admittance to the fort to serve it. Upon such return being made, the Chief-Justice said:
"I ordered the attachment yesterday, because upon the face of the return the detention of the prisoner was unlawful upon two grounds:
"1. The President, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, can not suspend the privilege of the writ ofhabeas corpus, nor authorize any military officer to do so.
"2. A military officer has no right to arrest and detain a person not subject to the rules and articles of war for an offense against the laws of the United States, except in aid of the judicial authority and subject to its control; and, if the party is arrested by the military, it is the duty of the officer to deliver him over immediately to the civil authority, to be dealt with according to law.
"Under the Constitution of the United States, these principles are the fundamental law of the Union. In relation to the present return, I propose to say that the marshal has legally the power to summon out theposse comitatusto seize and bring into court the party named in the attachment; but it is apparent he will be resisted in the discharge of that duty by a force notoriously superior to theposse comitatusand, such being the case, the Court has no power under the law to order the necessary force to compel the appearance of the party.
"I shall reduce to writing the reasons under which I have acted, and which have led me to the conclusions expressed in my opinion, and shall report them, with these proceedings, to the President of the United States, and call upon him to perform his constitutional duty to enforce the laws; in other words, to enforce the process of this court."
During the month of July arrests were made of 361 persons, on charges like the above mentioned, by the military authority. Of this number, 317 took the oath of allegiance to the Government of the United States, and were released; 5 were sent to Fort McHenry, 3 to Washington for the action of the authorities there, 11 to the North, 6 across the lines, and 19 were held for further examination.
On September 11, 1863, one of the city newspapers published the poem entitled "The Southern Cross." The publishers and editor were immediately arrested, not allowed communication with any person whatever, and on the same day sent across the lines, with the understanding that they should not return during the war. On July 2d an order was issued which forbade the citizens of Baltimore City and County to keep arms unless they were enrolled as volunteer companies. The Fifty-first Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteers was placed at the disposal of General E. B. Tyler, assisted by the provost-marshal and the chief of police. The soldiers, in concert with the police, formed into parties of three or four, and were soon diligently engaged in searching houses. Large wagons were provided, and muskets, carbines, rifles, revolvers of all kinds, sabers, bayonets, swords, and bird and ducking guns in considerable quantities were gathered. The Constitution of the United States says:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." [85]
A further subversion of the State government of Maryland was next made by a direct interference with the elections. An election was to be held in the State for members of the Legislature and members of Congress on November 3, 1863. The commanding General, on October 27th, issued an order to all marshals and military officers to cause their direct interference with the voters. The Governor (Bradford) applied to the President of the United States to have the order revoked, and protested against any person who offered to vote being put to any test not found in the laws of Maryland. President Lincoln declined to interfere with the order, except in one less important point. The Governor issued a proclamation on the day preceding the election, which the military commander endeavored to suppress, and issued an order charging that the tendency of the proclamation was to invite and suggest disturbance. One or more regiments of soldiers were sent out and distributed among several of the counties to attend the places of election, in defiance of the known laws of the State prohibiting their presence. Military officers and provost-marshals were ordered to arrest voters, guilty, in their opinion, of certain offenses, and to menace judges of election with the power of the army in case this order was not respected.
But, perhaps, the forcible language of the Governor to theLegislature will furnish the most undeniable statement of the facts.He says:
"On Monday evening preceding the election I issued a proclamation giving the judges of election the assurance of the protection of the State to the extent of its ability. Before the following morning, orders were sent to the Eastern Shore, directing its circulation to be suppressed; the public papers were forbidden to publish it, and an embargo laid on all steamers in port trading with that part of the State, lest they might carry it.
"The abuses commenced even before the opening of the polls. On the day preceding the election, the officer in command of the regiment which had been distributed among the counties of the Eastern Shore, and who had himself landed in Kent County, commenced his operations by arresting and sending across the bay some ten or more of the most estimable and distinguished of its citizens, including several of the most steadfast and most uncompromising loyalists of the Shore. The jail of the county was entered, the jailer seized, imprisoned, and afterward sent to Baltimore, and prisoners confined therein under indictment set at liberty. The commanding officer gave the first clew to the kind of disloyalty against which he considered himself as particularly commissioned, by printing and publishing a proclamation in which, referring to the election to take place on the next day, he invited all the trulyloyalto avail themselves of that opportunity and establish theirloyalty, 'by giving a full and ardent support to the whole Government ticket, upon the platform adopted by the Union League Convention,' declaring that 'none other is recognized by the Federal authorities as loyal or worthy of the support of any one who desires the peace and restoration of the Union.'
"This Government ticket was in several, if not all, of those counties designated by its color. It was a yellow ticket, and, armed with that, a voter could safely run the gantlet of the sabers and carbines that guarded the entrance to the polls, and known sympathizers with the rebellion were allowed to vote unquestioned if they would vote that ticket, while loyal and respected citizens, ready to take the oath, were turned back by the officer in charge without even allowing them to approach the polls. In one district the military officer took his stand at the polls before they were opened, declaring that none but the 'yellow ticket should be voted,' and excluded all others throughout the day. In another district a similar officer caused every ballot offered to be examined, and, unless it was the favored one, the voter was required to take the oath, and not otherwise. In another district, after one vote only had been given, the polls wore closed, the judges were all arrested and sent out of the county, and military occupation taken of the town. Other statements might be made.
"These abuses present a humiliating record, such as I had never supposed we should be called upon to read in any State, still less in a loyal one like this. Unless it be, indeed, a fallacy to suppose that any rights whatever remain to such a State, or that any line whatever marks the limit of Federal power, a bolder stride across that line that power never made, even in a rebel State, than it did in Maryland on the 3d of last November. A part of the army, which a generous people had supplied for a very different purpose, was on that day engaged in stifling the freedom of election in a faithful State, intimidating its sworn officers, violating the constitutional rights of its loyal citizens, and obstructing the usual channels of communication between them and their Executive."
The result was the election of a majority of members of the Legislature in favor of a State Constitutional Convention. The acts necessary for this object were passed. At the election of delegates, the military authority again interfered in order to secure a majority in favor of immediate and unconditional emancipation. The so-called Convention assembled and drafted a so-called Constitution, in which the twenty-third article of the Bill of Rights prohibited the existence of slavery in the State, and said, "All persons held to service or labor as slaves are hereby declared free."
It was urged, in objection to the adoption of the so-called Constitution by the Convention, that "the election by which the Convention was called and its members elected was not free for the legal voters of the State, but was held and conducted in clear violation of the rights of voters, in consequence of which a majority of the legal voters of the State were excluded from the polls." A rigid article on the qualifications of voters at the State elections was embodied in the Constitution, with the shameless provision that it should be in force at the election for ratification or rejection of the so-called Constitution which was to create the disabilities. The instrument also authorized a poll to be opened in each company of every Maryland regiment in the service of the United States at the quarters of the commanding officer, and that the commissioned officers of such company should act as the judges of election. The aid of the President of the United States was also obtained to help on the ratification of the new Constitution, and he concludes a letter on the subject by saying, "I shall be gratified exceedingly if the good people of the State shall, by their votes, ratify the new Constitution."
Notwithstanding the aid of the President, of the soldiers' votes, and a most stringent oath, and the exclusion of every person who had in any manner, by word or act, aided the cause of the Confederacy, the majority for the so-called Constitution was only 375. The total vote was 59,973. In 1860 the vote of the State was 92,502. Thus was the State government subjugated and made an instrument of destruction to the people; thus were their rights ruthlessly violated, and property millions of dollars in value annihilated.
The reader must have noticed, in all these proceedings which resulted in the subjugation of the State governments, the cautious and stealthy manner in which the Government of the United States proceeded at the outset in each instance until it got a strong foothold, that then the mask was thrown off, and both Governor and people were made the unresisting victims of its unscrupulous and lawless outrages.
In the State of Kentucky, the first open and direct measures taken by the Government of the United States for the subjugation of the State government and people, thereby to effect the emancipation of the slaves, consisted in an interference with the voters at the State election in August, 1863. This interference was by means of a military force stationed at the polls to sustain and enforce the action of some of the servants of the Government of the United States, the object being to overawe the judges of election, secure the administration of a rigid oath of allegiance, and thereby the rejection of as many antagonistic votes as possible. Indeed, it was intended that none but so-called "Union" men should vote—that is, men who were willing to approve of every measure which the Government of the United States might adopt to carry on the war and revolutionize the State. At the same time, no man was allowed to be a candidate or to receive any votes unless he was a well-known advocate of the Government of the United States. It will be seen that these measures excluded the largest portion of the former Democratic party, although they might be practically "Union" men, and placed everything in the hands of the Administration party, where, by the use of similar machinery, it remained a great many years after the war closed.
Meantime, on July 31, 1863, the commanding General of the Department of the Ohio issued an order declaring the State under martial law, and said, "It is for the purpose, only, of protecting, if necessary, the rights of loyal citizens and the freedom of elections." He would have more correctly said, "It is for the purpose of enforcing and securing a majority for the candidates of my views." The General in command in the western part of the State issued an order to regulate the election in that quarter, and the colonels at every post did likewise. In Louisville, on the day of election, there were ten soldiers with muskets at each voting-place who, with crossed bayonets, stood in the doors, preventing all access of voters to the polls but by their permission, and who arrested and carried to the military prison all whom they were told to arrest. Out of some eight thousand voters in the city, less than five thousand votes were taken. How many of the missing three thousand were deterred from attempting to vote could not be ascertained, nor was it necessary, for the intimidation of three thousand voters is no greater outrage than the intimidation of only three hundred. The interpretation generally put on the order of the commanding officer by the opposition party was, that no man was to have the privilege of having his right to vote tested by the judges of election if he was pointed out to the guard by any one of the detectives as a proper person to be arrested. As the commanding officer had not the semblance of legal or rightful power to interfere with the election, the most sinister suspicions were naturally aroused, and very many were said to have been deterred from going to the polls through fear that they would be made the victims to personal or party malice. Similar intimidation was practiced in other parts of the State. The result was, that there was not only direct military interference with the election, but it was conducted in most of the State under the intimidation of the bayonets of the Government of the United States. The total vote was 85,695. In 1860 the vote of the State was 146,216. The Governor-elect in his message spoke, of such an unjust election, as follows:
"The recent elections clearly and unmistakably define the popular will and public judgment of Kentucky. It is settled that Kentucky will, with unwavering faith and unswerving purpose, stand by and support the Government in every effort to suppress the rebellion and maintain the Union."
The true sense of this language is, that the Government of the United States had so far subverted the State government and destroyed the sovereignty of the people that they could not withstand its further aggressions.
The Government of the United States was now ready to move forward in its design to destroy one of the most valuable institutions of the State. Steps were taken by its officers to enroll all able-bodied male negroes in the State between the ages of twenty and forty-five years, that they might form a part of its forces. The effect of this measure was to break up the labor system of the State, and meanwhile the pseudo-philanthropists furnished food for powder, and indulged their ideas of freedom at their neighbors' expense. The excitement produced caused the Governor to visit Washington and effect agreements by which all recruiting should cease when a county's quota was full, all recruits should be removed from the State, and other similar provisions. A year later, he said to the Legislature: "Had these agreements been carried out, a very different state of feeling would have existed in Kentucky. But, instead of carrying them out, the most offensive and injurious modes were adopted to violate them."
The next step taken by the Government of the United States in the subversion of the government of Kentucky was the destruction of the unalienable right of personal liberty of the citizens, which the State was in duty bound to protect. The Union Governor of the State, whose election was aided by the United States military officers, as above stated, is the witness for the facts. In his message to the Legislature of January, 1865, he says:
"The gravest matter of military outrage has been, and yet is, the arrest, imprisonment, and banishment of loyal citizens without a hearing, and without even a knowledge of the charges against them. There have been a number of this class of arrests, merely for partisan political vengeance, and to force them to pay heavy sums to purchase their liberation. How the spoils so infamously extorted are divided, has not transpired to the public information. For partisan political ends, General John B. Huston was arrested at midnight preceding the election, and hurried off under circumstances of shameful aggravation. He was, however, released in a few days; but that does not atone for the criminality of his malicious arrest and false imprisonment. The battle-scarred veteran, Colonel Frank Wolford, whose name and loyal fame are part of his country's proudest memories, and whose arrest for political vengeance should put a nation's cheek to blush, is yet held in durance vile, without a hearing and without an accusation, so far as he or his friends can ascertain.
"Lieutenant-Governor Jacobs, whose yet unclosed wounds were received in battle for his country, was made a victim to partisan and personal enmity, and hurried without a hearing and without any known accusation through the rebel lines into Virginia. The action in this case is in defiance of Federal and State Constitutions and laws, in defiance of the laws of humanity and liberty, dishonors the cause of our country, and degrades the military rank to the infamous uses of partisan and personal vengeance. Other cases might be mentioned, but these are selected because they are known to the whole country; the acts of these men are part of the glorious history of loyal heroism."
The next step in the progress of the subjugation of the State government was taken by President Lincoln on July 5, 1864, when he issued a proclamation establishing martial law throughout the State, and the suspension of the writ ofhabeas corpus. Civil proceedings were allowed to be continued, "which did not affect the military operations or the constituted authorities of the Government of the United States." Arrests of individuals by military force soon commenced, and a large number of eminent Kentuckians of all professions and pursuits were imprisoned. A group of persons, consisting of judges, magistrates, wealthy merchants, and young women, without having been allowed a hearing, or trial, or any opportunity to vindicate themselves, were banished from the State. In this destruction of the unalienable right of personal liberty, the State government was passive; indeed, it was powerless to resist.
A State election was to be held on the first Monday of August for local officers and a Judge of the High Court of Appeals from one district. Chief-Justice Duvall was one of the two candidates. On July 29th an order was issued by the Major-General, commanding, to the sheriffs of the counties concerned, as follows:
"You will not allow the name of Alvin Duvall to appear upon the poll-books as a candidate for office at the coming election."
Another name was substituted. The election of a President of the United States was to be held in November, but the Government of the United States seems to have regarded the vote of the State as unnecessary to secure the reelection of its officials, and refrained from interference. Under these circumstances, the Governor of the State took courage and issued a proclamation to the election officers. It is of no importance except as showing their powers and duties, and how grossly they had neglected them at previous elections. He said:
"As no officer of any rank, from the President down, has any right or authority to interfere with elections, no order to do so can legalize the act. If there be sufficient power in the citizens present, at any place where such interference may be attempted, to arrest the offenders, and hold them over to answer to the violated laws, it will be the duty of the sheriff to make the arrest in such case. He has authority to require the aid of every citizen, and it should be readily and promptly given, in defense of a common right—of a blood-bought franchise. If the force employed to interfere with the election be too great, at any place of voting, to be arrested, the officers of election, in such case, should adjourn and not proceed with the election. If you are unable to hold a free election, your duty is to hold none at all."
By enlistment, over twenty-two thousand of the most valuable slaves in the State had gone into the service of the United States, and on March 3, 1865, its Congress passed an act declaring that the wives and children of all such soldiers should be free. But the final moment was near at hand when the annihilation of more than one hundred millions of property and the destruction of one of the most important institutions of the State was to take place by one of those fictions so peculiar to this administration of the Government of the United States. That was the pretended adoption of a constitutional amendment, prohibiting the existence of slavery in the United States. When a whole people suffers itself to be cajoled in this unaccountable manner by its unscrupulous rulers, it argues as little regard for the fundamental law of the Union as for the rights of the States.
The subversion of the State government of Missouri by the Government of the United States was more rapid and more desperate than in the case of Kentucky. As previously stated, the Governor of the State, at the commencement of the difficulties, proposed the most conciliatory terms to the Government of the United States, which were rejected. He then, like a Governor, sensible of his duty to protect the rights of his people and of the sacred obligations of his official oath, issued his proclamation calling into active service fifty thousand of the State militia, "for the purpose of repelling invasion, and for the protection of the lives, liberty, and property of the citizens." He said:
"A series of unprovoked and unparalleled outrages have been inflicted upon the peace and dignity of this Commonwealth and upon the rights and liberties of its people, by wicked and unprincipled men, professing to act under the authority of the Government of the United States; solemn enactments of your Legislature have been nullified; your volunteer soldiers have been taken prisoners; your commerce with your sister States has been suspended; your trade with your own fellow-citizens has been and is subjected to the harassing control of an armed soldiery; peaceful citizens have been imprisoned without warrant of law; unoffending and defenseless men, women, and children have been ruthlessly shot down and murdered; and other unbearable indignities have been heaped upon your State and yourselves."
The plea of the invader was contained in an order issued fromWashington to the commanding General in these words:
"The President observes with concern that, notwithstanding the pledge of the State authorities to coöperate in preserving the peace of Missouri, loyal citizens in great numbers continue to be driven from their homes. It is immaterial whether the outrages continue from inactivity or indisposition on the part of the State authorities to prevent them. It is enough that they continue, and it will devolve on you the duty of putting a stop to them summarily by the force under your command, to be aided by such troops as you may require from Kansas, Iowa, and Illinois. . . . The authority of the United States is paramount, and, whenever it is apparent that a movement, whether by order of State authority or not, is hostile, you will not hesitate to put it down."
In this order the only pretext put forward is that of domestic violence. But in that case the Constitution of the United States gives no authority to the United States Government to interfere except on the express conditions of an "application of the Legislature, or of the Executive, when the Legislature can not be convened." There had been no application of the Legislature or of the Executive. On the contrary, the Governor of the State, like a brave man, told the Executive of the United States to keep his hands off, and to keep his military forces without the State, and he pledged himself to preserve its peace and neutrality. But arguments or pledges on the part of the victim have never yet stopped the progress of the remorseless usurper. The subjugation of the State government of Missouri to the will and designs of the Government at Washington had been determined upon, and the sovereignty of the people was to be crushed by troops from the sister States of Kansas, Iowa, and Illinois.
But the bravery of the Governor and the determination of the Legislature caused the Government of the United States to depart from its usually stealthy progress in the invasion of the State government and the sovereignty of the people, and to adopt bolder measures. The Governor was charged with purposes of treason and secession, for his attempt faithfully to discharge the duties of a conscientious Governor to the citizens. Says the commander of the United States forces, in his proclamation:
"The recent proclamation of Governor Jackson, by which he has set at defiance the authorities of the United States and urged you to make war upon them, is but a consummation of his treasonable purposes, long indicated by his acts and expressed opinions, and now made manifest."
These are fine words to come from the satrap of a usurper who invades a State of the Union without lawful permission or authority, with the design to subvert its government and overthrow the sovereignty of its people, and to be applied by him to the only Governor in the Northern States who strove defiantly to protect the unalienable rights and sovereignty of his constituents!
Troops were now poured into the State by the Government of the United States so rapidly as to render the successful opposition of the lawful authorities impossible, and the control of a large portion of the State was soon held by the military forces. The Governor, unable to resist, retired to the southern part of the State. Meantime, the State Convention, which had been called to consider the relations between the Government of the United States and the State of Missouri, and to adopt such measures for vindicating the sovereignty of the State as were necessary, reassembled on the call of its committee. Entirely forgetful of the objects for which the people had called it together, it proceeded to declare the State offices vacant, and to elect a provisional Governor and other officers entirely subservient to the will and behests of the Administration at Washington. The commanding General now declared martial law in the State, and the emancipation of all slaves belonging to persons who had taken an active part with us. This emancipation clause was soon modified by the President as in advance of the times.
The attention of the reader is called to the numerous usurpations and violations of constitutional principles and of laws, by the Government of the United States and its champions, contained in the few lines of the preceding paragraph, viz.: the invasion with military force, the expulsion of the lawful State authorities, the assumption by the State Convention of unlawful powers, the election and introduction of persons to offices not vacant, the abandonment of all protection of the unalienable rights of the people, the declaration of martial law without any authority for it, and the attempt to emancipate the slaves in violation of every law and constitutional principle.