Mt. Vernon Republican (Mount Vernon, Ohio : 1854), 1863-03-19

              ff if if i ip$fltei. I , ml m MOUNT VERNON, OHIO THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 18G3. NO. 20. VOL. IX. THE MOUNT VERNON UEITBLICAN. T E 11 M S : For one year (invariably iu advanco)S'2,00 For six months, l.M TKRMS OF ADVEUTISINO. One square, 3 weeks, One squaro, 8 months, Ono square, 0 month, One square, 1 year, One square (changeable monthly) Changeable weekly, Two squares, 3 weeks, Two squares, 0 weeks, Two squares, 3 months, Two squares, 6 months, Two squares, 1 year, Three squares, 3 weeks, Three squares, (5 weeks, Three squares, 3 months, Three squares, 0 months, Three souares. 1 vear. 1,00 3.00 4,50 0,00 10.00 15,00 1.75 3.25 5,25 0.75 s;oo 2,50 4,50 0.00 8,00 10.00 One-fourth column, ehan. quarterly, 15.00 One-third " 11 22,00 One-half " " " 28,00 One column, changeable quarterly, 50,00 All local notices of advertisements, or calling attention to any enterprise intended to benefit individuals or corporations, will jo charged at the rate often cents per line. s p k e c n or Hon. J. A. Bingham OF OHIO. IX KEI'LY TO HON. C. L. VALLANDIG1IAM. DEUVERK.D I.N THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAN. 14, 1803. Mn. Speaker: We have been faroroed to-day with another apology from that side of the House for this rebellion, and 1 think myself that an apology for the unmatched crime of the rebels in arms against the nation's life ought not tobe allowed to go to the country unchallenged. So loug as liod may give uio strength, and the opportunity shall be afforded me to challenge these apologies for rebellion, 1 '.shall challenge and denounce them. My colleague comes here to-day with his prepared denunciation of the war of: the war for the Union. lie assumes that thenar in support of the supremacy of : the Constitution was wantonly made by the present Executive of the United iStiitcs, and asserts that in' the beginning, l. ...Ul. tl. tl,,.-If.. n,..'.l. Jr.. . ' j die, Yillll lliu uuiuuliJ nil innv uu J ' dared that coercion would make civil war! itli sell complacency, the gentleman m- forms us that he bided his time, and that the avenger, has right nobly responded that coercion would make civil war! Mr. speaker, when my colleague talks about history and about the truth of history, I ask that ho shall make up the record fairly and according to the fact. A stranger to the events that have occurred in our country during the last two years listening to the remarks of the gentleman would suppose that no blood would have been shed, that war would not have darkened the Republic like the shadow of an eclipse, but for the commission, of a great crime by the present Kxcculivc of tho United States, in this, that he wrongfully attempted to coerce law-abiding citizens. Is that, sir, according to the fact? Is that according to the truth of history, upon which the gentleman seems with so much confidenoe to rely, and to which he so frequently referred, to-day, as of commanding authority? Sir, before that Executive ever took his peat, before he hail power cither for good or for evil in the Republic, while the care of the State was in the keeping of his predecessor, the chosen of tho gentleman and his party, war was already levied against ,tho Republic' by these avowed rebels, for whom niy colleague appears this day as an apologist, and by them your flag had already been dishonored by their attack upon it within your own waters. Yet upon that subject the gentleman chooses to be silent a silence most commendable in one who would apologize for the rebellion, and declare it a sacred resistance to au unlawful coercion. Mr. Speaker, long before tho inauguration of the present Executive, rebel batteries were being built by rebel hands around your Fort Sumter, within the limits of the Republic, for no other purpose han to reduce it by force. This fact is fussed in silence by tho apologist of the rebellion, iu approval I suppec,-nf his own . . Democratic Administration which permitted it to ho done. I think, sir, that as the gentleman has chosen to raise this issue , I may be allowed to show today how this war did originate, unfortunate as it is for us, and w ho, above all others in tho North, aro responsible for tho rebellion. In all that I may say, sir, I am willing to to he judged and condemned or approved by history, the faithful record of what men do or sutler' in this life. It is my opinion that this rebellion would have been powerless, comparatively, for mischief against this country, but for the gentleman himself and those politically associated wtth him, who. from its inception to this hour, have been crying in the ear of tho conspirators aud traitors, and for their encouragement, "no coercion," by tho Govcrnnicrut of rebels in arms against it. My colleague exhibited a wise discretion, in selecting his facts from history, to omit tho fact that when these men in the South were arming to cocrco tho Government and people of the United States to submit to disunion which is national dissolution and national death a Democratic Cabinet minister, (Mr. Floyd,) in the War Department, was co-operating with them by dismantling their forts; and a Democratic Cabinet minister, (Mr. Touccy,) whether wittingly or unwittingly, was aiding them by sending your vessels of war into distant seas, that your Navy might not It Jicrv in ihe day of trial.. Aud to luake assurance doubly sure, a Demwcratio President (Mr. Uuclianan) sent to this House that remarkable message of the 4th of December, 1S00, iu which he said that it was unconstitutional to coerce seceded Suites; that is, to make war upon the armed rebels who seize upon and control a Stato organization; and in most plaintive words declared that the, meord teas not placed in the hands of Cumjrcsi to preserve the Union hy force. Congress, it was admitted, might declare war, but not against rebels. Tho substanco of this was that your power to call forth the militia to execute the laws and suppress insurrection could not be rightfully exercised against these rebels. What was this declaration by your Democratic President but a declaration that coercion was to bo all ono side; that rebels alone in this land might coerce the peoplo to submission by arms? If that weak and wicked declaration of your Democratic Presidcut had been met in this House as it ought to have been ' met; if, instead of being supported in that treasonable declaration of a purpose to disregard tho obligation of his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of tho United States, he had been met first with the uni ted declaration of disapproval, and, if that had not brought him to a just sense ol his duty, he had been pursued, as ho deserved to be pursued, by articles of impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors in office,! do not believe this rebellion would have progressed as it under his administration. I am aware that before tho reception of this message of James Buchanan, South Carolina had passed her ordinance of secession; but for this ciicouragciueut she would, in my opinion, havo stood ulonc, the same contempti ble, craven State that she was in her first rebellion iu 1832, not able to muster forty thousand men, and filled by a larger servile population brooding over wrongs, strong enough and willing enough, aud, as I believe, bravo enough to have strangled to death all tho rebels within her borders. When this rebellion was thus aided by this Democratic President and Democratic Cabinet ministers, and by the gentleman himself and those who agree with him in this J louse, it well becomes him, now that the rebellion is full armed, to attempt to justify tho record of himself and his party, even by the audacious cry, "l told you that coercion would make civil war: the present Administration has resorted to it, and hence this unhappy war." How would it now be with the country if the existing Administration had followed the example of that Administration which expired on the 4th day of .March, 1S01? But one answer can be truthfully given; the country would have been dismembered, the rebellion would have triumphed! No coercion meant disunion. It is unconstitutional, you say, to call out armies to suppress the rebellion authorized by conspirators, who, by their ordinance of treason, declare State seceded. Strip these words of all disguise, and they simply mean to-day, as they meant in the beginniug, this Government has no power to t'efend itself against tho armed rebellion and treason of a contemptible minority. Do;:s it require any gift of prophecy to forseo what tho result had been, if the abused Administration of to-day had folluwoll the gentleman's . advice? Tho Union would have been destroyed by the coercive power of the rebellion, unless disunion had been resisted by the eoerciou of the loyal i people. The gentleman stands here to denounce Abraham Lincoln,the Executive of the United States, for issuing his proclamation of tho 15th of April, 1801, after the walls of Smnpter had been broken by tho infernal enginery of treason, and the hand of tho Almighty alone had saved its gallant defenders from perishisg iu its flames. I havo no doubt it grieves him that the President of tho United States had tho courage to do his duty in accrdaneo with his registered oath, to summon, in accordance with tho law of tho land seventy-five thousand men, good and true, to tho rescue jjfa violated Constitution and an imperiled country. Sir, tho gentleman, according to the utterances of to-day, would have been eulogizing, instead of denouncing tho present Executive of the United States, if like his predecessor, instead of issuing that proclamation of tho 15th of April, 1801, lie had crept through the avenues of tho capital muttering, like a gibbering ghost, the silly words, "the Constitution does not allow the coercion of a rebel State." This pitiful imitation of his predecessor would have rejoiced the heart of this defender of the Constitution as it is and tho Union as it was. Tho gentleman would havo had the watchman, whom the people had placed upon tho tower, to cry "all is well," while one-half of tho Republic was engaged in armed rebellion for tho overthrow of the Constitution and tho laws. IIo himself would havo repeated tho cry, "all is well," till your capital had fallen without a gun being fired, and the Republic had been blotted from the map of nations tho gentleman himself proclaiming that it perished bocau.se it was unconstitutional to do-fend it; that to coerce rebels who struck at its life was a crime. The gentleman has tho .'andor to say that was his opinion, declared by himself ut the beginning, and that ho is of that mind still; he says to-day to coerce by force rebels in arms is unconstitutional.Hence it is that the gentleman comes here to-day and tells us that tho war ought to6top; that it should not continue a day nor an hour. lie is for tho Union he tells us, aud against tho employmctt of tho only means by which tho Union can bo this day maintained, the armed power of tha people themselves. There can be no Union as it was, unless by arms you sustain, over all the rcpufejje, tho Constitution as the supremo law of the land; and yet the gentleman says tho war ought to stop; that it it should not continue a day or an hour. The other half of his speech is devoid to the tnsk of satisfying the people,1 that ho is for the Constitution as it is and tho Union as it was. Let us see. lie tells us frankly and 1 believe his statement is liri'c'iM'lv aecoi'diinr to the record that ho voted neither men nor money to carry on the war. iiuppose un me representatives in this Hall had followed his example, had acted us he declares ho has acted in tho cause of tho Union, what would have been tho result? No bill authorizing the enlistment of volunteers in del'enco of your flag, no appropriation of money for arming, equipping, and keeping iu the field six hundred thousand defenders of the Union, no arm lifted to support the tottering pillars of tho Republic, shaking in this wild storm of rebellion. All would havo been abandoned. The gentleman who says he is for tho Union as it was, would have abandoned all to the ten-dor mercies of this armed rebellion, whioh has multiplied those graves all over tho land to which the gentleman refers with so much tenderness, and so much regret for those who fill them; fallen as ho says, by reason of this unconstitutional war. The gentleman could not find it in his heart to O.enounco tho rebellion as unconstitutional, but only the war on the part of the Government for the suppressiou of that rebellion is unconstitutional. This is the last phaso of that Democracy which has brought this ruin upou the country. 1 do not say that everybody of the party to whioh the gentleman belongs was of his mind; but 1 do say, and I challenge contradiction in saying it, that but for the aid and comfort which that gentleman and his party has given to this rebellion from its inception to this hour, this ruiu, to whioh he points so significantly to-day, wrought by this terrible conflict of arms, aud which has reached almost every hearthstone in the laud, never had been. In my judgment, the gentleman, and those of his party whs have agreed andco-operated with him, are not clear of the blood shed in this war. I am as tolerant of conflicting opinions as tho gentleman or any other man; but I cannot bo expected to bo tolerant of the charge mado by the gentleman this day, that those who stand by the country and by the Constitution, by reason of their fiidelity to duty, violate the Constitution; ' nor can I be tolerant of tho demand that the only means by which tho Government can bo maintained shall bo withdrawn from its support, and the country left naked to its enemies. That is tho point I mako with the gentleman to-day. He seems to assume that there is no difficulty in the way to a restoration, a speedy restoration of peace and of tho Union, if your armies are disbanded, if the war for tho Union only ceases, and ceases at once. There is not a word of denunciation from the gentleman's lips against this rebellion', and he assumes and takes it for granted that secession is a constitutional right; and by way of glorifying these infernal architects of our country's ruin, inquires, were not our fathers rebels like unto them? I think, sir, I am not mistaken in saying that the gentleman's expressed opinion is that this rebellion is right and constitutional, and justified by the great example of tho fathers of the Republic. I thank him for his candor in so plainly announcing his opinion, though eoustrained to differ with him in his opinions and his conclusions. My colleague, who talks to-day about the Union as it was, is the same gentleman who introduced, in February. 1X01, in aid of this rebellion. the proposition to "divide the United States into four sections," and to arm, by an amendment to the Constitution, tho rebellious section of the country the fifteen slave States with the power to legalize secession, in utter disregard of ovcry free State in tho Union, and without the consent of nnv of them. I do not think that a gentleman occupying that position upon the records or tne country lias a right. 10 denounco anybody as opponents of the Constitution and tho Union, much less do I suppose it become him to assume that he is tho special guardian of tho "Constitution as it is and tho Union as it was." The gentleman was very correct iu remarking that it would be a most singular sneetac e. indeed, to have two separate governments within tho limits of territory which Godandnaturo had designed should bo under ono Government, and to be the common heritage of ono people. I agree with him; and yet the gcutlcman managed and oontrived adeviceby which tho American pcoploj if they had accepted the proposition, would havo consented that that very result might bo accomplished. It is not for mo to declare tho motives of the gentleman beyond what he himself has declared; but it is for mo to assume that ho meant tho legal consequences aud effects of his own acts; and I stand here to-day to assert in his presence that tho proposition which ho made in February, 1861, in this House, was a proposition to lcgalizo secession by the consent simply of tho Legislature of the sections in which it was proposed; casting aside the authority of tho whole peoplo of the Republic outside of that section; saying to the States of New England, if South Carolina should propose to secede, "be silent; you havo no voice in thio matter;" saying to tho great Empire State of New York, if Mississippi proposes to secede, "be still; you havo no voice in this matter;" saying to the Key stone of Pennsylvania, if Alabama proposes to secede, "be silent; you havo no voice in this matter:" savin'.' to the free West which tho gentleman and myself with our col leagues, in part present, U ucorgiaana every other shivo Stato should propose to se cede, and break up tho common heritage which God mtended should belong to one peoplo, "bo silent; you havo no right to interfere:" bedauso it is written in tho Con stitution, as amended by tho suggestion of my colteaguo nimseit, mat every siave Stato may socedo from the Union simply upon the condition that tho several Legislature of tho section of tho South consent to it. And yet the gentleman is for ''the Union as it was." The gentleman seems to bo horrified by the thought of two scp-parale governments exiting upon this com mon heritage (d' one people, which God, by its mountains, and its lakes, and its inagnificient rivers, has declared shall never be partitioned. His premises and his conclusions are strangely at fault with each other. The gentleman is for the Union, and at tho samo moment for disunion. Disband youi armies, and let tho war for Union cease, says tho gentleman; not word about that other war, the rebellion against tho Union; only let this war for tho Union wise, and do not tolerate it for a day or an hour- His official conduct corresponds precisely with his declarations, for he refused to vote cither the men or tho money to carry on tho war for the Union and the Constitution; and, of course, if we all follow his example, it must cease, and cease at once. lM.i il y rni . ft .1 ... . n nut iiieu: x no ooutli Would be independent of the North, find the South would bo triumphant over your violated Constitution and shuttered Union. The gentleman so assumed, and hence his resolutions of this session contemplate and speak f "a final treaty of peace" with these rends as a foreign and independent power. The gentleman further assumes and I would like to know by what authority that if we withdraw our armies, if wo lay down our arms, if we cease to make war upon the rebels, they will come back into tho Union under a treaty of peace. 1 would like to know by what authority he says so. If he knows it he ought to give the House the benefit of his information. If it is a mere matter of speculation with him, of course, ho has a right to indulge in his speculations, but we may be pardoned if wo question tho correctness of them. I appeal to my colleague to know if ho has any personal information, any authority niicin the subject, which authorizes him jo say that in the event we disband our army, in (bo event wo lay down our arms, in tho event we cease to make war upon the rebellion, these rebels will consent to conic back at once into the Union under tha Constitution as it is and submit to the laws. I would like to know by what authority he says this. If it is only matter of speculation with him I desire to know. If it is a matter of information from those who have this rebellion in their keeping I desire to know it. The gentleman is silent upon that subject. Mr. Vaixandigham. Will vou allow me time to finish my speech? Mr. IiixonAM. That is an unreasonable request. Mr. VAUAVMCin M. Then I have said I all I desire to say to the gentleman. Mr. Bingham. I supposed the eentlc-l man had. I have this to say in reply to the gentleman, that I doubt very much whether the gentleman is authorized to speak for these rebels to that extent. To whatever extent he may bo their mouthpiece, I venture to doubt his authority to say for them that if wo lay down our arms and surrender to them and allow them to proclaim their independence and their triumph over us and our common Government, they will then consent to come back and be governed by the Constitution, and the laws. I have no doubt that tho gentlemen may say many things by their authority, but that is one thing I do not think ho is allowed to say by his master Jefferson Davis yet. Now, sir, I wish to follow a little further the suggestion which tho gentlemen saw fit to mako here of the origin of this war and how it was brought about. The policy which has brought about this contest is very different from tho early policy of tho Government to which the gentleman refers. He says that if the old status of slavery under tho Constitution were restored all would be well. I beg leave to say that it is because the gentleman and his party broke up the old policy of tho Government touching slavery that this rebellion becamo possible in tho land. Suppose tho gentleman and his party had not gone off of late years in the conspiracy with these very rebels to extend slavery aud give it empire for the sake of securing a present party triumph, but had stoutly stood by the old policy, the ancient landmarks of the Republic, docs anybody suppose that this rebellion would this day have shaken the Union and filled tho hearts of all good men with direful apprehensions for the success of this last experiment of representative government? Not at all. Whoever heard in tho beginin of tho Government of the United States going out on acrusade for tho conquest of territory for tho very purpose of extending tho area of slavery and upholding it by Federal arms? Wo all know that in the beginning slavery existed in the original thirteen States, with the exception of Massachusetts, and we know as well that under the boncficont workings of our institutions, operated upon by the freo spirit of our free Constitution, which Washingtsn himself declared was "perfectly freo in its principles," ono half of those States, without violence to a human being or a human habitation, abolished tho system. When everything was tending directly to the same end in all tho other States, a new light sroso in tho Republic, after the fathers had departed, and when tho Calhounds and tho Hayncs and Mc-Duffios found thoir places in the national councils. It was under tho lead of that distinguished man, whom the gentleman himself cited upon this floor this morning, Mr. Calhoun, that the Government was thrown into a conflict with ft foreign Power for tho very purpose of acquiring a territory, equal in extent to tho territory of the empire of France, for the support of the institution of slavery. I refer you to Mr. Calhoun's letter, as Secretary of State, to our representative in France, (Mr King.) wherein he says that tho annexation of Texas to the Union as a slave Stats is essential to the maintenance and perpetuity of the institution of slavery. What followed? These gentleman from the North, who tell us now to restore slavery to its ancient statue under the Constitution, and all will be well with the Republic, imediatcly fell in with the suggestion, and all over the North, upon (be banners of this Democra- ey, who claim to be the guardi'tm' of the Uuicm and tho Constitution to-day blazed the words, "Polk, Dallas, nd Toxat." Thrt is not all. After they hadsui-eeeiied in hunting to his grave by thoir slanders! and their 'alumnies tho great commoner i of kentuckv. t he man who had a heart largo enough and patriotic euough to embrace the whole Union and all its interests; the inuu who had a vision clear and strong enough to penetrate the future, and with the pro-science of a prophet to fortull that of this proposed acquisition of national ,wu and :. 'r,.. foreign territory could only come dishonor: when ha was hunted dow your champion, upon the solo basis of the annexation of Texas, was elevated over him to the Presidency, what followed Where, then, was your lovo for tho Con- stitution and the time-honored policy of tho Government? Texas, a fureign State, by your party, not mine, was admitted iu-! to the Union with a contract of that sort made with a foreign State could only b rightfully make, if at all, under the Constitution, by the tieaty-inakiug power, and therefore only with the asseutof two thirds of the Sei nate. It is a fact iu history that ! ipt was made so to annex Texas, it failed. The two thirds of the tho attempt and that Senate refused toassent to it. What then? W by, the party represented by these de- fenders of "the Constitution us it is and tho Union as it was,'' laid the foundation of this very revolt to-day by breaking through the restrictions of the Constitution, by trampling their oaths under their feet, by introducing, in the service of this institution of slavery, which was the great pillar of Democracy at that day, their famous juint resolution, and by passing it through the Senate by a meager majority of one, in defiance of their oaths and the Constitution. To-day, sir, the words of Mr. Clay sound j like a prophet s word, "I'o this, and you will involve your country in national dishonor and war." You did do it, and the result predicted following :tt effect follows cause. Tho first result of this civil war at home over the division of tho spoils of this conquest. You had no sooner got Texas into the Union, and effected the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo with Mexico, by wliich you had acquired a large portion of' her tcritory, than immediately there arose in these Halls a wild conflict about I the government of the new acquisition. Away upon the coast of the Pacific the young State of California organized a free constitution and asked for admission into the Union. These men of the South who are now engaged in this conspiracy declared that she should not come in with her free constitution. Why? Because it would multiply tho representatives of free labor in this and the other end of tho Capitol You remember the ultimatum of that doughty knight of Georgia, now in arms against tho Rcpublic,(Mr. Toombs,) that that .State must be divided by tho thiiry-sixth parallell, or they would divide the Union. It was not accomplished. The State was finally admitted, but admitted upon a compromise as to the residue of the territory, aud which compromise was immediately, in 1850, made the pretext for organizing this rebellion. The very terms were then agreed upon by which the rebellion should be initiated. I ask gentlemen to read tho letters that passed at that time between the then Governor of Mississippi and the then Govcrn-nor of South Carolina, and sco what was then substantially agreed upon between them, when they talk about maintaining ths Union fcnd the Constitution by- rcstro-ing slavery to its status. What was it? Lt was agreed by these high contracting parties that South Carolina should lead off in the act of secession at the proper limn; and when she had done that, declared herself independent of the authority of the Federal Government, dedlarod the Constitution and laws of tho United States void and of no effect within the limits of her territory, then, said these gentleman, tho Federal Government will attempt to ''coerce" her to "submission.'' That is whence gentlemen borrow this word "coercion,'' about which we havo heard so much to-day. It was in tho originial conspiracy in 1850 that tho word was first used, in American politics with any signifiancc. Tho Federal Government would attempt to coerce South Carolina into submission, aud theu, said they, her sister southern States aud especially the ootton St-itcs would rally to her standard and protect the sovereignty of seceding South Carolina against "unconstitutional Federal coercion." That plot, sir, was carried out. It was agreed in 1850 that South Carolina should take the initiative whenever tho proper time, ar-rivod. The contest of 1852 came, and n President was elected who was not in this conspiracy, who was not willing to lend his influenco to its accomplishment, and, therefore, it was agreed that tho proper time had not arrived. Tho contest of 150 came, and an old man was elected whoso intellect was shattered by the approaches of ago;who, whether intending the destruction of his country or not, brought into his Cabinet council men that were in that conspirney, and who were ready to use their position and offices ia aid of its accomplishment.In that Cabinet council sat ono of those men who is stained all over to-day with the blood of our countrymen Howell Cobb, of Georgia, tho Secretary of the Treasury. In that Cabinet council also sat, as Secre tary of War, another (Floyd) who, in like 1 l . I'.L' I manner, has been engaged in this work of this beautiful fibrie of American how so wisely and justly to mould the in-asssssination on all your stricken fields of ' empire were mighty men, whom God stitutions of States? In thai denounced . . . .. . I. i.. t 'ijr-i i 1 i i.-. I I -i I'll s i-i battle in that Cabinet council also was that other man from the North, who I have nod reason to believe, though I do not know the fact, did lend the influence of his position to tho conspiracy. I refer to that gentleman from Connecticut, whose nauie is not often heard these days ok the lips of patriots, eithor hero or elsewhere, who.for the time being.actcdas Sceretaryof the Navy, and who in his personal appearance answers well to Byron's description ot one of the heroes: "lUwu Tuik.tliti.'ulurbf ttinti)Kny " I mean the man who sent bhips to for- elgn seus! that they might not be hero to" uiuie u. vlw uU nrii eminent a-ainut this ureal i Ly iho ugge.,iioii 1 aui nut lure thul 1 ful defend tho Gove treason. I mean the man who permitted "uvy -yards to be tukeu by these labels. W MI1U VJ kill-it. iwubir, honest uudeavor to resist j who made ho them. And there was thai other gentle-' Hr. U1.NQ1UM. 11 u luioruiea u -una man of tho Interior Department, (Mr. ', 'twas the ouly example of Moses, wUrm Thompson,) who is uU now engaged inthisl I ""Id discover iruui the .peech ihat he rebelliou. I urn not huru W say that he '" pWasted to ruler to spfeiheally--lhut wantonly and purposely allowed the De-1 Mo' wh" he wuuu-d to Juju.'.iCj U ivirlnmuUnhd rinmf a iL was rifled. i.luli-l'' I'l'lo, wlitm he Wi.lllud to f.sluM the dered, of the Indian securities; tut unfor-! tunately it was done under his admiuistra-i've lUnfiL lui,,,i A n,l with uneli a role as was thus played in the capital of tl. n.,t;..M i,v n.,i.,.w.i-..i;,. Vl.wK.t I council, the gentleman wl.o;helped to put I mem there has the curontcry to come here "d srraigu meu for making war ou these innoeeot, unofTtuding rebels. According to his logic we should hare sat silent, and al- lowea inose gentlemen to plunder the people of the money iu their Treasury on the one baud, aud to rob theui of the means of , oil- j l..l'...,ao a,l .,e.r,rr,,Un f1. Mlwi. The suggestion of the gentlo.uaii .siupcrfeet kwpins with tho conduct of that Cabinet. lib-ud your Army, he says. Leave the fihl to these rebels. Allow them to pro- Bla,m themselves to all the world independ' ent of your authority. Allow the Union to bo dissevered, and tbeieupou goto work and stfttle the difficulty, in the language of tho gentleman's resolution, by "u final treaty nt'tie.'ien" Tl.,it i.,.il.l I... .. for gods and men to look on with wouder I tho Government of the Uuited States engaged in a final treaty of peace with Robert Toombs aud Jefferson Davis, and John 15. Floyd and John Letcher of Virginia, aud John Sliddell and James Mason, with the gentleman from Ohio chief '" J0" ':uuusel But tho gcutlcman, not content with simply making this suggestion, comes here to-day to discredit the tjoverumeut in the face of tho world, and says, with an air of triumph, "how can you carry on the war? Cau it continue? Can you borrow more money? Cau you obtain any more revenue by taxation?" Aud he undertakes to answer for all the loyal peoplo of this great country, "no." 1 ask hinl again for hi authority. I deny tho correctness of his eoueulsiou. I would despair ol this Republic if I thought that the millions who peoplo all this broad laud of ours, from the rock-bound ceast of New England to the golden gates of the Pacific, were like tho gentleman from Ohio, ready to lav their hands linon their nuiiitlm nml thu'n- mouths iu the dust, crying beforo these armed rebels and thieves, ''unclean, unclean, unclean." Tho people, sir, occupy no such position, thank God, and 1 trust they never will; because I believe that the spirit of the Puritans, at which the gentleman affects to snoer to-day, runs through their veins. "Ah," paid my colleague, "you cau borrow no more money, you can raise no more revenue by taxation." 1 take it that, iu this instance, the wish of my colleague is father to the thought. He would, if he could, have those who hold tho purse-strings in this laud withhold from the Government the means of support. I have the right to infer, from his words, that he would, if ho could, induce the loyal peojdo of the land to withhold the payment of taxes in support of their own Government. And yet ho is for the Union as it was and for "the Constitution as it is ! Tho gentleman refers fo Washington, whose bones, he says aro disturbed by this unconstitutional war for the Union. Has the gentleman, when he talks such suggesting to the peoplo a disregard of law; a withholding of taxes, a refusal to support tho Government forgotton those grand words of Washington, which ought to be written to-day over the liulels of every door in the land; "in the Constitution wliich at any timo exists is sacredly obligatory upon all until changod by tho act of the wholo people!" I think that admonition of Washington a sufficient response to the suggestions of the gentleman to the good people of this land to pay no more taxes, not to submit tohcir own laws, to allow the Union to bo dismembered, and tho heritage, which God himself has declared should be tho common heritage of one people, to be divided. And for what purpose? Why, that it may be united again. I suppnso tho gentleman's philosophy is, that tho best way to preservo a mau's life is to kill him, in tho first place, nicrcly for tho purposo of showing his skill in restoring him to life again. Ho would destroy tho Union to-day by disbanding the Army; ho would destroy tho Union to-day by destroying the public confidence in the Government; he would destroy it by withholding from theGovcrnffient the revenues necessary to carry on tho war. And after that is done, ho would restore it by some strange machinery, by some strange power of enchaunent which he posscses. I warn thn gentleman to lay no such flattering unction to his soul. He who would put out tho light now burning on your altars had better bo careful, before ho does that work, to inquire what earthly power shall that light relume. My colleace would consent that the ' fnllars of the tomplo of our librtiesshould ip shaken down, in tho vain belief that he has the power to rear them again in all their just and beautiful proportions. I treat iu God that mv colleague's day dream is not to be realised. I conviction that those who feel the reared ; taugnt to uuua ior giory ann ior oesuiy. i They were mon who are not seen io every j generation, or in every century. They : were men of that large discourse that looks before and after. They were men fitted ot God to accomplish the great work or laying the foundation of a great and free commonwealth. In this hour of peril my cnlloague tells us to follow tho example of Moso. I am quito satifQed with the tribute which he paid to him. He sid he was one of the gre ileit btatcmiieu llnl m-r Inei. J ihinl itui l likely, Ha w.n t into f- 1 .w ly comprehend. Mr. LuviJor, To loul ihu iUi& out of ihe house ol boi.Jage. authority of good govun.in,nt took cnr to tho laud 1 lypt, uud lead ihuw out ol that country. Doci tho eeiiUomuu b)' "ilu l; follow the lead ul some Mwus-hiuiaull. Jor example-get up and leau- tut. good ly heritage of uurs to be oceupicd exclu sively by those rebels iu urnis, who have sworn that they will not have thia Government of the peoplo to rule over them? cauuot infer anything cU 1 do not ee what other conclusion any uiau ch ii arrive- "uU w',ttt 1lllu '"t'"i" 'd- And it that le what ho means, then I huve this to hiu: ,Lll1tl'u r1''1" ,0t "Imlrmti0B " "B secured under the Uiiatitutiuu and laws of the Uuted States to all iu citizens, and if it be m ojrding to his mind to gather up his buudic under his arm, uud to go into distant parts, iu order to accommodate these rebels, he has a right perfect to exercise his privilege. But 1 beg leave to suggest that those oTus who think otherwise shall Le permitted to stand by thu "1J UaS uuJ ,tu ru,,uuiu yur Ulltivu heuth undisturbed, so long us it shall please God to let us live. If he meaut auything else than this bright question, 1 would like to know what he did uicuu. My friend on my left suggests that howeuut to lead the people out of their bjndage into the life of their liberty. Laughter. If he meant ilut.it was not juir iu him not to diselossuu fully aud unequivocally his meuuiug, so that the country might have tho beuotit of. it. Tho gentleman alluded to Moses al s great statesman aud law-giver. I ugre. with my colleague in that; but Iiusita that if that bo his conviction in this hour of national peril, ho ought to follow the example of Moses, I hope the goutlo uum will not repudiate the law of hisgreut law-giver aud he is also my great lawgiver and model statesman. It we Lava any respect for Moses's law, iu my belief, the first act to be done by tho nation is to proclaim to these rebels, iu tho words inV tered by this great law-giver, which be received from the Almighty himself in tho midst of the darkness uud earthquake of the mountain "Thou shalt not steal." Laughter. They are attempting to steal your country and mine; they are attempting to steal your property aud mine; they are attempting to steal the heritage of yonr children uud raiue. 1 huvo no doubt you, sir, Mr. Crittenden, will agree with me, whither my colleague docs or uot, that every rood of South Carolina is as much a part of your native land and mine us any rood of Kentucky or Ohio. Yet these rebels iu arms are attempting to steal it. 1 here brand them us thoivus who rob us of any part of our national heritage, Let thus who do not forfeit their right by crime enjoy that heritage iu peace, in common with the rest ol'ub. I ask my colleague whether ha will consent that those rebels shall steal any portion of this common territory of our oountry or not? The theory which he baa advanced in his remarks of to-day would consent to the theft. Mr. Vallandinoham. I will consent that my colleague may volunteer to prevent it, if he wishes. Mr. Hinouam. Will my colleague really consent that I may voluuteer? Laughter.Mr. Vallandioham. Yes, sir. My colleague and myself will be in tho same category, at leisure after sho 4th of March, and perhaps we may volunteer together. Mr. KiMOHAM. 1 take eourage from that, for the inference to be drawn, both from the spoken argumonts of my colleague and his official conduot in this Hohso, is, that ho would permit nobobody to voluo-toc. Applauso in tho gallery. Mr. Vau.andkjuam. Let mo say to my colleogiie Mr. Ri.NdHAM. I cannot yield tha floor. Tha gentleman would disband yonr Army, withhold all supplies, and permit me alono to volunteer against all these rc bcls in arms. That is magnanimity.-Talk about volunteering, sneeringly, when you, who havo sworn to support tho Constitution of tho United States, stands by and see it torn and rentjin tatters, and deny tho right to maintain it by nrms. When violent hands are laid upon the old flag of the Union, stained as it is, all over with, the blood of its defonders, shed by their assassins and murderers, you deny tha right to uphoid it, and refuse to vote supplies to your citizen soldiery, who peril all things earthly for the majesty of the .law and in defence of their own institutions. You talk about volunteering. Applauso in tho galleries. The Speaker. Ths chair will order tho galleries cleared, if this disturbance is persisted in. Mr. Bingham. Ons other remark irp-on this snbjeot of volunteering. My cel-lcague volunteers to speak, for the great and free North i st-the offspring of that New Logland, which he has denojiuced here tc day. Where did the founders of those free commonwealths of the Northwest lesrn rsew ngiai'u, amsng lae nuis oi wnicu they were crad:ed. They oarried the giest lesson ot wUdom with them, those children 'of the pilgrim fathers who followed th , getting sun ni no walked .in bis Makers j steps ot lire. Ibe lirstactof those pion- eers of west rn civilisation was to re. enact in the light of New England's cxpmple, as the primal law of their free Common-wealths, that all men should be free, and that no man within tbeir limits jhoa'd be wrongfully robbed either of h i liberty or -1 ! ' &4 St