The veto was never considered, and the effort for the admission of Colorado expired for that session. Had the veto been considered, Mr. Sumner would have said:—
Months have passed since the application of Colorado was presented to Congress, with a constitution disregarding that vital principle which constitutes the essential element of republican government, without which a republican government is a name and nothing more. For months representatives of Colorado have struggled to triumph over this benign principle. Meanwhile the popular voice has been heard, sounding in the ears of members of Congress, and still the efforts of these representatives of Colorado are continued. I regret this much. I regret that they did not return home and crown their labors by making the new State an example to the country.
On this occasion I shall sustain the veto of the President. I must do this, because I agree with him, that Colorado should not now be admitted as a State.
There are reasons assigned by the President which are applicable and sufficient. There is at least one other assigned by him which is inapplicable, and, of course, insufficient. When he objects to the reception of a new State with so small a population as Colorado, to exercise equal power, legislative, diplomatic, and executive, with New York, in this Chamber,—and when again he objects to this new State on the ground that the people there are not yet ripe and ready for the responsibilities of a State government,—clearly, in these two cases he has reason on his side. All that he says is at once applicable and sufficient. But I must be pardoned, if I cannot adopt his other reason,—that we should not undertake to admit new States while our late Rebel States are still unrepresented in Congress. This reason is obviously inapplicable, and, of course, insufficient. He might as well object to the validity of elections because criminals have not been let out of the prisons and penitentiaries to vote. States hardly yet washed clean from the blood of rebellion cannot expect to be received instantly into the great copartnership of the National Government. For the present, the business must be done by the loyal members.
There is another reason, at once applicable and sufficient, which the President has forgotten to assign. That he should forget it may seem strange, when we consider, that, on an important occasion in Tennessee, standing on the steps of the Capitol, he openly announced himself as the “Moses” of an oppressed race. But, Sir, are we not told by the poet that the soul can reach heights which it cannot keep? Clearly, in this utterance, so grandiose in promise, our President reached heights he has not been able to keep. He is mortal, and the early inspiration has passed from him. Had it been otherwise, he would not have forgotten to rebuke this young Colorado coming forward with a constitution that openly sets at nought that equality of rights which attaches to the loyal citizens of an oppressed race. Here is reason enough for the rejection. As in times past there has been the cry, “No more Slave States!” the cry now must be, “No more States with the word ‘white’!” I trust the Territories west of the Mississippi will take notice, and govern themselves accordingly.
At the next session, another bill was promptly introduced by Mr. Wade, and then reported by him from the Committee on Territories. Meanwhile a bill for the admission of Nebraska was taken up, and, after a protracted discussion, in which Mr. Sumner took part, that Territory was admitted as a State, on the fundamental condition of Equal Rights.[280]
January 9, 1867, immediately on the passage of the Nebraska Bill in the Senate, the bill for the admission of Colorado was taken up. The proviso requiring equal rights as a fundamental condition was adopted,—Yeas 21, Nays 18,—and the bill then passed the Senate,—Yeas 23, Nays 11,—Mr. Sumner voting in the affirmative.
January 15th, in the House of Representatives, the proviso adopted by the Senate was changed so as to require the assent of the State Legislature,—Yeas 84, Nays 65,—and the bill then passed the House,—Yeas 90, Nays 60. The Senate concurred, but President Johnson returned the bill with his objections.
March 1st, on the question of the passage of the bill, notwithstanding the objections of the President, the vote stood, Yeas 29, Nays 19. Two thirds not having voted for the bill, it did not become a law. Nebraska was more fortunate.
Although Colorado failed to be admitted as a State, the long and earnest debate was not without result. The power of Congress to require Equal Rights as a fundamental condition was affirmed.
OPPOSITION TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ON THE BASIS OF REPRESENTATION.
Letter to the Boston Daily Advertiser, March 15, 1866.
Senate Chamber, March 15, 1866.
To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser.
GENTLEMEN,—My attention has been called to an editorial article in your paper,[281] where you say that Mr. Sumner “aided in defeating” the proposed Constitutional Amendment, “because in his opinion it fell short of what was needed.”
Permit me to say that this does not state my position accurately.
My objection to the proposed Amendment was twofold: first, that it carried into the Constitution by express words the idea of inequality of rights, which, in my opinion, would be a defilement of the text; and, secondly, that it lent the sanction of the Constitution to a wholesale disfranchisement on account of race or color. Thus far, nothing of the kind had been allowed to find place in its text. To my mind it was clear that nothing of the kind could rightly be allowed to find place in its text.
You will see, therefore, that my opposition was not because the proposed Amendment “fell short of what was needed,”—although this was too true,—but because it did what in my judgment ought not to be done. Its objectionable character became more apparent, when it was considered that it did this at a crisis when complete justice to the freedmen was at once the prompting of gratitude and the requirement of necessity for the sake of national peace and the good name of the Republic. But the special objection to the proposed Amendment was not that it “fell short,” but that it was bad in itself. It is sometimes said, “Half a loaf is better than no bread,” and this has been called “half a loaf.” But nobody would accept “half a loaf,” if it were poisoned. Here was a poisonous ingredient. The proposition to found representation on voters, besides being more surely effective to the same end, had no poison in it.
Others did not see the proposed Amendment as I did. Had they seen it so, they must have voted against it. But, seeing it as I did, I think you will agree that I could not hesitate in opposition to it.
I do not write now for any purpose of controversy, but simply that my position may not be misunderstood.
I am, Gentlemen, your faithful servant,
Charles Sumner.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Afterwards Minister and Consul General to the Government of Hayti.
[2] Post, Vol. XIV. pp. 228-231.
[3] Blackstone, Commentaries, Vol. IV. p. 278.
[4] Post, p. 22.
[5] Post, pp. 113, 123.
[6] Post, p. 271.
[7] Post, pp. 315, seqq.
[8] This same oath appears in another bill, introduced by Mr. Sumner on the same day, entitled “A Bill prescribing an oath to maintain a republican form of government in the Rebel States”; this oath to be taken by every person in any State lately declared to be in rebellion, before he shall be allowed to vote at any election, State or National, or before he shall enter upon the duties of any office, State or National, or become entitled to the salary or other emoluments thereof. See, ante, p. 12.
[9] Statutes at Large, Vol. XII. pp. 255-258.
[10] The Senate Chamber.
[11] Mr. Butler.
[12] Congressional Globe, 34th Cong. 1st Sess., p. 640, March 12, 1856.
[13] See the engraving of Retzsch.
[14] Ante, Vol. XI. p. 365: Speech of Mr. Sumner on the Recognition of Arkansas, June 13, 1864.
[15] First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801: Writings, Vol. VIII. p. 4.
[16] Act of July 13, 1861: Statutes at Large, Vol. XII. pp. 255-258.
[17] Congressional Globe, 38th Cong. 2d Sess., February 4, 1865, p. 591.
[18] Horne, Commentary on the Psalms: Ps. xi. 3.
[19] See, ante, p. 42.
[20] Executive Documents, 39th Cong. 1st Sess., Senate, No. 1, pp. 2-105.
[21] Burke, Letter to Henry Dundas, April 9, 1792: Works (Boston, 1865-67), Vol. VI. p. 261.
[22] Ante, Vol. XII. pp. 312-314.
[23] Affranchissement des Serfs: Traduction des Documents Officiels, Résumés Explicatifs et Annotations (St. Petersburg, 1861).
[24] Constitution of Massachusetts, Declaration of Rights, drawn by John Adams.
[25] Ante, p. 17.
[26] Ante, p. 14.
[27] Post, pp. 136, seqq.
[28] Letters from New Orleans, October, 1865: Nation, October 26, 1865, Vol. I. pp. 523, 524.
[29] He had already united with President Johnson in his “policy.”
[30] Act to establish and regulate the Domestic Relations of Persons of Color, etc., Sec. XVII. [Approved December 21, 1865.]
[31] Ibid., Sections L., LII., LIII.
[32] Later evidence showed that this hope was without foundation.
[33] Senate Journal, 1865-66, p. 151.
[34] Code of Tennessee, § 3808.
[35] Statutes at Large, Vol. XIV. p. 50.
[36] The Necessity of Universal Suffrage in Reconstruction; Letter to the Editor of the New York Nation, October, 1865: Speeches and Addresses, pp. 585-596.
[37] Speech in the House of Commons, on the Address of Thanks, December 13, 1792: Hansard’s Parliamentary History, Vol. XXX. col. 13.
[38] Ante, p. 14.
[39] Post, p. 123.
[40] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 25, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. pp. 1429, 1430.
[41] Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication. It passed the Senate February 2d, and became a law, notwithstanding the veto of President Johnson, April 9th.—Statutes at Large, Vol. XIV. p. 27.
[42] Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun: Characters, prefixed to Political Works, (Glasgow, 1749,) p. viii.
[43] Ante, p. 113.
[44] Ante, Vol. X. p. 167, Our Domestic Relations, Power of Congress over the Rebel States; Vol. XII. p. 305, The National Security and the National Faith. See, also, Vol. IX. p. 1, Rights of Sovereignty and Rights of War.
[45] Speech in Washington, April 11, 1865: McPherson’s Political History of the United States during the Rebellion, p. 609.
[46] Constitution of the Confederate States, Art. IV., Sec. 3, Clause 4: Statutes at Large (Richmond, 1864), p. 21. See, also, Appleton’s Annual Cyclopædia, 1861, art. Public Documents.
[47] Of Reformation in England, Book II.: Works (London, 1851), Vol. III. p. 34.
[48] No. XXI.
[49] Notes on the Confederacy, April, 1787: Letters and other Writings, Vol. I. p. 322.
[50] Madison Papers, Vol. III., Appendix, No. 5.
[51] Works, Vol. II. pp. 463-466.
[52] Debates in the Federal Convention, May 29, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. II. pp. 731, 734.
[53] Ibid., June 20, 1787, p. 913.
[54] Ibid., May 29, 1787, p. 734.
[55] Debates in the Federal Convention, June 11 and July 18, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. II. pp. 844, 1139, 1141.
[56] Ibid., August 6, 30, and September 12, 15, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. II. p. 1241, Vol. III. pp. 1466, 1467, 1558, 1590, 1621.
[57] The Federalist, No. XLIII. See, also, Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Vol. III. § 1811.
[58] Argument in the Supreme Court of the United States, January 27, 1848, in the Case of Luther v. Borden et als.: Works, Vol. VI. p. 230.
[59] Politics, Book I. ch. 1.
[60] Ibid., Book III. ch. 1.
[61] Ibid., Book III. ch. 7.
[62] Politics, Book IV. ch. 4.
[63] De Republica, Lib. I. c. 25.
[64] Ibid., c. 31.
[65] John Adams, Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States: Works, Vol. IV. p. 370.
[66] Brief of Argument on the Constitution of the United States: Works, Vol. II. p. 463.
[67] Defence of the Constitutions: Works, Vol. V. p. 453.
[68] Letter to J. H. Tiffany, March 31, 1819: Ibid., Vol. X. pp. 377, 378.
[69] Letter to J. H. Tiffany, April 30, 1819: Works, Vol. X. p. 378.
[70] Defence of the Constitutions: Ibid., Vol. IV. p. 358.
[71] De l’Esprit des Lois, Liv. III. ch. 3; IV. 5; V. 2, 3.
[72] Ibid., Liv. II. chs. 1, 2.
[73] De Republica, Lib. II. c. 1.
[74] Histoire de nostre Temps, de l’Estat de la Religion et de la République de France, soubz le Roy Henry second, François second et Charles neuviesme: Vies des Hommes Illustres et Capitaines François, Discours LVIII.: Œuvres Complètes du Seigneur de Brantôme (Paris, 1822), Tom. II. p. 310.
[75] Brantôme, Vies des Hommes Illustres et Capitaines François, Discours LXII.: Œuvres, Tom. II. p. 395.
[76] Histoire de France (4me édit.), Tom. IX. p. 391.
[77] John Adams, Novanglus: Works, Vol. IV. p. 106.
[78] Politics, Book III. ch. 16.
[79] Historical View of the English Government (London, 1818), Vol. III. p. 326.
[80] John Adams, Letter to J. H. Tiffany, March 31, 1819: Works, Vol. X. p. 378.
[81] Enquiry into Vulgar and Common Errors, Book III. ch. 27, § 3.
[82] Du Contrat Social, Liv. III. ch. 4: Œuvres (Paris, 1821), Tom. V. p. 175.
[83] Letter to John Penn: Works, Vol. IV. p. 204. See also Letter to George Wythe: Ibid., p. 194.
[84] Speech on Motion for a Reform in Parliament, May 7, 1793: Hansard’s Parliamentary History, Vol. XXX. col. 915.
[85] Three Letters to Governor Shirley, December, 1754: Works, ed. Sparks, Vol. III. pp. 56, seqq.
[86] Discourses concerning Government (London, 1751), pp. 14, 54, Ch. I. §§ 6, 20.
[87] Two Treatises on Government, Book II. ch. 11, § 140: Works (London, 1812), Vol. V. pp. 422, 423.
[88] Introduction to the Literature of Europe (London, 1847), Vol. III. p. 445, Part IV. ch. 4, § 95.
[89] Mémoires, Liv. V. ch. 19: Petitot, Mémoires relatifs à l’Historie de France, Tom. XII. p. 298.
[90] Preface to Vol. III. Thucydides, p. xv (Oxford, 1842).
[91] Hening, Statutes at Large, Vol. I. p. 403.
[92] Hening, Statutes at Large, Vol. IX. p. 110.
[93] John Adams, Letter to William Tudor, December 18, 1816: Works, Vol. X. p. 233.
[94] John Adams, Letter to William Tudor, June 9, 1818: Works, Vol. X. p. 319.
[95] John Adams, Works, Vol. II. pp. 521-525; Vol. X. pp. 244-249, 314-362. Tudor’s Life of Otis, Chs. V., VI.
[96] Letter to William Tudor, March 29, 1817: Works, Vol. X. pp. 247, 248.
[97] Letter to William Tudor, March 29, 1817: Works, Vol. X. p. 248.
[98] John Adams, Letter to William Tudor, April 5, 1818: Works, Vol. X. pp. 300-312.
[99] See Bancroft’s History of the United States, Vol. V. pp. 290, 291.
[100] Rights of the British Colonies, p. 14.
[101] Ibid., p. 37.
[102] Rights of the British Colonies, p. 37.
[103] Ibid., p. 29.
[104] Ibid., p. 38.
[105] Rights of the British Colonies, Appendix, p. 69. Wells’s Life of Samuel Adams, Vol. I. pp. 46-48.
[106] Resolves, October 26, 1765: Journal of House of Representatives, pp. 151-153; Hutchinson’s History of Massachusetts, Vol. III. pp. 476-478, Appendix.
[107] Answer to Governor’s Speech, October 24, 1765: Journal of House of Representatives, p. 135; Hutchinson’s History of Massachusetts, Vol. III. p. 474, Appendix.
[108] Ante, p. 157.
[109] Considerations on the Propriety of imposing Taxes in the British Colonies (2d edit., London, 1766), p. 5 and Preface.
[110] Wirt’s Life of Patrick Henry (3d edit.), p. 63.
[111] Resolves, September 21, 1765: Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives, Vol. V. p. 426.
[112] Authentic Account of the Proceedings of the Congress held at New York in 1765 (London, 1767), pp. 5, 6.
[113] The Justice and Necessity of Taxing the American Colonies Demonstrated (London, 1766), pp. 13, 14.
[114] Votes and Proceedings of the Town of Boston, October 28th and November 2d, 20th, 1772, pp. 9, 10. Wells’s Life of Samuel Adams, Vol. I. p. 506.
[115] Bancroft’s History of the United States, Vol. V. p. 294.
[116] Instructions to the Delegates from Hanover County to the Virginia Convention, August 1, 1774: Wirt’s Life of Patrick Henry, p. 99, note.
[117] Novanglus, No. VIII.: Works, Vol. IV. p. 131.
[118] Journals of Congress, Vol. I. p. 29, October 12, 1774.
[119] Ibid., pp. 38, 39, October 21, 1774.
[120] Journals of Congress, Vol. I. p. 60, October 26, 1774.
[121] Ibid., p. 70, October 26, 1774.
[122] Speech on Motion for withdrawing Confidence from Ministers, March 15, 1782: Hansard’s Parliamentary History, Vol. XXII. col. 1184.
[123] Speech on the Address of Thanks, January 14, 1766: Ibid., Vol. XVI. col. 100.
[124] Journal of Congress, April 26, 1783, Vol. VIII. p. 201.
[125] Writings, ed. Sparks, Vol. VIII. pp. 567, 568, Appendix, No. XIII.
[126] On Government, No. I.: Works, ed. Sparks, Vol. II. p. 279.
[127] Some Good Whig Principles: Ibid., pp. 372, 373.
[128] Writings, Vol. VII. p. 75.
[129] Ibid., Vol. VI. p. 605.
[130] Writings, Vol. VI. p. 607.
[131] Notes on Virginia, Query XIV.: Ibid., Vol. VIII. p. 385.
[132] Thoughts on Lotteries, February, 1826: Ibid., Vol. IX. p. 508.
[133] Debates in the Federal Convention, June 6, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. II. pp. 805, 806.
[134] Ibid., August 7, 1787, Vol. III. p. 1253.
[135] Ibid., Note to Speech of August 7, 1787, Appendix, No. 4, Vol. III. p. ix.
[136] Ibid., p. xii.
[137] Ibid., p. xiii.
[138] Federalist, No. XXXIX.
[139] Letters and other Writings, Vol. I. p. 322.
[140] Letters and other Writings, Vol. III. p. 190.
[141] Ibid., Vol. IV. p. 60.
[142] Remarks in the Federal Convention: Works, Vol. II. pp. 416, 417.
[143] Remarks in the Federal Convention: Works, Vol. II. p. 418.
[144] Phocion, Letter II.: Ibid., pp. 315, 316.
[145] Ibid., p. 316.
[146] The Federalist, No. LIV.—J. C. Hamilton, in the Historical Notice prefixed to his edition of the Federalist (Philadelphia, 1864), furnishes strong grounds for ascribing this important paper to his father. See pp. xcv-cvi, and cxix-cxxvii.
[147] Correspondence between John Adams and Samuel Adams on Government, Letter IV., November 20, 1790: Works of John Adams, Vol. VI. p. 421.
[148] Correspondence on the Constitution, Letter I., July 20, 1789: Ibid., p. 437.
[149] Works, Vol. IV. p. 293.
[150] Speech in the South Carolina Convention, May 14, 1788: Elliot’s Debates (2d edit.), Vol. IV. pp. 326, 328.
[151] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 21, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. p. 1388.
[152] Elliot’s Debates, Vol. I. p. 374.
[153] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 7, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. p. 1252.
[154] Construction Construed, p. 312.
[155] Address at laying the Corner-Stone of the Addition to the Capitol, July 4, 1851: Works, Vol. II. p. 601.
[156] Argument in the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Case of Luther v. Borden, January 27, 1848: Works, Vol. VI. p. 222.
[157] The State v. Manuel, 4 Devereux and Battle, R., 25.
[158] Hening, Statutes at Large, Vol. IV. pp. 133, 134.
[159] Opinion of Richard West, January 16, 1723, addressed to the Right Honorable the Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, on an Act of Virginia “tending to prevent free black men from voting at elections.”—Chalmers, Opinions of Eminent Lawyers on Various Points of English Jurisprudence, chiefly concerning the Colonies, Vol. II. p. 113.
[160] Petition of Joseph Boone to the Lords Proprietors of Carolina: Dalcho, Historical Account of the Protestant Episcopal Church in South Carolina, p. 83. See, also, p. 178.
[161] Essais, Liv. I. chs. 3, 19.
[162] See, ante, p. 149.
[163] P. Janet, Histoire de la Philosophie Morale et Politique, Tom. II. p. 371.
[164] Considérations sur le Gouvernement de la France, quoted by Henri Martin, Histoire de France, Tom. XV. p. 358. See, also, his Mémoires, Tom. III. p. 313, Tom. V. p. 312.
[165] Idées Républicaines, §§ 13, 43: Œuvres (1784), Tom. XXIX. pp. 190, 203.
[166] Dictionnaire Philosophique, art. Démocratie: Ibid., Tom. XXXIX. p. 254.
[167] Ce que les Citoyens ont Droit d’attendre de leurs Représentants, 10 Avril, 1793: Œuvres, par O’Connor et Arago, (Paris, 1847-49,) Tom. XII. p. 567.
[168] Institutions du Droit de la Nature et des Gens (Paris, 1851), Tom. I. pp. 51, 52, Liv. I. ch. 5, § 4.
[169] Buchez et Roux, Histoire Parlementaire de la Révolution Française, Tom. XXXVIII. p. 458.
[170] Proclamation, 10 Juillet, 1802, pour l’Anniversaire du 14 Juillet, 1789: Correspondance du Napoléon I., No. 6180, (Paris, 1861, Imprim. Impér. 4to,) Tom. VII. p. 660.
[171] Garnier-Pagès, Histoire de la Révolution de 1848, Tom. V. p. 338.
[172] Ibid., p. 348.
[173] Garnier-Pagès, Histoire de la Révolution de 1848, Tom. VII. p. 407.
[174] De la Démocratie en Amérique (14me édit.), Tom. III. pp. 526, 527, Ch. 7.
[175] Block, Dictionnaire de la Politique, art. République.
[176] Additional Observations on the Nature and Value of Civil Liberty (London, 1777), Introduction, p. ix.
[177] Wheaton, History of the Law of Nations (New York, 1845), p. 751.
[178] Ashby v. White et als., Lord Raymond, R., 953.
[179] No. XIV.
[180] De Republica, Lib. II. c. 6.
[181] Literature of Europe, Part II. ch. 4, § 52.
[182] Politics, Book III. ch. 7 [12].
[183] Sarpi, Opinione come debba governarsi internamente la Republica di Venezia per avere il perpetuo Dominio, p. 13.
[184] Luther v. Borden et al.: 7 Howard, R., 42.
[185] Elliot’s Debates (2d edit.), Vol. III. p. 367.
[186] M’Culloch v. Bank of Maryland: 4 Wheaton, R., pp. 409, 421.
[187] Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee: 1 Wheaton, R., 326.
[188] Lives, tr. Langhorne: Solon, c. 14.
[189] Morals, ed. Goodwin: Of Brotherly Love, c. 12.
[190] Virgil, Æneid, tr. Pitt, Book VI., 204, 205 [143, 144].
[191] Gray, Ode for Music, st. v.
[192] Coke, Institutes, Third Part, p. 44.
[193] Plutarch, Of Isis and Osiris, Ch. IX.
[194] Euripides, The Suppliants: Tragedies, tr. Wodhull, Vol. II. p. 20.—Milton, in his Answer to Salmasius, has used this text; and in the English repetition of that tract he has turned it into prose: “I have advanced the people themselves into the throne, having freed the city from slavery, and admitted the people to a share in the government, by giving them an equal right of suffrage.”—Defence of the People of England, in Answer to Salmasius, Ch. VI.: Works (London, 1851), Vol. VIII. p. 163.
[195] Ezekiel, xxxvii. 19.
[196] Speech on the Bill to establish a Territorial Government in Oregon, June 27, 1848: Works, Vol. IV. pp. 511, 512.
[197] Post, pp. 294, seqq.
[198] Less than two fifths. By census of 1790, whole population 748,308; slaves 293,427.
[199] Post, p. 282.
[200] Post, p. 338.
[201] Ante, p. 114.
[202] May 8, 1866: Congressional Globe, 39th Cong. 1st Sess., pp. 2459-60.
[203] Act of March 2, 1867: Statutes at Large, Vol. XIV. p. 429.
[204] Revue des Deux Mondes, 1 Mars, 1866, Tom. LXII. pp. 245, 246.
[205] McPherson’s Political History of the United States during Reconstruction, pp. 53-55.
[206] Ibid., p. 61.
[207] Ante, p. 255.
[208] Boston Daily Advertiser, March 3, 1866.
[209] See, post, p. 280.
[210] Ante, p. 4.
[211] Statutes at Large, Vol. XIV. pp. 225, 226.
[212] Ante, p. 2.
[213] Ante, Vol. VIII. pp. 305, seqq.
[214] Ante, Vol. XI. pp. 389, seqq.
[215] Congressional Globe, 39th Cong. 1st Sess., p. 1291, March 9, 1866.
[216] 4 Wheaton, R., 316.
[217] Attorney-General Bates, On Citizenship, November 29, 1862: Opinions of Attorneys General, Vol. X. pp. 382, seqq.
[218] See, ante, Vol. XII. pp. 97, seqq.
[219] 4 Wheaton, R., pp. 409-421.
[220] Ante, p. 267.
[221] Ante, pp. 238, seqq.
[222] Speech on the Employment of Indians in the American War, November 20, 1777: Hansard’s Parliamentary History, Vol. XIX. col. 368-370.
[223] Speech on Negro Emancipation, February 20, 1838: Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3d Ser. Vol. XL. col. 1307, 1308.
[224] Essays: Of Honor and Reputation.
[225] Boswell’s Life of Johnson, ed. Croker, (London, 1853,) Vol. VIII. p. 285, June 3, 1784.
[226] “Parturient mountains have ere now produced muscipular abortions.”—Johnson’s Ghost: Rejected Addresses.
[227] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 25, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. pp. 1429, 1430.
[228] Æneid, tr. Dryden, Book III. 295, 296 [227, 228].
[229] Boston Recorder, February 9, 1866.
[230] Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (Boston, 1764), p. 14.
[231] Letter to William Tudor, June 1, 1818: Works, Vol. X. p. 315.
[232] Rights of the British Colonies, p. 29.
[233] Ibid., p. 38.
[234] Hutchinson’s Correspondence, quoted by Bancroft, History of the United States, Vol. V. pp. 290, 291.
[235] Rights of the British Colonies, p. 8.
[236] Life of John Adams, by C. F. Adams; Works, Vol. I. p. 78.
[237] Hening, Statutes at Large, Vol. IX. p. 110.
[238] Some Good Whig Principles: Works, ed. Sparks, Vol. II. p. 372.
[239] Two Treatises of Government: Of Civil Government, Book II. ch. 11, § 140: Works (London, 1812), Vol. V. p. 423.
[240] Introduction to the Literature of Europe (London, 1847), Vol. III. pp. 445, 448, Part IV. ch. 4, §§ 95, 100.
[241] Political Experience of the Ancients, p. 129.
[242] Addressed to his constituents, and appearing in the newspapers. See also a later speech, in the House of Commons, March 13, 1866: Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3d Ser., Vol. CLXXXII. col. 223.
[243] Free Conference on the Bill of Occasional Conformity, December 16, 1702: Chandler’s History and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Vol. III. p. 229; Hansard’s Parliamentary History, Vol. VI. col. 80.
[244] Memoirs of Theophilus Parsons by his Son, Appendix, pp. 375, 376.
[245] New Orleans Delta, February 13, 1866.
[246] Debates in the Virginia Convention, June 4 and 5, 1788: Elliot (2d edit.), Vol. III. pp. 22, 44.
[247] Ibid., June 4, 1788: Elliot, Vol. III. p. 29.
[248] Yates’s Minutes of the Debates of the Federal Convention, June 29, 1787: Elliot, Vol. I. p. 461.
[249] Ibid., p. 464.
[250] Ibid., June 30, 1787, p. 467.
[251] “‘What is truth?’ said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer.”—Bacon, Essays: Of Truth.
[252] Articles of Amendment, XXI., XXII.
[253] Speech on the Representative System, July 7, 1853: Ante, Vol. IV. p. 46.
[254] Notes on Virginia, Appendix, No. II.: Writings, Vol. VIII. p. 443.
[255] Debates in the Federal Convention, July 14, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. II. p. 1102.
[256] Ante, pp. 113, 114.
[257] American Insurance Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, S. C. R., 542.
[258] This was done in the Act of March 2, 1867, “to provide for the more efficient government of the Rebel States.”—Statutes at Large, Vol. XIV. p. 428.
[259] Le Droit des Gens, Liv. III. ch. 13, § 201.
[260] Ibid., § 199.
[261] The Federalist, No. LIV.
[262] Phocion, Letter II.: Works, Vol. II. p. 316.
[263] The Federalist, No. LVII.
[264] Works, Vol. II. p. 396. Madison Papers, Vol. III., Appendix, No. 5, p. xxi.
[265] Ante, p. 189.
[266] Politics, Book III. ch. 1. See abstract by Tremenheere, Political Experience of the Ancients, p. 11.
[267] History of Greece (London, 1835), Vol. I. p. 409, Ch. X.
[268] Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 Howard, R., 404.
[269] Ibid., 476.
[270] Fuller, Holy State: The Good Sea-Captain.
[271] Ante, pp. 238, seqq.
[272] Section 4.
[273] Ante, Vol. XII. p. 185.
[274] Works, Vol. III. p. 264.
[275] From Acts of the Legislative Assembly, as quoted in Special Message of the Governor, January 23, 1866, pp. 1, 2.
[276] Special Message of Governor Cummings to the Legislative Assembly, Colorado Territory, January 23, 1866, pp. 2, 3.
[277] Despatch, January 18, 1866: Congressional Globe, 39th Cong. 1st Sess., p. 2139.
[278] See, ante, p. 353.
[279] Opinion of Attorney-General Bates, November 29, 1862: Official Opinions of the Attorneys General of the United States, Vol. X. pp. 382, seqq.
[280] Post, Vol. XIV. p. 147.
[281] March 12, 1866.