INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN 1867 AND 1877
The Purchase of Alaska--The Contention of the House of Representatives
in Regard to its Power over Treaties--The Senate's Position and the
Compromise--Irritation of the American People against Great
Britain--The Johnson-Clarendon Treaty--President Grant's Statements in
His First Annual Message and in His Second Annual Address--Sir John
Rose's Mission to the United States--The Joint High Commission--The
Treaty of Washington--The Alabama Claims and the Geneva
Convention--Triumph of the Diplomacy of the United States--Organization
of the Tribunal and Filing of the Cases--The Controversy between Mr.
Fish and Lord Granville--The Filing of the Counter Cases and the
Argument--Obstacles--Decision of the Tribunal in Regard to National and
Indirect Damages--The Decision of the Tribunal in the Case of the
_Florida_--The Decision in the Case of the _Alabama_--The Decision in
the Case of the _Shenandoah_, and other Vessels--International
Principles Settled by the Geneva Tribunal--The Northwest Boundary
Question--The Fisheries Question--The Halifax Commission and Award--The
Burlingame Treaty with China--The Attempt to Annex the Dominican
Republic to the United States--The Treaty--The Treaty before the
Senate--Its Rejection--The President's Attempt to Renew
Negotiations--The Committee of Inquiry--The Report of the
Committee--The Abandonment of the Scheme.
The two chief products of American diplomacy in the decade between 1867
and 1877 were the purchase of Alaska, and the treaty of Washington with
Great Britain.
[Sidenote: The purchase of Alaska.]
The purchase of Alaska, the northwest corner of the North American
continent, together with the islands {300} adjacent thereto, a vast
region of some five hundred thousand square miles in extent, inhabited
chiefly by a few savage tribes, was effected by a treaty, negotiated by
Mr. Seward and the Russian diplomatist, Baron Stoeckl, and ratified by
the Senate of the United States on the 30th of March, 1867.
[Sidenote: The reasons for and against the purchase.]
The proposition came from the side of Russia, and it appeared that
Russia was more eager to sell than the United States was to buy. The
price agreed on was seven millions two hundred thousand dollars in
gold, and most people in the United States thought, at the time, that
this great sum was being paid for nothing but a barren area of snow and
ice. The country was declared to be utterly worthless by some of the
best informed men in Congress, and a man of no less ability and
influence than Mr. Shellabarger opposed the purchase on the ground that
it involved an extension of territory dangerous to the existence of the
Republic.
On the other hand, such men as General Banks and Mr. Stevens contended
that from the point of view of a business transaction alone it was
worth the money; and Mr. Higby, of California, told his colleagues that
they were mistaken in regard to the climate of the region. The
consideration, however, which seems to have had most weight was
gratitude toward Russia, whose government had manifested the most
friendly feeling for the Union in the struggle against the giant
rebellion, and had even threatened interference in behalf of the Union
against interference in behalf of the Confederacy by any other European
state. That acute observer of political opinion, Mr. Blaine, affirmed
that a like offer from any other European government would most
probably have been declined.
{301} [Sidenote: A real political reason for the purchase.]
It is, however, almost certain that Mr. Seward had another very
profound reason for making the purchase, one which he could not very
well proclaim from the housetops, especially as the feeling on his
part, and on the part of the Government and of the people of the North,
was most kindly toward Russia. It was this: The United States would in
this way and at a comparatively small cost rid herself forever of any
danger of Russian colonization on the North American continent, and of
the danger of any complications between Russia and Great Britain upon
this continent. This was a most important political consideration, one
which much overbalanced the price paid for the territory and the cost
of its administration.
[Sidenote: The contention of the House of Representatives in regard to
its power over treaties involving the payment of money by the United
States.]
When the bill for making the appropriation to pay for Alaska came
before the House of Representatives, that body raised the question of
the power of the House over treaties involving the payment of money by
the United States, by asserting in the preamble of the bill that its
consent was necessary to the validity of such treaties. It did so on
the ground that as an independent legislative body it could refuse any
appropriation at its own discretion, and that as all foreign countries
were bound to know this from the wording of the Constitution, no
foreign country could consider a treaty with the United States,
involving financial obligations by the United States, as completed
until the House of Representatives should have voted the appropriation
of the amount stipulated in the agreement.
[Sidenote: The Senate's position and the compromise.]
The Senate, on the other hand, repudiated this doctrine, and rejected
the bill with the preamble containing it as it came from the House of
Representatives. {302} The bill then went to a conference committee of
the two Houses, and this committee invented a preamble which read:
"Whereas the President has entered into a treaty with the Emperor of
Russia, and the Senate thereafter gave its advice and consent to said
treaty, and whereas said stipulations cannot be carried into full force
and effect, except by legislation to which the consent of both Houses
of Congress is necessary; therefore be it resolved," etc. Both Houses
adopted the bill in this form and it became law July 27th, 1868.
The contention of the House was good political science, but it is still
doubtful whether it is the constitutional law of the United States or
not. The more recent constitutions of even the European states, such as
those of Germany and France, make the consent of both houses of the
legislature necessary to the validity of all treaties involving the
appropriation of money, or the assumption of any financial obligation.
This is as it should be; and the Constitution of the United States
ought to be so amended as to establish clearly the same principle.
[Sidenote: Irritation of the American people against Great Britain.]
[Sidenote: Change of Ministry and Parliamentary majority in 1867.]
We have, in the preceding volume of this series, followed the history
of the relations of the United States with Great Britain down to the
close of the rebellion, and have referred to the general irritation on
the part of the loyal people of the United States against the British
government for its attitude in regard to the acts of its subjects in
furnishing warships and munitions to the Confederates. There were many
who favored turning the great military power with which the United
States emerged from the Civil War against Great Britain, and forcing a
settlement of those difficulties by the trial of arms; but Seward
remained in the direction of the foreign affairs of the Union, and he
had had enough of war. Moreover, he {303} foresaw a change of
government in Great Britain, and with it he hoped for a change of
sentiment on the part of the new government on the international
question. This event happened in consequence of the parliamentary
election of 1867. The Minister of Foreign Affairs in Mr. Gladstone's
cabinet was first Lord Stanley, and then the Earl of Clarendon, both of
them very different in character from Lord John Russell. From the
outset each of them manifested a sincere desire to reach an amicable
settlement of all differences with the United States. The trouble at
this juncture seems to have been the extravagance of the claims of the
United States. Mr. Adams, whose patience had become much worn, talked
about private damages, national damages and an apology. The British
Ministers thought this too preposterous to be seriously meant.
[Sidenote: The Johnson-Clarendon treaty.]
Before, however, the discussion had fairly begun Mr. Adams returned to
the United States, and Mr. Reverdy Johnson was sent out to the British
Court. Mr. Johnson yielded much of the ground assumed by Mr. Adams in
reference to claims for national injury, and in January of 1869
concluded an agreement with the Earl of Clarendon for submitting to
arbitration the claims for direct damage to property rights.
[Sidenote: President Grant's statement in his first Annual Message.]
The Senate of the United States promptly rejected the treaty with much
feeling, because it did not contain proper provision, in its view, for
the reparation of wrongs to the Nation. The feeling among the people of
both countries ran so high that the Governments deemed it wise to
cease, for a time, negotiations upon the subject. The new President,
Grant, in his Message of December 6th, 1869, described the situation in
the following language:
{304} "Toward the close of the last Administration a convention was
signed in London for the settlement of all outstanding claims between
Great Britain and the United States, which failed to receive the advice
and consent of the Senate to its ratification. The time and the
circumstances attending the negotiation of that treaty were unfavorable
to its acceptance by the people of the United States, and its
provisions were wholly inadequate for the settlement of the grave
wrongs that had been sustained by this Government, as well as by its
citizens. The injuries resulting to the United States by reason of the
course adopted by Great Britain during our late Civil War in the
increased rates of insurance, in the diminution of exports and imports
and other obstructions to domestic industry and production, in its
effect upon the foreign commerce of the country, in the decrease and
transfer to Great Britain of our commercial marine, in the prolongation
of the war and the increased cost, both in treasure and lives, of its
suppression, could not be adjusted and satisfied as ordinary commercial
claims which continually arise among commercial nations; and yet the
convention treated them as such ordinary claims, from which they differ
more widely in the gravity of their character than in the magnitude of
their amount, great even as is that difference. Not a word was found in
the treaty, and not an inference could be drawn from it, to remove the
sense of the unfriendliness of the course of Great Britain in our
struggle for existence, which had so deeply and universally impressed
itself upon the people of this country. Believing that a convention
thus misconceived in its scope and inadequate in its provisions would
not have produced the hearty, cordial settlement of pending questions,
which alone is consistent with the relations which I desire to have
firmly established {305} between the United States and Great Britain, I
regarded the action of the Senate in rejecting the treaty to have been
wisely taken in the interests of peace and as a necessary step in the
direction of a perfect and cordial friendship between the two
countries. A sensitive people, conscious of their power, are more at
ease under a great wrong wholly unatoned than under the restraint of a
settlement which satisfies neither their ideas of justice nor their
grave sense of the grievance they have sustained. The rejection of the
treaty was followed by a state of public feeling on both sides which I
thought not favorable to an immediate attempt at renewed negotiations.
I accordingly so instructed the Minister of the United States to Great
Britain, and found that my views in this regard were shared by Her
Majesty's Ministers. I hope that the time may soon arrive when the two
Governments can approach the solution of this momentous question with
an appreciation of what is due to the rights, dignity and honor of
each, and with the determination not only to remove the causes of
complaint in the past, but to lay the foundation of a broad principle
of public law which will prevent future differences and tend to firm
and continued peace and friendship."
[Sidenote: The President's statement in his second annual message.]
For another year things drifted, and the views of the two Governments
seemed to be getting wider apart, when President Grant wrote in his
Message of December 5th, 1870:
"I regret to say that no conclusion has been reached for the adjustment
of the claims against Great Britain growing out of the course adopted
by that Government during the Rebellion. The Cabinet of London, so far
as its views have been expressed, does not appear to be willing to
concede that Her Majesty's Government was guilty of any negligence, or
did or permitted any act during the War {306} by which the United
States has just cause of complaint. Our firm and unalterable
convictions are directly the reverse. I therefore recommend to Congress
to authorize the appointment of a commission to take proof of the
amount and the ownership of these several claims, on notice to the
representative of Her Majesty at Washington, and that authority be
given for the settlement of these claims by the United States, so that
the Government shall have the ownership of the private claims, as well
as the responsible control of all the demands against Great Britain. It
cannot be necessary to add that whenever Her Majesty's Government shall
entertain a desire for a full and friendly adjustment of these claims
the United States will enter upon their consideration with an earnest
desire for a conclusion consistent with the honor and dignity of both
nations."
This was what is now called "a twist of the lion's tail." It was
something of a twist, although it was accompanied with the offer of the
olive branch, instead of the sword. It was effective, even more
effective for the conciliatory tone of the final paragraph. Moreover,
with the German armies encamped around Paris and throughout France, the
affairs of Continental Europe were too unsettled and precarious for
Great Britain to run the risk of any serious complications with the
United States.
[Sidenote: Sir John Rose's mission to the United States.]
[Sidenote: The Joint High Commission.]
Accepting the President's message as an invitation to renew
negotiations, the British Government, at the beginning of the next year
(1871), sent Sir John Rose to Washington to sound the President in
regard to the matter. The President greeted his advances with great
cordiality, and on the 26th of the month (January), Sir Edward
Thornton, the British Minister to the United States, formally proposed
to the Hon. Hamilton Fish, the Secretary of State, the appointment of a
Joint High {307} Commission, to consist of five persons representing
each Government, to sit at Washington, for the purpose of settling the
questions between the two Governments relative to Great Britain's North
American possessions. Mr. Fish immediately expressed the willingness of
his Government to enter upon the negotiation, provided the differences
growing out of the events of the Civil War should be included among the
subjects to be considered. The British Government accepted Mr. Fish's
proviso, and the respective Governments proceeded to appoint the
members of the Commission. President Grant designated Hamilton Fish,
Ebenezer R. Hoar, Justice Samuel Nelson, Robert C. Schenck and George
H. Williams. Her Majesty selected Earl de Grey and Ripon, Sir John
Macdonald, Sir Stafford Northcote, Sir Edward Thornton and Professor
Mountague Bernard. These eminent gentlemen proceeded immediately upon
their momentous undertaking, and on the 8th of May (1871) concluded the
treaty between the two Governments, known as the Treaty of Washington,
which was duly ratified, and on the 4th of July proclaimed to the
world.
[Sidenote: The Treaty of Washington.]
The first eleven articles of this agreement relate to the claims for
damages arising from the incidents of the Civil War, known as the
Alabama Claims. This was the subject of transcendent importance in the
Treaty; this was the subject which was, by these articles, referred to
the Court of Arbitration to sit at Geneva.
They contain, in the first place, an expression of regret for the
escape of the Confederate vessels from British ports and for the
depredations committed by them.
They provide, secondly, for a tribunal of arbitration, composed of five
members, one of whom should be {308} named by the President of the
United States, one by Her Britannic Majesty, one by the King of Italy,
one by the President of the Swiss Confederation, and one by the Emperor
of Brazil; and, in case either of these last three mentioned should
fail to name an arbitrator, they provide that one should be named by
the King of Sweden and Norway; and finally, that one agent should be
named by each of the high contracting parties to represent it generally
in all matters connected with the arbitration.
[Sidenote: The Alabama claims and the Geneva convention.]
They provide, in the third place, that "the Arbitrators shall meet at
Geneva, in Switzerland, at the earliest convenient day after they shall
have been named, and shall proceed impartially carefully to examine and
decide all questions that shall be laid before them on the part of the
Governments of the United States and Her Britannic Majesty
respectively," and that "all questions considered by the Tribunal,
including the final award, shall be decided by a majority of all the
arbitrators."
They provide, in the fourth place, that each of the two high
contracting parties should deliver his written or printed case,
together with all the evidence in support of it, to each of the
arbitrators and to the agent of the other party, as soon as possible
after the organization of the Tribunal, and within a period not
exceeding six months from the 17th of June, 1871; that within four
months after the delivery on both sides of the case, each party might
put in a counter case, with additional evidence, in reply to the case
of the other party; that the arbitrators might extend the time, under
certain circumstances, for delivering the counter case; that "within
two months after the expiration of the time limited for the delivery of
the counter case on both sides," the agent of each party should deliver
to each of {309} the arbitrators "and to the agent of the other party a
written or printed argument showing the points and referring to the
evidence upon which his Government relies"; and that the arbitrators
might require further argument by counsel, giving to each party an
equal chance to be heard.
They provide, in the fifth place, that the Tribunal should consider the
case of each vessel separately; that it might, however, award a gross
sum, or that in case it did not award a sum in gross, the high
contracting parties should appoint two members of a board of assessors,
and request the Italian Minister at Washington to appoint a third,
which board should determine the amounts due in the cases in which the
arbitrators had pronounced responsibility.
They provide, in the sixth place, that in deciding the matters
submitted the arbitrators should be governed by the following rules:
"A neutral government is bound, first, to use diligence to prevent the
fitting out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any
vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruise
or to carry on war against a Power with which it is at peace; and also
to use like diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of
any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel
having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, within such
jurisdiction, to warlike use. Secondly, not to permit or suffer either
belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval
operations against the other, or for the purpose of the renewal or
augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men.
Thirdly, to exercise due diligence in its own ports and waters, and, as
to all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent any violation of the
foregoing obligations and duties."
{310} They provide, in the seventh place, that the high contracting
parties would "agree to observe these rules as between themselves in
the future, and to bring them to the knowledge of other maritime
powers, and to invite them to accede to them."
And they provide, finally, that the result of the proceedings of the
Tribunal and the Board of Assessors, in case such board should be
appointed, should be accepted as a final settlement of all the claims
known as the Alabama Claims, and should be a bar to any further
proceedings in regard to them.
[Sidenote: Triumph of the diplomacy of the United States.]
It will be seen that the Government of the United States had in this
Treaty substantially won all of the points for which it had contended.
The Queen's Government had apologized. It had agreed that the general
principles of international law in regard to the duties of neutrals
toward belligerents should take precedence over municipal statutes, and
should not be limited by municipal statutes. And it had agreed that the
Tribunal of Arbitration should decide _all questions_ laid before it by
the Governments of the United States and of Her Britannic Majesty
respectively.
It is true that Her Majesty's Government qualified its acceptance of
the rules to be applied in determining its responsibility by inserting
an explanation in the Treaty of the following tenor: "Her Britannic
Majesty has commanded her High Commissioners and Plenipotentiaries to
declare that Her Majesty's Government cannot assent to the foregoing
rules as a statement of principles of international law which were in
force at the time when the claims mentioned in Article I. arose, but
that Her Majesty's Government, in order to evince its desire of
strengthening the friendly relations between the two countries and of
making satisfactory provision for the {311} future, agrees that, in
deciding the questions between the two countries arising out of those
claims, the Arbitrators should assume that Her Majesty's Government had
undertaken to act upon the principles set forth in these rules."
And it is also true that, while, according to the letter of the Treaty,
the United States Government was left unfettered as to the character of
the claims which it might lay before the Arbitrators, Her Majesty's
Government had been led to expect more moderation in this respect than
the popular sentiment in the United States seemed to indicate.
[Sidenote: The arbitrators, agents and counsel.]
The two Governments and the high personages invited by them proceeded
in due time to appoint the Arbitrators. The President of the United
States appointed Mr. Charles Francis Adams; Her Majesty named Chief
Justice Alexander Cockburn; the Italian King designated Count Frederic
Sclopis; the President of the Swiss Confederation designated Mr. Jacob
Staempfli, and the Emperor of Brazil named the Baron d'Itajubá.
The President of the United States also appointed Mr. J. C. Bancroft
Davis as the agent of the United States before the Tribunal, and Mr.
Caleb Cushing, Mr. William M. Evarts and Mr. Morrison R. Waite as
counsel.
Her Majesty's Government also appointed Lord Tenterden as the agent of
Great Britain before the Tribunal, and Sir Roundell Palmer as chief
counsel.
[Sidenote: Organization of the Tribunal and filing of the cases.]
On the 15th of December, 1871, the Arbitrators organized the Tribunal
at Geneva with Count Frederic Sclopis in the chair as presiding
officer, and with Mr. Alexander Favrot as secretary. The printed case
of each of the high contracting parties was filed immediately by the
agent of each, and the Tribunal ordered the counter cases to be filed
{312} on or before the 15th day of the following April. The Tribunal
then adjourned to June 15th following, unless sooner called together by
the secretary.
[Sidenote: The controversy between Mr. Fish and Lord Granville.]
The contents of the case of the United States became immediately known
to the British Ministers, but not for some weeks to the British people.
The Ministers were not apparently disturbed in mind about it, although
they discovered at once that it contained claims for national damages
and indirect damages as well as for direct damages to individuals; but
as soon as the newspapers got hold of this fact, they raised a
tremendous hue and cry, and accused those who had prepared the case of
taking an unfair advantage of the wording of the treaty. The Minister
of the United States in London, General Schenck, informed Mr. Fish by
cable of the agitation in London over the subject and of the demand of
the newspapers that the claim for national and indirect damages should
be withdrawn. Mr. Fish replied firmly that "there must be no withdrawal
of any part of the claim presented." At this moment the session of
Parliament opened and the Queen's speech contained a criticism of the
extravagance of the claims of the United States in the case submitted
to the Tribunal. The matter was warmly debated in Parliament, and on
February 3d the British Foreign Minister, Lord Granville, opened a
diplomatic discussion with Mr. Fish upon the subject. Mr. Fish,
however, held his ground with great courage and ability, insisting that
the claims of every character should be disposed of by the Tribunal in
order to remove them from the domain of further controversy and in
order to establish perfect harmony in the relations of the two
countries.
[Sidenote: The filing of the counter cases and the argument.]
Before this discussion terminated the day arrived for the filing of the
counter cases. They were both {313} promptly filed with a reservation
of all rights by each of the high contracting parties. The diplomatic
discussion culminated in an attempt to make a supplemental treaty,
which should provide that the Government of the United States should
withdraw its claims for national losses and indirect losses, on the
condition that no such losses should be claimed by either Government in
the future. But the day arrived for the filing of the arguments before
anything was effected. The agent of the United States filed his
argument on the day fixed, the 15th of June, but the British agent only
filed a statement setting forth the differences between the two
Governments in the interpretation of the Treaty in respect to claims
for national and indirect damages, and the late negotiations and
discussions between the two Governments concerning these differences.
The British agent also expressed the hope that, if time were given,
these negotiations would prove fruitful, and asked the Arbitrators to
adjourn for eight months.
[Sidenote: Obstacles.]
[Sidenote: Decision of the Tribunal in regard to national and indirect
damages.]
It looked as if the work of the commissioners, who had framed the
Treaty, and of the Arbitrators, who had now given six months of their
time to its execution, would go for naught, and that the Governments
and the people of the two countries would be thrown back into the
relations existing during the years 1869 and 1870, with intensified
feelings of hostility. The Arbitrators realized the seriousness of the
situation and did not yield to the request of the British agent. They
adjourned to the 19th of the month, that is for four days only, in
order to deliberate upon the proposition. When they reassembled on the
19th the President of the Tribunal announced that the Arbitrators had
decided to inform the two high contracting parties, at that {314}
juncture, that the Arbitrators did not consider the claims for national
and indirect damages to be a good foundation in international law "for
an award of compensation or computation of damages between nations;"
but were unanimously of the opinion that such claims should "be wholly
excluded from the consideration of the Tribunal in making its award,
even if there were no disagreement between the two Governments as to
the competency of the Tribunal to decide them." The President said
further, that the Arbitrators made this announcement in order that the
Government of the United States might consider if it would adopt some
course in reference to these claims, which would relieve the Tribunal
from deciding upon the request of the British agent for an adjournment.
The President of the United States was duly informed of this
announcement by the Tribunal, and, upon the advice of the learned
counsel for the United States, he instructed the agent of the United
States to make the following reply to the Tribunal:
"The declaration made by the Tribunal, individually and collectively,
respecting the claims presented by the United States for the award of
the Tribunal for, first, the losses in the transfer of the American
commercial marine to the British flag, second, the enhanced payment of
insurance, and, third, the prolongation of the war and the addition of
a large sum to the cost of the war and the suppression of the
Rebellion, is accepted by the President of the United States as
determinative of their judgment upon the important question of public
law involved."
This reply was read to the Tribunal on the 25th of June, and on the
27th the British agent, under instructions from his Government,
withdrew his request for an adjournment and filed his argument.
{315} It was supposed by the Americans that the whole case on both
sides was now in, and that, unless the Arbitrators should require
further argument or statement in reference to specific points, the
Tribunal would now proceed to make its decisions. But the British
counsel and the British agent immediately petitioned the Tribunal to be
allowed to prepare and present another argument, and to have six weeks'
time in which to do it, and even the member of the Tribunal appointed
by the British Government exerted himself to secure this delay and this
new opportunity for the British agent and his counsel. The Tribunal
felt, however, that it was in possession of the evidence and the
argument necessary for determining the question before it, and refused
the request.
The Tribunal now adjourned to the 15th of July, in order to give its
members time and opportunity to study the cases. On the 15th, the
arbitrators reassembled and invited the agent and counsel of each of
the high contracting parties to sit with them in their conferences. To
all others, however, the doors were closed. They spent some two days
discussing the order of the procedure which they should follow, and
finally adopted the order proposed by Mr. Staempfli, and also indicated
in the Treaty itself, which was to take up the case of each vessel
separately, and allow each Arbitrator to express a provisional opinion
upon it, which opinion, however, should not be conclusive even on the
Arbitrator himself who gave it.
[Sidenote: The decision of the Tribunal in the case of the _Florida_.]
On the 17th of the month (July), the Tribunal proceeded to take up the
case of the _Florida_ and to hear the opinions of the Arbitrators upon
it. Four of the five Arbitrators were of the opinion that the British
Government had failed to exercise due diligence in the discharge of its
neutral duties toward the United States in this case. Sir Alexander
{316} Cockburn alone disagreed with this view. The four also held that
the tenders of the _Florida_ should follow the lot of their principal.
The reading of the opinion in the case of the _Florida_ was finished on
the 22d, and the Tribunal adjourned to the 25th.
Upon the reassembly of the arbitrators, Baron d'Itajubá called on the
British counsel for a statement or an argument on the questions of due
diligence, and of the effect of commissions held by Confederate war
vessels which had entered British ports, and of the legitimacy of coal
supplies to Confederate vessels in British ports. Of course the counsel
of the United States would be permitted to reply.
[Sidenote: The decision in the case of the _Alabama_.]
The Tribunal approved the proposition, and then proceeded to the case
of the _Alabama_. The Arbitrators agreed unanimously in their views of
this case, holding the Government of Great Britain guilty of a lack of
due diligence. The case of the tender to the _Alabama_ was viewed in
the same light.
[Sidenote: The decision in the case of the _Shenandoah_, and other
vessels.]
The Tribunal then took up the case of the _Shenandoah_. The Arbitrators
were unanimously of the opinion in this case that the British
Government had not failed in due diligence anterior to the time when
the vessel entered the port of Melbourne. On the other hand, three of
the Arbitrators, Count Sclopis, Mr. Adams and Mr. Staempfli, held that
the British Government was responsible for all the acts of this vessel
committed after leaving Melbourne.
In regard to all the other vessels mentioned in the case of the United
States, excepting only the _Retribution_, the Arbitrators were
unanimous in the opinion that the British Government had not failed in
due diligence in the discharge of its duties as a neutral, and in
regard {317} to the _Retribution_ three of the five Arbitrators held
the like opinion. After hearing the additional arguments called for,
the Tribunal closed the doors on the 26th of August, and, without the
presence even of agents or counsel, deliberated upon the momentous
questions submitted to it. On the 9th of September the decision was
adopted. The Tribunal then adjourned to the 14th, upon which day the
decision was to be proclaimed to the world.
The public session of the Tribunal on the 14th was a solemn and an
imposing affair with nothing to mar the satisfaction of those who
participated in it, except the discourtesy of Sir Alexander Cockburn,
who not only kept the assembly waiting for his appearance long past the
appointed hour, but departed with unseemly haste at the close of the
valedictory pronounced by the president, Count Sclopis.
The award followed the line of the opinions already recited. It
convicted the British Government of a lack of due diligence in the
discharge of its neutral duties in the cases of the _Alabama_ and the
_Florida_ and their respective tenders, and also in the case of the
_Shenandoah_ from the time she left the port of Melbourne, but
exonerated it in all other cases.
The award also repeated the decision announced by Count Sclopis, on the
19th of June, excluding the claims for national and indirect damages,
and then fixed the amount due to the United States from Great Britain
in the gross sum of "fifteen millions five hundred thousand dollars in
gold, as the indemnity to be paid by Great Britain to the United States
for the satisfaction of all the claims referred to the consideration of
the Tribunal." Sir Alexander Cockburn refused to sign the award, and
filed a statement of his reasons for his dissent. The other four
members of the Tribunal signed {318} it, and as the majority rule had
been provided for in the Treaty, both of the high contracting parties
were duly bound, and so regarded themselves.
[Sidenote: International principles settled by the Geneva Tribunal.]
As to principles decided by the entire procedure of the commissioners
and of their Governments in the formation of the Treaty, and of the
Arbitrators in making the award, we may say, first, that all questions
of damages resulting from the lack of due diligence on the part of a
neutral in the fulfilment of the duties of neutrality were regarded as
proper subjects for arbitration, and that the determination of the
question whether the claims presented, or any of them, are a good
foundation for an award of compensation was also regarded as a proper
question for arbitration; second, that due diligence to be exercised by
neutral governments is diligence "in exact proportion to the risks to
which either of the belligerents may be exposed from a failure to
fulfil the obligations of neutrality on their part"; third, that the
fact that a commission was only subsequently given by a belligerent to
a vessel constructed, equipped or armed for the belligerent in the port
of the neutral does not heal the violation of the duties of neutrality
by the neutral in not using due diligence to prevent such construction,
equipment or armament in its ports; fourth, that the privilege of
ex-territoriality accorded to vessels of war can never be appealed to
for the protection of acts done in violation of neutrality; fifth, that
no neutral can excuse itself from the due discharge of the duties of
neutrality on account of imperfections in its own laws and government;
and sixth, that the cost to the belligerent of pursuing vessels, which
have been enabled to operate against the belligerent on account of the
dereliction of the neutral, and all indirect loss resulting therefrom,
do not constitute a "good foundation for an {319} award of compensation
or computation of damages between nations."
[Sidenote: The Northwest boundary question.]
Two other questions of great importance were placed in course of
solution by the Treaty of Washington. One was the contention between
the two high contracting parties concerning the boundary line between
the United States and British Columbia from the point where the
forty-ninth parallel of north latitude intersects the middle of the
channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's Island to the
Pacific Ocean. The contention on the part of Great Britain was that
this line should run, according to the stipulations of the Treaty of
June 15th, 1846, through the Rosario Straits, and on the part of the
United States that it should run through the Canal de Haro. The high
contracting parties agreed, in the thirty-fourth article of the Treaty
of Washington, to submit this question to the arbitration and award of
His Majesty the German Emperor, whose decision thereon should be final
and without appeal. The German Emperor, William I., accepted this duty;
and on the 21st of October, 1872, announced his award, upholding the
contention of the United States.
[Sidenote: The Fisheries question.]
The other question was that which related to the common rights of
fishing to be enjoyed by the citizens and subjects of the two high
contracting parties along the Atlantic coast. The eighteenth article of
the Treaty provided that the inhabitants of the United States should
have for the term of twelve years, in common with the subjects of Her
Britannic Majesty, the right to take sea fish "of every kind, except
shell-fish, on the sea-coasts and shores, and in the bays, harbors, and
creeks, of the Provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and
the colony of Prince Edward's Island, and of the several islands {320}
thereunto adjacent, without being restricted to any distance from the
shore, with permission to land upon the said coasts and shores and
islands, and also upon the Magdalen Islands, for the purpose of drying
their nets and curing their fish." By article nineteenth the same right
was accorded to British subjects, in common with the citizens of the
United States, along "the eastern sea-coasts and shores of the United
States north of the thirty-ninth parallel of north latitude, and on the
shores of the several islands adjacent thereunto, and in the bays,
harbors and creeks of the said sea-coasts and shores of the United
States and of the said islands." Finally, by article twenty-first free
trade between Canada and Prince Edward's Island and the United States
in the produce of their respective sea-fisheries was established.
[Sidenote: The Halifax commission and award.]
The contention on the part of Great Britain in regard to this subject
was that the rights and privileges accorded to the citizens of the
United States by these articles were more valuable than those conceded
to the subjects of Great Britain by the United States, and that a sum
of money should be paid to Great Britain by the United States in offset
thereof. The United States denied the British assumption, and the two
high contracting parties agreed, in the twenty-third article of the
Treaty, to leave this matter to the arbitration and award of three
commissioners, one to be appointed by the President of the United
States, one by Her Britannic Majesty, and a third by the President and
the Queen conjointly, provided they could agree upon a person within
three months from the date when the Treaty should take effect and, if
not, then by the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador at the Court of St. James.
The President named, as the representative of the United States, the
Hon. Ensign H. Kellogg. The Queen {321} appointed, as her
representative, Sir Alexander T. Galt. And the two high contracting
parties not being able to agree upon the third member of the
commission, the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador to the Queen named Maurice
Delfosse, the Belgian Minister Plenipotentiary to the United States.
Delfosse had been proposed by the British Government to the Government
of the United States as the third commissioner, and the President had
objected to him as being the representative of a country whose
interests were too nearly allied with those of Great Britain. It was
naturally understood by the President that this had disposed of
Delfosse, and the Government at Washington was taken by surprise when
the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador at London, Count Beust, made it
manifest that he should name Mr. Delfosse. Mr. Fish, the Secretary of
State, with true diplomatic instinct, immediately accommodated himself,
however, to the situation, and congratulated Delfosse upon his
appointment. Count Beust announced the choice of Delfosse on the 2d of
March, 1877, nearly six years after the Washington Treaty was
negotiated and signed, during which period the fisheries of
Newfoundland were brought under the same agreements as those of Canada,
Prince Edward's Island, and the United States above the thirty-ninth
parallel. The Commission finally met at Halifax in the latter half of
the year 1877 and on November 23d, 1877, made its award, sustaining by
a vote of two to one the contention of Great Britain, and adjudging
that the United States Government should pay the Government of Great
Britain the sum of five millions five hundred thousand dollars in gold.
The representative of the United States, Mr. Kellogg, dissented from
the decision; and it was felt in the United States that the Government
had been overreached in the matter. Considerable delay in the {322}
payment of the amount thus resulted, and some controversy over it with
Great Britain occurred. But finally, on November 21st, 1878, the draft
for the amount was delivered to the British Government by Mr. Welsh,
the Minister of the United States at the Court of St. James.
Two other events of an international character happened within the
decade between 1867 and 1877 to which brief reference should be made,
viz., the Chinese Treaty of 1868, and the strong and persistent attempt
of President Grant to bring Santo Domingo under the sovereignty of the
United States.
[Sidenote: The Burlingame Treaty with China.]
In 1861 Anson Burlingame, a citizen of the United States and a resident
of Massachusetts, was sent as Minister of the United States to China.
He was a diplomatist of much skill, and he succeeded in making such a
deep impression upon the Emperor of China that the latter, on his
resignation as Minister of the United States to China in 1867, made him
Envoy Extraordinary from China to the United States and the European
states for the purpose of securing treaties of amity and commerce
between China and the states of the civilized world. He came
immediately to the United States and negotiated with Mr. Seward, the
Secretary of State of the United States, the Treaty of July 28th, 1868,
whereby freedom of emigration and immigration between China and the
United States was established, upon the principle of the "inherent and
inalienable right of man to change his home and allegiance" expressly
subscribed to by the United States and China in the Treaty; the
residence of Chinese consuls in the ports of the United States, with
the same privileges and immunities as the British and Russian consuls
enjoyed in said ports, was agreed to; and freedom of religion for
citizens of {323} the United States in China, and Chinese converts to
the Christian religion in China, and for Chinese subjects in the United
States, was mutually pledged. This Treaty was heralded at the time as
being an immense advance in bringing China into close sympathy with
modern civilization. But very soon the "labor element," as it assumes
to call itself, in the United States, began to find fault with the
liberal provisions upon the subject of emigration and immigration, and
has succeeded in forcing the Government of the United States back from
its ideal position to the old ground of national exclusiveness. The
example set by the United States has been accepted by the Chinese
Government as a justification of its old methods, and as an excuse for
dropping back into them in great measure.
[Sidenote: The attempt to annex the Dominican Republic to the United
States.]
At the moment of General Grant's accession to the presidency there was
civil commotion in the Dominican Republic. Buenaventura Baez was the
legal President of the Republic, but he had lost the support of a very
large proportion of the population, who were following a leader named
Cabral. Cabral and his party were so strong that Baez feared the
overthrow of his government, and sought to avert it by proposing
annexation to the United States.
[Sidenote: The Treaty.]
In July of 1869, President Grant sent General Orville E. Babcock to
Santo Domingo with written instructions from the Secretary of State,
Mr. Fish, to inquire into the political situation there and into the
value and resources of the country. Babcock, terming himself
aide-de-camp to the President of the United States, succeeded somehow
or other in so impressing his importance and authority upon the willing
Baez and his confederates as to move them to sign a treaty for the
annexation of the Dominican Republic to the United States. It appears
that he pledged the {324} President of the United States to use
privately all his influence with the members of Congress for the
ratification of the Treaty.
[Sidenote: The Treaty before the Senate.]
On the 10th of January, 1870, President Grant sent this proposed Treaty
to the Senate for ratification. He must have thought that there would
be no difficulty in securing for it the approval of that body, for his
message was only three lines in length and contained no argument. It
was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and it soon became
manifest that a serious opposition to ratification was developing
itself. The President now procured from the Dominican representative at
Washington an agreement to an extension of the time for ratification,
and in communicating this to the Senate on May 31st he went into an
argument in support of the proposed treaty. He said, among other
things, that the acquisition of this country would cut off one hundred
millions of dollars' worth of the imports of the United States and
largely increase its exports, and would thus enable the United States
to extinguish its large debt abroad; that it would give the United
States military command of the entrance to the Caribbean Sea and "the
Isthmus transit of commerce"; and that it was necessary in order to
maintain the Monroe Doctrine. He declared that the inhabitants of Santo
Domingo yearned "for the protection of our free institutions and laws,
and our progress and civilization." And he affirmed that he had
information that a European Power was standing ready to offer two
millions of dollars for the possession of Samana Bay alone. It would be
difficult to find another message of a President of the United States
which contained an equal amount of such extravagant nonsense.
[Sidenote: Its rejection.]
The Committee on Foreign Affairs thoroughly sifted the subject, and
recommended that the proposed Treaty {325} be not ratified, and the
Senate, despite the influence of the Administration, sustained the
Committee. This action of the Senate occurred on the 30th of June. The
President was surprised, mortified and indignant. He was especially
angry with the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Senator
Sumner, and was from that moment determined to oust Sumner from that
position.
[Sidenote: The President's attempt to renew negotiations.]
In his next annual message, that of December 5th, 1870, he took up the
matter again, went over all of his old arguments expressed in even more
extravagant language than before, and added the prophecy that if the
United States did not take Santo Domingo, European nations would
acquire the Bay of Samana and create there a great commercial city to
which the United States would become tributary without receiving
corresponding benefits, and that then the folly of the rejection of so
great a prize by the United States would be recognized. He then asked
Congress to authorize him to appoint a commission to negotiate a treaty
with the authorities of Santo Domingo for its annexation to the United
States, and suggested that the treaty so negotiated might be ratified
by a joint resolution of the two Houses of Congress, instead of by the
Senate alone.
[Sidenote: The Committee of Inquiry.]
These recommendations and suggestions and the language in which they
were expressed were felt to be most exasperating by those Senators and
Representatives who opposed the President's scheme, and the President's
supporters saw quickly that Congress would not sanction any such
measure as he proposed. In place of it, Senator Morton, of Indiana,
offered in the Senate a resolution to empower the President to appoint
a commission, composed of three persons, to go to Santo Domingo and
inquire into the {326} political situation and the resources of the
country. This resolution finally passed under strong opposition, and
the House of Representatives concurred in it with the proviso, which
the Senate accepted, that the resolution should not be construed as
committing Congress in any manner or degree to the policy of annexing
Santo Domingo to the United States.
[Sidenote: The report of the commissioners.]
The President appointed as commissioners Benjamin F. Wade, Andrew D.
White and Samuel G. Howe. These gentlemen proceeded to Santo Domingo,
made their inquiries, and furnished the President with a report
sustaining his views and recommendations.
[Sidenote: The abandonment of the scheme.]
On the 5th of April, 1871, the President submitted this report to
Congress, accompanied by a message which contained a justification of
his own conduct in the whole matter, and an attack upon those who
opposed his policy of annexation, especially upon Senator Sumner. It
was a very undignified, not to say puerile, document, and ought never
to have been written, much less sent. It revealed, however, the fact
that the President understood at last that he must abandon his pet
scheme. He did it, however, with a very bad grace, and in his last
annual message he repeated for the third time his old arguments in
favor of his miserable project, "not," he said, "as a recommendation
for a renewal of the subject of annexation," but in vindication of his
conduct in regard to it. It is needless to add that none of his fearful
predictions about European occupation of Santo Domingo, in case the
United States should fail to seize it, and the destruction of the
Monroe Doctrine, have come to pass. On the other hand, the Monroe
Doctrine has attained an almost monstrous growth which at times appears
as likely to threaten as to preserve the peace of the two {327}
Americas, and the poor little Dominican Republic, which was incapable
of self-government, still exists and seems to be bettering its
condition by its own efforts, while the great European city in the Bay
of Samana, to which the United States was to become tributary, has not
even the substance of a mirage in the waters upon which the vast
marines of the world were to ride in approaching its docks and
landings. Such has been the fulfilment of the prophecy upon which was
based the supposed necessity of expansion beyond the seas!
{328}
{329}
INDEX
Abbott, Josiah G., on electoral commission, 286
Adams, Charles Francis, joins liberal republicans, 264;
candidate for presidential nomination, 265;
returns from England, 303;
at Geneva arbitration, 311, 316
Adams, John Q., nominated for vice-presidency, 267
Alabama, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
convention and election in, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 146;
election in, 149;
disfranchisements in, 150;
voting on constitution, 151, 153, 197;
act on admission of members from, 198;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
republicans get control in, 268, 269;
change in character of government, 273
_Alabama_, the, case of, 316, 317
_Alabama_ claims, 307, 308, 316, 317
Alaska, purchase of, 299-302
Alexandria, Va., Pierpont government at, 13, 224
Alta Vela, matter of claim to, 177, 178
Ames, Adelbert, resigns as governor of Mississippi, 275
Anderson, T. C., in Louisiana politics, 269
Arkansas, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
Lincoln's acts toward, 12;
presidential reconstruction in, 15;
congressmen refused seats, 15;
in Lincoln's message, 19;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
attitude of Johnson to, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
disfranchisements in, 150;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 197;
act of June, 1868, as to, 198, 199, 201;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
change in character of government, 273
Ashburn, George W., in convention of 1866, 100
Ashley, James M., action on thirteenth amendment, 29
Austin, Tex., convention at, 229
Babcock, Orville E., mission to Santo Domingo, 323
Baez, Buenaventura, in Dominican politics, 323
Baird, Absalom, New Orleans riot, 94-97
Baltimore, Md., republican convention at, 20;
democratic convention at, 266
Banks, Nathaniel P., appoints election in Louisiana, 14;
views on purchase of Alaska, 300
Bayard, Thomas F., on electoral commission, 286
Bell, John, desertion of the Union cause, 221
Benton, Thomas H., in convention of 1866, 100
Bernard, Mountague, on Joint High Commission, 307
Beust, Count, names Delfosse for Halifax commission, 321
Bingham, John A., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
on impeachment committee, 174;
impeachment manager, 175;
approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177;
offers amendment as to Georgia, 242
Black, Jeremiah S., counsel for Johnson, 176;
his withdrawal, 177, 178;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Blaine, James G., proposes amendment to reconstruction bill, 115, 116;
approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177;
in convention of 1876, 281;
views on purchase of Alaska, 300
Blair, Francis P., nominated for vice-presidency, 211;
conduct in the campaign, 211, 212
Blair, Montgomery, in convention of 1866, 99;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Blow, Henry T., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57
Borie, Adolph E., becomes secretary of the navy, 231;
resigns, 232
Botts, John Minor, in convention of 1866, 100
Boutwell, George S., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
on impeachment committee, 174;
impeachment manager, 175;
becomes secretary of the treasury, 232
Bradley, Joseph P., on electoral commission, 289
Brodhead, James O., letter from F. P. Blair, 211
Brown, B. Gratz, joins liberal republicans, 264;
nominated for vice-presidency, 265
Browning, Orville H., enters cabinet, 90;
in convention of 1866, 99
Brownlow, William G., elected governor of Tennessee, 25;
in convention of 1866, 100
Bullock, Rufus B., share in reconstruction of Georgia, 237-239, 241,
244
Burlingame, Anson, treaty with China, 322
Butler, Benjamin F., impeachment manager, 175;
signs letter on Alta Vela claim, 177;
attack on Johnson, 181;
proposes bill as to Georgia, 240;
withdraws his amendment, 242
Cabral, in Dominican politics, 323
Cameron, Simon, in convention of 1866, 100
Campbell, James, in convention of 1866, 99
Campbell, John A., counsel before electoral commission, 291
Canada, the fisheries question, 320-322
Canby, Edward R. S., supersedes Sickles, 143
Carpenter, Matthew H., counsel before electoral commission, 291
Carpenter, testimony as to Ku-Klux, 259
Cartter, David K., action in case against Thomas, 171, 172, 174
Cartwright, J. C., Oregon elector of 1876, 291
Chamberlain, Daniel H., as governor of South Carolina, 274;
retires from the office, 296
Chandler, Zachariah, in convention of 1866, 100;
manages campaign for Hayes, 283
Chase, Salmon P., presides at impeachment of Johnson, 176;
rulings, 181;
puts final question, 191;
candidate for presidential nomination, 210
Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia (5 Peters 1), 144
Chicago, Ill., democratic convention at, 207;
republican convention of 1868, 207
China, the Burlingame treaty, 322
Cincinnati, O., liberal republican convention at, 265;
republican convention of 1876, 280
Civil Rights, state legislation on, 45-52, 62;
bill on, in Congress, 68-70;
the bill criticised, 71;
bill passed over veto, 73
Clarendon, Earl of, treaty negotiated with Johnson, 303
Clements, White vs., 237
Cleveland, O., radical republican convention at, 20;
soldier convention at, 101
Clifford, Nathan, on electoral commission, 286
Cochrane, John, nominated for vice-presidency, 20;
withdraws, 21
Cockburn, Alexander, at Geneva arbitration, 311, 315, 317
Coke, Richard, elected governor of Texas, 249, 273
Colfax, Schuyler, elected Speaker, 42;
appoints committee on impeachment, 174;
nominated for vice-presidency, 207;
character of acceptance, 208
Columbia, S. C., made head-quarters of second military district, 135
Committee of the House on Elections, Georgia case referred to, 223
Committee of the House on Impeachment, appointed, 174;
proceedings, 175 _et seq._
Committee of the House on Reconstruction, reports bill, 112;
bill passed, 117;
Covode resolution referred to, 171;
reports impeachment resolution, 173;
reports bill as to Georgia, 240
Committee of the House on the Judiciary, action as to thirteenth
amendment, 28;
Blaine moves reference to, 116
Committee of the House on the Rebellious States, 15
Committee of the Senate on Elections, Georgia case referred to, 223
Committee of the Senate on Finance, bill reported from, 277
Committee of the Senate on Foreign Relations, Sumner loses chairmanship
of, 264;
opposes Dominican treaty, 324, 325
Committee of the Senate on the Judiciary, action as to thirteenth
amendment, 26-28;
proposes Freedmen's Bureau bill, 64;
reports a civil rights bill, 68;
action on bill repealing Tenure-of-Office Act, 233
Committee of the Senate on the Rebellious States, 15
Congress of the United States, power vested in, 3;
action on State perdurance, 5;
power over territories, 6;
relation of its acts to Reconstruction, 12;
legislation on Reconstruction, 15;
action as to electoral vote of 1864, 21, 22;
twenty-second joint rule, 24, 25;
attitude to Tennessee, 26;
meeting of December, 1865, 40;
Johnson's views of powers of, 41;
demand of southerners for seats, 56;
joint committee on reconstruction, 57, 58;
passes Freedmen's Bureau bill, 66;
passes civil rights bill, 70, 73;
the fourteenth amendment, 74-79;
proposal of committee on reconstruction, 80;
reports to, on reconstruction, 84-86;
passage of Freedmen's Bureau bill, 87-90;
relation to campaign of 1866, 98;
attacked by Johnson, 102;
effect of election of 1866, 104;
effect of Johnson's message on, 105;
passes bill for negro suffrage in District of Columbia, 107, 108;
bill vetoed, 107, 108;
bill passed over veto, 109;
vetoes sent to, 126;
encroachment on President's power, 128;
passes supplemental reconstruction bill, 129;
opening of fortieth Congress, 132;
passes bill interpreting Reconstruction Acts, 140;
passes bill over veto, 142;
as to powers of, 147;
attitude of southern whites to acts of, 149;
additional bill as to reconstructed States, 152, 153;
comment on the act, 154;
message to, of December, 1867, 158-160;
admission of Southern members, 198, 202;
action on proclamation of fourteenth amendment, 204;
friction with Johnson, 214;
annual message to, 214;
action on fifteenth amendment, 217;
question as to southern members, 223, 225;
admits members from Virginia, 228;
passes modification of Tenure-of-Office Act, 234;
readmission of Georgia, 235-244;
attitude to the South, 248;
bill to enforce the amendments, 253-255;
control of elections to, 256;
statute on the Ku-Klux, 257, 258;
legislation on finance, 276-279;
electoral count of 1877, 283, 284;
bill for electoral commission, 284, 285;
action as to Santo Domingo, 326.
_See_ House of Representatives; Senate; Statutes of the United States
Conkling, Roscoe, on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
in convention of 1876, 281
Connecticut ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Constitution of the United States, government provided by the, 2-4;
relation of State government to, 5, 6;
powers of Congress over elections, 22;
eligibility to vice-presidency, 23, 24;
adoption of the thirteenth amendment, 26-30, 55;
the fourteenth amendment, 73-80, 82, 83;
fourteenth amendment in the campaign of 1866, 98;
fourteenth amendment rejected in South, 106, 109;
fourteenth amendment with reference to revival of State functions,
110;
tests of, applied to reconstruction bill, 113;
in reconstruction bill, 120, 121;
interpreted by the Supreme Court, 144;
fourteenth amendment ratified in Arkansas, 197;
ratification of fourteenth amendment completed, 202-205;
action on fifteenth amendment, 217;
fifteenth amendment ratified by Georgia, 240;
provision for enforcement of amendments, 253-255
Covode, John, resolutions on Johnson, 171
Cowan, Edgar, action on the Stevens resolution, 57;
in convention of 1866, 99
Cox, Jacob D., in Pittsburg convention, 102;
becomes secretary of the interior, 231
Creswell, John A. J., in convention of 1866, 100;
becomes postmaster-general, 231
Cronin, E. A., Oregon elector in 1876, 290, 291
Curtin, A. G., in convention of 1866, 100
Curtis, Benjamin R., counsel for Johnson, 176;
argument, 182, 183
Cushing, Caleb, at Geneva arbitration, 311
Custer, George A., in Cleveland convention, 101
Davis, David, joins liberal republicans, 264;
candidate for presidential nomination, 265;
elected Senator, 287;
relation to electoral commission, 288
Davis, Henry Winter, bill on reconstruction, 15-18;
protest against Lincoln's proclamation, 19
Davis, J. C. Bancroft, at Geneva arbitration, 311
Delaware, in election of 1866, 104;
votes for Seymour, 212
Delfosse, Maurice, on Halifax commission, 321
Dennison, William, resignation, 90, 142
District of Columbia, bill for negro suffrage in, 107;
bill vetoed, 108;
bill passed over veto, 109;
bill on colored schools in, 216
Dix, John A., in convention of 1866, 99
Dixon, James, action on the Stevens resolution, 57;
vote on impeachment, 191
Doolittle, James R., action on the Stevens resolution, 57;
in convention of 1866, 99;
view of the Stanton case, 189;
vote on impeachment, 191
Drew, George F., becomes governor of Florida, 296
Durant, Thomas J., in convention of 1866, 100
Durell, E. H., in Louisiana politics, 270, 271
Edmunds, George F., on electoral commission, 286
Electoral Commission, creation, 284, 285;
membership, 286-289;
proceedings, 290-293
Emory, W. H., relations with Johnson, 175, 179, 181
English, James E., in convention of 1866, 99
Evarts, William M., counsel for Johnson, 176;
counsel before electoral commission, 291;
at Geneva arbitration, 311
Ewing, Thomas, in Cleveland convention, 101;
nominated as secretary of war, 173
Farragut, David D., accompanies Johnson to the West, 102
Favrot, Alexander, at Geneva arbitration, 311
Federal government, system of, 1, 2
Ferry, Thomas W., announces result of 1876 election, 294
Fessenden, William P., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
theory of reconstruction, 60;
opinion on impeachment, 184;
view of the Stanton case, 189;
vote on impeachment, 191
Field, Stephen J., on electoral commission, 286
Fish, Hamilton, becomes secretary of state, 232;
negotiations with Great Britain, 306, 307;
controversy with Granville, 312;
congratulates Delfosse, 321
Fisheries Question, the, 320-322
Flanders, Benjamin F., elected to House of Representatives, 14
Florida, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
convention in, 38;
adopts thirteenth amendment, 39;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
act on admission of members from, 198;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
contest as to election returns of 1876, 283, 289;
change of administration, 296
_Florida_, the, case of, 315-317
Fowler, Joseph S., vote on impeachment, 191
Freedmen's Bureau, created, 44, 45;
Grant's opinion of its officers, 63;
bill of 1866, 64-67;
bill passed over veto, 87-90.
_See_ Statutes of the United States
Frelinghuysen, Frederick T., on electoral commission, 286
Frémont, John C., nominated for presidency, 20;
withdraws, 21
Galt, Alexander T., on Halifax commission, 321
Garfield, James A., approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177;
on electoral commission, 286
Garland, Augustus H., elected governor of Arkansas, 273
Geneva Arbitration, 307, 308, 311-318
Georgia, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
convention and election in, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
case of Georgia vs. Stanton, 146, 195;
registration in, 147;
election in, 148;
election in, 149;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
controversy in, 155;
act on admission of members from, 198, 199;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratification of fourteenth amendment, 205;
votes for Seymour, 212;
question in Congress as to representation of, 224;
question of representation of, 235-237;
military government in, 238, 239;
fifteenth amendment ratified, 240;
admission delayed, 241, 242;
finally restored to federal relations, 243, 244;
escape from negro rule, 247, 248;
election of 1872 in, 267
Gerry, Elbridge, in convention of 1866, 100
Gillem, A. C., arrest of McCardle, 196
Granger, Gordon, in Cleveland convention, 101
Grant, Ulysses S., report on conditions at the South, 63;
accompanies Johnson to the West, 102;
acting Secretary of War, 143, 158;
injunction against sought, 146;
appointed acting secretary of war, 163;
his action thereon, 164, 165;
relations with Johnson, 166-168;
nominated for presidency, 207;
character of acceptance, 208;
attitude to reconstruction, 223;
proclamation as to Virginia, 227;
orders as to Mississippi and Texas, 229, 230;
policy characterized, 230, 231;
attitude to Tenure-of-Office Act, 231-234;
first annual message, 234;
suggestion as to Georgia, 235;
message of March, 1871, 257;
proclamation of March, 1871, 258;
proclamation of May, 1871, 259, 260;
proclamations of April and November, 1871, 260, 261;
relations with Sumner, 264;
nominated for second term, 267;
elected, 267;
veto of inflation bill, 279;
messages on relations with Great Britain, 303-306;
policy as to Santo Domingo, 323-326
Granville, Lord, controversy with Fish, 312
Great Britain, change in ministry, 303;
Grant's messages on relations with, 304-306;
the Geneva arbitration, 307-318;
the British Columbia boundary, 319;
the fisheries question, 320-322
Greeley, Horace, in convention of 1866, 100;
joins liberal republicans, 264;
nominated for presidency, 265, 266;
defeated, 267
Green, Ashbel, counsel before electoral commission, 291
Grey and Ripon, Earl de, on Joint High Commission, 307
Grider, Henry, on joint committee on reconstruction, 57
Grimes, James W., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
view of the Stanton case, 189;
vote on impeachment, 191
Groesbeck, William S., counsel for Johnson, 177
Habeas Corpus, writ of, privileges suspended in District of Columbia,
39
Hahn, Michael, elected to House of Representatives, 14;
elected Governor of Louisiana, 14
Halifax, N. S., fisheries commission at, 320, 321
Hamlin, Hannibal, count of electoral votes, 24
Hampton, Wade, in convention of 1868, 211;
becomes governor of South Carolina, 296
Hancock, Winfield Scott, supersedes Sheridan, 143;
in convention of 1868, 210
Harlan, James, resignation, 90, 142
Harris, Ira, on joint committee on reconstruction, 57
Hawley, Joseph R., in republican convention of 1866, 207
Hayes, Rutherford B., significance of his election, 279;
nominated for presidency, 281, 282;
the campaign, 283 _et seq._;
election formally declared, 294;
policy toward the South, 295, 296
Henderson, John B., introduces amendment abolishing slavery, 26, 27;
vote on impeachment, 191
Hendricks, Thomas A., candidate for presidential nomination, 210;
nominated for vice-presidency, 282
Herron, Francis J., in Louisiana politics, 269, 270
Higby, William, views on purchase of Alaska, 300
Hill, Benjamin H., enters Senate from Georgia, 244
Hoadly, George, joins liberal republicans, 264;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Hoar, Ebenezer R., becomes attorney-general, 231;
on Joint High Commission, 307
Hoar, George F., on electoral commission, 286
Hood, John B., near Nashville, 23
House of Representatives of the United States, admits members from
Louisiana, 14;
refuses seats to members from Arkansas, 15;
action on thirteenth amendment, 28-30;
elects Colfax Speaker, 42;
the Stevens resolution, 42-44;
speech by Stevens, 58;
passes Freedmen's Bureau bill, 66;
passes civil rights bill, 73;
representation in, 74;
election of 1866, 98;
effect of election of 1866, 104;
attempt to impeach Johnson, 109;
bill on reconstruction before the, 112-118;
resolution on confiscation act, 122;
tenure-of-office bill in, 125;
bill on reconstructed States, 153;
action on dismissal of Stanton, 171;
proceedings of impeachment against Johnson, 173 _et seq._;
passes bill repealing Tenure-of-Office Act, 232, 233;
democrats secure control of, 253, 273;
jurisdiction over treaties, 301, 302.
_See_ Congress of the United States; Statutes of the United States
Houston, George S., elected governor of Alabama, 273
Howard, Jacob M., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
illness delays vote on impeachment, 190
Howe, Samuel G., commissioner to Santo Domingo, 326
Hunt, Ward, 289
Hunton, Eppa, on electoral commission, 286
Illinois, ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
Davis elected Senator from, 287
Indiana, election of 1886 in, 103;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
election of 1872 in, 267
Iowa, election of 1866 in, 103;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
d'Itajubá, Baron, at Geneva arbitration, 311, 316
Jenkins, Charles J., institutes suit against Stanton, 145;
removed by Meade, 155
Johnson, Andrew, elected vice-president, 21;
calls Tennessee convention, 23;
proclamation of Feb. 25, 1865, 25;
becomes president, 30;
plan and acts as to reconstruction, 31-41;
proclamation of May 29, 1865, 33, 34;
identity of his plan with Lincoln's, 36;
proclaims federal law in force in Virginia, 37;
proclamations as to civil government, 39;
message of Dec., 1865, 40;
relation to congressional views of reconstruction, 61;
sends Grant and Schurz through the South, 63;
veto of Freedmen's Bureau bill, 66, 67;
speech of Feb. 22, 1866, 67;
veto of civil rights bill, 70, 71;
effect of it, 72;
veto overridden, 73;
as to fourteenth amendment, 80;
message as to Tennessee, 83;
veto of Freedmen's Bureau bill overridden, 88-90;
relations with Stanton, 90, 91;
changes in cabinet, 90;
relation to New Orleans riot, 95, 96;
endorsed by convention of 1866, 99;
criticized by conventions of 1866, 101, 102;
takes part in campaign of 1866, 102;
proclamation declaring war ended, 103;
message of Dec., 1866, 104, 105;
vetoes bill as to negro suffrage in District of Columbia, 107, 108;
bill passed over his veto, 109;
first attempt at impeachment, 109;
vetoes resolution on confiscation act, 122;
influence of Seward on, 124;
vetoes reconstruction bill and tenure-of-office bill, 126;
encroachment on his power, 128;
veto of supplemental reconstruction bill, 132, 133;
orders under the statutes, 135, 136, 138;
vetoes bill interpreting reconstruction acts, 140, 141;
distrust of Stanton, 140;
veto overridden, 142;
suspends Stanton, 142, 143;
Mississippi vs. Johnson, 145, 195;
supersedes Pope with Meade, 152;
the attempt to impeach, 157-194;
message on suspension of Stanton, 160-163;
relations with Grant, 164-168;
supersedes Stanton with Thomas, 169, 170;
Covode resolution, 171;
action of House on impeachment, 173 _et seq._;
vetoes overridden, 197, 199, 202;
proclaims reconstruction completed, 202;
conduct in campaign of 1868, 213;
last annual message, 214;
proclamation of Dec., 1868, 215;
veto of colored school bill, 216;
retirement, 218, 219;
relations with republicans, 219-221;
policy compared with Grant's, 230
Johnson, James, appointed governor of Georgia, 37
Johnson, Reverdy, on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
report on reconstruction, 86;
in convention of 1866, 99;
offers bill on reconstruction, 117;
negotiates treaty with Clarendon, 303
Joint Committee on Reconstruction, 57, 58;
recommendation on representation, 74;
proposes bill, 80;
its bill rejected, 82;
final report of, 84-86
Joint High Commission, 307
Julian, George W., on impeachment committee, 174;
joins liberal republicans, 264
Kansas ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Kellogg, Ensign H., on Halifax commission, 320, 321
Kellogg, William P., in Louisiana politics, 270-272;
certificate in 1876 election, 290
Kendall vs. United States (12 Peters 524), 144
Kentucky, reconstruction in, 7, 13;
in Lincoln's message, 20;
in election of 1866, 104;
votes for Seymour, 212;
election of 1872 in, 267
Kenzie, Lewis M., in convention of 1866, 100
Kernan, Francis, in convention of 1868, 209
Koontz, William H., approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177
Ku-Klux, the, 250-252, 255;
act of April, 1871, 257, 258;
trials, 261
Lawrence, William B., in convention of 1866, 99
Lewis, D. P., elected governor of Alabama, 268
Liberal Republicans, convention of 1872, 264, 265;
in campaign of 1872, 266
Lincoln, Abraham, views and acts as to reconstruction, 8-30;
his proposed oath of allegiance, 10;
attitude to the Pierpont government, 13;
course toward Louisiana, 14, 15;
proclamation of July 8, 1864, 18, 19;
message of Dec. 6, 1864, 19, 20;
renominated, 20;
re-elected, 21;
message of Feb. 8, 1865, 22;
views of powers of Congress, 24;
attitude to Brownlow's administration, 26;
nature of acts as to abolition, 26;
signs resolution on thirteenth amendment, 29;
assassinated, 30;
his cabinet retained by Johnson, 32;
identity of plan of reconstruction with Johnson's, 36
Lindsay, Robert B., course as governor of Alabama, 268
Logan, John A., on impeachment committee, 174;
impeachment manager, 175;
approves letter on Alta Vela claim, 177
Louisiana, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
Lincoln's acts toward, 12;
presidential reconstruction in, 14, 15;
in Lincoln's message, 19;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 21, 22;
attitude of Johnson to, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
contest for control of state government, 92-98;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
disfranchisements in, 150;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
act on admission of members from, 198;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
votes for Seymour, 212;
corruption in, 263;
contest for political control in, 269-272;
contested electoral vote of 1876, 283, 289, 290;
change of administration, 296
Louisville, Ky., democratic convention at, 267
Loyal League, the, 250, 252
Luther vs. Borden, (7 Howard 1), 144
Lynch, John, in Louisiana politics, 269-272
Macdonald, John, on Joint High Commission, 307
McCardle, William H., case of, 195, 196
McClellan, George B., nominated for presidency, 20;
electoral votes, 21
McClernand, John A., in Cleveland convention, 101
McCrary, George W., suggests electoral commission, 284
McEnery, John, in Louisiana politics, 270-272;
certificate in 1876 election, 290
Maine, election of 1866 in, 103;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
election of 1872 in, 267
Marvin, William, appointed governor of Florida, 37
Maryland, in Lincoln's message, 20;
in election of 1866, 104;
votes for Seymour, 212;
election of 1872 in, 267
Massachusetts ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Matthews, Stanley, in convention of 1866, 100;
joins liberal republicans, 264;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Meade, George G., supersedes Pope, 152;
report on Alabama election, 153;
removes Jenkins, 155;
proclamation of June, 1868, 238, 239
Merrick, Richard T., counsel before electoral commission, 291
Michigan ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Miller, J. N. Y., Oregon elector of 1876, 291
Miller, Samuel F., on electoral commission, 286
Miller enters Senate from Georgia, 244
Minnesota ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Mississippi, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
convention in, 38;
rejects thirteenth amendment, 39;
law on vagrancy, etc., 46-52, 62;
opinion of this legislation, 53;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
Mississippi vs. Johnson, 145;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
disfranchisements in, 151;
constitution rejected in, 156;
arrest of McCardle in, 196;
martial law in, 202;
no share in election of 1868, 212;
ratification of constitution, 229;
restored to federal relations, 229;
negro rule in, 249;
political conditions in 1875, 274, 275
Mississippi vs. Johnson (4 Wallace 475), 145, 193, 195
Missouri, Reconstruction in, 7, 13;
in Lincoln's message, 20;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
liberal republicans in, 265;
election of 1872 in, 267
Monroe, John T., as mayor of New Orleans, 94
Montgomery, Ala., made head-quarters of third military district, 135
Moorhead, James K., approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177
Morgan, Edwin D., vote on Freedmen's Bureau bill, 67
Morrill, Justin S., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57
Morse, Alexander P., counsel before electoral commission, 291
Morton, Oliver P., in convention of 1866, 100;
in convention of 1876, 281;
on electoral commission, 286;
resolution on Santo Domingo, 325
Moses, F. J., connection with South Carolina corruption, 262
Moses, F. J., Jr., judge-elect of South Carolina, 274
Nashville, Tenn., convention at, 236
National Nominating Conventions, radical republican of 1864, 20;
democratic of 1864, 20;
republican of 1864, 20;
of 1866, 99-102;
republican of 1868, 207;
democratic of 1868, 208;
liberal republican of 1872, 264, 265;
democratic of 1872, 266;
republican of 1868, 267;
republican of 1876, 280, 281;
democratic of 1876, 282
Nebraska ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Nelson, Samuel, on Joint High Commission, 307
Nelson, Thomas A. R., counsel for Johnson, 176
Nevada ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
New Hampshire ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
New Jersey, ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
withdrawal of ratification, 203, 205, 206;
votes for Seymour, 212
New Orleans, La., convention at, 14;
riot at, 92-98;
head-quarters of fifth military district, 135
New York, ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
votes for Seymour, 212
New York, N. Y., democratic convention of 1868 at, 208
New York _Tribune_ prints protest of Wade and Davis, 19
Niblack, William E., motion in House, 43
Nicholls, Francis T., becomes governor of Louisiana, 296
North Carolina, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 35;
convention in, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
act on admission of members from, 198;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
recovery from negro rule, 249
Northcote, Stafford, on Joint High Commission, 307
Northwest Ordinance, 27
Norton, Daniel S., action on the Stevens resolution, 57;
vote on impeachment, 191
O'Conor, Charles, nominated for presidency, 267;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Odell, W. H., Oregon elector of 1876, 291
Ohio, election of 1866 in, 103;
vote on negro suffrage in, 148;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
withdrawal of ratification, 203, 205, 206;
election of 1872 in, 267
Ord, Edward O. C., in fourth military district, 135
Oregon, ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
votes for Seymour, 212;
contested electoral returns of 1876, 289-291
Packard, S. B., takes possession of Louisiana capitol, 271;
retires from office of governor, 296
Palmer, Roundell, at Geneva arbitration, 311
Parker, John, Oregon elector of 1876, 291
Parsons, Lewis E., appointed governor of Alabama, 37
Paschal, George W., in convention of 1886, 100
Patterson, David T., vote on impeachment, 191
Payne, Henry B., on electoral commission, 286
Pendleton, George H., nominated for vice-presidency, 21;
candidate for presidential nomination, 208
Pennsylvania, election of 1866 in, 103;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
election of 1872 in, 267
Perry, Benjamin F., appointed governor of South Carolina, 37
Philadelphia, Penn., conventions of 1866 at, 99, 100;
republican convention of 1872 at, 267
Phillips, Wendell, characterized by Johnson, 67
Pierpont, Francis H., attitude of Lincoln to, 13;
supported by Johnson, 37, 224
Pinchback, P. B. S., in Louisiana politics, 269, 272
Pittsburg, Penn., soldier convention at, 101
Poland, Luke P., connection with Thomas case, 174
Pope, John, in third military district, 136;
injunction sought against, 146;
election orders, 151;
recalled, 152
Preston, William, in convention of 1868, 210
Pulaski, Tenn., place of origin of Ku-Klux, 250
Randall, Alexander W., appointed postmaster-general, 90;
accompanies Johnson to the West, 102
Rawlins, John A., becomes secretary of war, 232
Raymond, Henry J., views on reconstruction, 59;
vote on fourteenth amendment, 87;
in convention of 1866, 99
Reconstruction, theory of, 1-7;
Lincoln's views and acts as to, 8-30;
Seward's view of, 12;
in Louisiana, 14;
the Wade-Davis bill, 15-18;
relation of party conventions to, 20;
in Tennessee, 23, 25;
Johnson's plan as to, 31-41;
in North Carolina, 35;
in the several States, 37, 38;
views of House on, 43;
attitude of republicans, 44;
joint committee on, 57;
views of Stevens, 58;
views of Raymond and Shellabarger, 59;
theory of Sumner, 60;
reports of congressional committee, 84-86;
as an issue in the campaign of 1866, 98;
Johnson's defence of his policy as to, 102;
bill in the House, 112-114;
the Blaine amendment, 115, 116;
the Sherman bill, 117;
the bill as finally passed, 118-122;
vetoed by Johnson, 126;
republican motives in, 127;
supplemental bill on, 129-131;
vetoed, 132;
acts on, criticised, 133, 134;
application of acts on, 135-137;
congressional interpretation of acts on, 138;
bill interpreting the statutes on, 140;
application of statutes on, 146 _et seq._;
process of, declared completed, 202;
attitude of Grant toward, 223;
end of legislation on, 244;
reconstruction characterized, 297.
_See_ Statutes
Republican party, schism threatened in, 20;
attitude to reconstruction, 44;
attitude to southern legislation, 52, 54;
feeling toward southern congressmen, 56;
attitude to views of Stevens, Raymond and Shellabarger, 59;
attitude to presidential reconstruction, 60, 61;
position on civil rights, 62;
attitude to Freedmen's Bureau bill, 89;
attitude to Stanton, 90, 91;
in campaign of 1866, 99, 101;
convention of 1866, 104;
in election of 1866, 104;
views on reconstruction, 110, 111;
motives in Reconstruction, 127;
interpretation of Johnson's message, 160;
action in vote on impeachment, 191;
effect of McCardle case on, 197;
convention of 1868, 207;
criticism of views of, 217;
relations with Johnson, 219-221;
control of Grant, 257;
revolt in the party, 264, 265;
convention of 1872, 267;
get control of Alabama legislature, 268, 269;
lose control in Congress, 273;
financial policy, 276;
convention of 1876, 280, 281;
campaign of 1876, 283 _et seq._;
views as to powers of Congress, 292
_Retribution_, the, case of, 316
Rhode Island ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Richmond, Va., made head-quarters of first military district, 135;
convention at, 226, 227
Robeson, George M., becomes secretary of the navy, 232
Rogers, Andrew J., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57
Rose, John, mission of, 306
Ross, Edmund G., vote on impeachment, 191
Rousseau, Lovell H., in Cleveland convention, 101
Russia, purchase of Alaska from, 300-302
Safford, M. J., in convention of 1866, 100
St. Louis, Mo., Johnson's speech at, 102
Samana Bay, 324, 327
Santo Domingo, Sumner's position as to, 264;
attempt to annex to United States, 323-327
Schaffner law, the, 249
Schell, Augustus, in convention of 1868, 209
Schenck, Robert C., in convention of 1866, 100;
on Joint High Commission, 307;
at London, 312
Schofield, John M., assigned to first military district, 135, 226;
nominated as secretary of war, 190;
confirmed, 192;
retained by Grant, 231;
resigns, 232
Schriver, General, in Stanton-Thomas incident, 169, 170, 172, 173
Schurz, Carl, report on conditions at the South, 63;
in convention of 1866, 100;
joins liberal republicans, 264
Sclopis, Frederic, at Geneva arbitration, 311, 316, 317
Scott, R. K., views of Ku-Klux, etc., 259
Senate of the United States, refuses seats to members from Arkansas,
15;
adopts thirteenth amendment, 26-28;
the Stevens resolution, 43, 44, 57;
passes Freedmen's Bureau bill, 66;
passes civil rights bill, 70, 73;
effect of election of 1866, 104;
passes reconstruction bill, 118;
tenure-of-office bill in, 122, 125;
passes resolution on confiscation act, 122;
bill on reconstructed States, 153;
action on suspension of Stanton, 162, 163;
action on dismissal of Stanton, 170;
acts as court of impeachment, 176 _et seq._;
vote on impeachment, 190, 191;
confirms Schofield, 192;
resolution on the amnesty proclamation, 215, 216;
confirms Grant's nominees, 232;
admits members from Georgia, 244;
currency bill in, 277;
ratifies treaty with Russia, 300;
rejects Johnson-Clarendon treaty, 303;
rejects Dominican treaty, 324, 325.
_See_ Congress of the United States; Statutes of the United States
Seward, William H., views on reconstruction, 12;
sends thirteenth amendment to states, 29;
retained by Johnson, 32;
calculation as to thirteenth amendment, 52, 55, 56;
announces adoption of thirteenth amendment, 55;
action on fourteenth amendment, 80;
accompanies Johnson to the west, 102;
influence on Johnson, 124;
proclaims ratification of fourteenth amendment, 202;
procedure as to the proclamation, 203-205;
negotiates purchase of Alaska, 300-301;
negotiates treaty with China, 322;
instructions to Babcock, 323
Seymour, Horatio, nominated for presidency, 210;
defeated, 212
Shaffer, J. W., secures letter on Alta Vela claims, 177
Sharkey, William L., appointed governor of Mississippi, 37;
institutes suit against Johnson, 145
Shellabarger, Samuel, theory of reconstruction, 59-61;
counsel before electoral commission, 291;
opinion of purchase of Alaska, 300
_Shenandoah_, the, case of, 316, 317
Shepley, George F., military governor of Louisiana, 14
Sheridan, Philip H., New Orleans riot, 94, 97;
in fifth military district, 135;
superseded by Hancock, 143
Sherman, John, offers bill on reconstruction, 117;
father-in-law of Ewing, 173;
reports currency bill, 277
Sickles, Daniel E., in second military district, 135;
superseded by Canby, 143
Sinclair, John G., in convention of 1866, 99
Skinner, J. B. L., postmaster-general _ad interim_, 186, 188
Slavery, adoption of the thirteenth amendment, 26-30
South Carolina, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
convention and election in, 38;
law on vagrancy, 46;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
character of convention in, 150;
ratifies constitution, 155, 197;
act on admission of members from, 198;
reconstruction declared complete, 202;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
request of governor for troops, 258;
proclamations of president as to, 260, 261;
corruption in, 262;
conditions in 1874, 274;
contested electoral returns of 1876, 283, 289;
change of administration, 296
Spaulding, J. R., joins liberal republicans, 264
Speed, James, resignation, 90, 142;
in convention of 1866, 100, 101
Staempfli, Jacob, at Geneva arbitration, 311, 315, 316
Stanbery, Henry, appointed attorney-general, 90;
in case of Mississippi vs. Johnson, 145;
in case of Georgia vs. Stanton, 146;
arrest of Thomas, 172;
counsel for Johnson, 176
Stanley, Lord, secretary for foreign affairs, 303
Stanton, Edwin M., attitude to Johnson, 90, 91;
as to the New Orleans riot, 95, 96;
dissents from instructions on reconstruction, 136;
distrusted by Johnson, 140;
suspended, 142, 143, 158;
case of Georgia vs. Stanton, 146, 195;
message on suspension of, 160-162;
action of Senate as to, 162, 163;
superseded by Thomas, 169-172;
removal discussed before Senate, 178, 179;
power to remove, 185;
his violations of law, 189;
abdication, 192
Statutes of the United States, of Aug. 7, 1789, 184;
of May 8, 1792, 186, 187;
of Feb. 13, 1795, 179, 186, 187;
of July 31, 1861, 175;
of Feb. 20, 1863, 187, 188;
of Mar. 3, 1865, 44, 64, 65, 89;
of April 9, 1866, 68-73;
of July 16, 1866, 87-90;
of Feb. 5, 1873, 197;
of Mar. 2, 1867 (on reconstruction), 112-121, 126, 136, 159, 160,
175, 179, 193, 197, 215, 235, 239, 243, 245, 247, 250-253;
of Mar. 2, 1867 (on tenure-of-office), 122-126, 160-163, 165, 166,
174, 178, 181, 184, 185, 188, 189, 214, 231-234;
of Mar. 11, 1867, 155;
of Mar. 23, 1867, 129-133, 136, 159, 160, 193, 197, 235, 245, 247,
250-253;
of June 22, 1868, 198;
of June 25, 1868, 202, 241, 249;
of June 28, 1868, 198;
of July 26, 1868, 302;
of Mar. 18, 1869, 276, 277;
of April 10, 1869, 229;
of Dec. 22, 1869, 239;
of May 31, 1870, 255, 256;
of July 14, 1870, 276, 278;
of July 15, 1870, 244;
of Jan. 20, 1871, 276;
of Feb. 28, 1871, 256;
of April 20, 1871, 257, 260, 261;
of May 22, 1872, 268;
of Jan. 14, 1875, 279, 283
Stearns, M. L., retires as governor of Florida, 296
Stephens, Alexander H., seeks seat in Congress, 56
Stevens, Thaddeus, proposes substitute thirteenth amendment, 28;
resolution on representation, 42-44, 57;
view of Mississippi legislation, 53;
on committee on reconstruction, 57;
views of reconstruction, 58;
characterized by Johnson, 67;
view as to effect of secession, 81;
introduces bill on reconstruction, 112;
refuses to accept the Blaine amendment, 115, 116;
on impeachment committee, 174;
impeachment manager, 175;
approves letter on Alta Vela claims, 177;
views on purchase of Alaska, 300
Stewart, Alexander T., nominated for secretary of treasury, 231;
declines, 232
Stockton, John P., in convention of 1866, 99
Stoeckl, Baron, negotiates treaty for sale of Alaska, 300
Stone, John M., elected governor of Mississippi, 276
Stoughton, E. W., counsel before electoral commission, 291
Strong, William, on electoral commission, 286
Sumner, Charles, theory of reconstruction, 60, 61;
characterized by Johnson, 67;
joins liberal republicans, 264;
relations with Grant, 264, 325
Supreme Court of the United States, relation of dicta to
reconstruction, 12;
decisions, 144-146, 179, 195, 196
Swayne, Noah H., 289
Tennessee, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
in Lincoln's message, 20;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 21, 22;
Reconstruction in, 23, 25;
civil government established in, 25;
ratifies thirteenth amendment, 30;
attitude of Johnson to, 38;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 82, 83;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
election of 1872 in, 267
Tenterden, Lord, at Geneva arbitration, 311
Tenure-of-Office Bill, the, introduced, 122, 123;
contents, 124, 125;
vetoed, 125;
case of Stanton, 162 _et seq._
_See_ Statutes
Terry, Alfred H., modifies Virginia vagrant act, 225, 226;
resumes military control in Georgia, 239
Texas, in Lincoln's proclamation, 11;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
war declared ended in, 103;
in the reconstruction bill, 112;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
martial law in, 202;
no share in election of 1868, 212;
restored to federal relations, 229, 230;
escape from negro rule, 247-249;
election of 1872 in, 267;
change in character of government, 273
Thomas, George H., in third military district, 135;
transferred, 136
Thomas, Lorenzo, appointed to supersede Stanton, 169-173;
his position discussed before Senate, 179, 181;
law as to appointment of, 186
Thornton, Edward, negotiations at Washington, 306, 307
Thurman, Allen G., on electoral commission, 286
Tilden, Samuel J., in convention of 1866, 99;
in convention of 1868, 209;
nominated for presidency, 282;
the campaign, 283 _et seq._
Townsend, E. D., orders from Stanton, 170;
in temporary charge of war department, 192
Trumbull, Lyman, reports thirteenth amendment, 26;
in convention of 1866, 100;
opinion on impeachment, 184;
view of the Stanton case, 189;
vote on impeachment, 191;
proposal as to Tenure-of-Office Act, 233;
joins liberal republicans, 264;
candidate for presidential nomination, 265;
counsel before electoral commission, 291
Twenty-second joint rule of Congress, 24, 25
Union Leagues, formation of, 250, 252
Vallandigham, Clement L., in convention of 1866, 99
Van Winkle, Peter G., view of the Stanton case, 189;
vote on impeachment, 191
Vermont, election of 1866 in, 103;
ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204;
election of 1872 in, 267
Vicksburg, Miss., made head-quarters of fourth military district, 135
Virginia, reconstruction in, 7;
omission from Lincoln's proclamation, 13;
electoral vote of 1864 rejected, 22;
reconstruction in, 37;
vote on thirteenth amendment, 55;
in the reconstruction bill, 112, 122;
registration in, 147;
election in, 149;
disfranchisements in, 151;
martial law in, 202;
no share in election of 1868, 212;
question in Congress as to representation, 224;
partition of, 224;
the vagrant act, 225, 226;
a military district, 226, 227;
restored to federal relations, 228;
escape from negro rule, 247, 248
Wade, Benjamin F., bill on reconstruction, 15-18;
protest against Lincoln's proclamation, 19;
opinion of Johnson, 32;
commissioner to Santo Domingo, 326
Waite, Morrison R., 289;
at Geneva arbitration, 311
Walker, Robert J., in case of Mississippi vs. Johnson, 145
War Department, Freedmen's Bureau organized in, 44
Ward, Hamilton, on impeachment committee, 174
Warmoth, Henry C., connection with Louisiana corruption, 263;
contest for control in Louisiana, 269-272
Washburne, Elihu B., on joint committee on reconstruction, 57;
becomes secretary of state, 231;
resigns, 232
Washington, treaty of, 299, 307-310, 319
Watts, John W., Oregon elector in 1876, 290, 291
Welles, Gideon, accompanies Johnson to the west, 102
Wells, David A., joins liberal republicans, 264
Wells, J. Madison, in contest for control of Louisiana, 93
Welsh pays Halifax award, 322
West Virginia ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Wharton, John, in Louisiana politics, 269, 270
Wheeler, William A., nominated for vice-presidency, 282;
election formally declared, 294
Wheeling, W. Va., government at, 224
Whipper, W. J., judge-elect of South Carolina, 274
Whiskey ring, 272
White, Andrew D., commissioner to Santo Domingo, 326
White, Horace, joins liberal republicans, 264
White vs. Clements, 237
Whitney, William C., counsel before electoral commission, 291
William I., Emperor, award as to northwest boundary, 319
Williams, George H., offers bill on reconstruction, 117;
introduces tenure-of-office bill, 122;
impeachment manager, 175;
motions, 191;
on Joint High Commission, 307
Wilson, Henry, theory of reconstruction, 60;
on impeachment committee, 174;
impeachment manager, 175;
elected vice-president, 267
Windom, William, introduces thirteenth amendment in House, 28
Winthrop, Robert C., in convention of 1866, 99
Wisconsin ratifies fourteenth amendment, 203, 204
Wood, Fernando, in convention of 1866, 99
Wool, John E., in Cleveland convention, 101
THE AMERICAN HISTORY SERIES
_Seven volumes, 12mo, with maps and plans. Price per volume, $1.00,
net._
THE COLONIAL ERA.--By Rev. GEORGE P. FISHER, D.D., LL.D., Professor of
Ecclesiastical History in Yale University.
THE FRENCH WAR AND THE REVOLUTION.--By WILLIAM M. SLOANE, Ph.D.,
Professor of History in Columbia University.
THE MAKING OF THE NATION.--By General FRANCIS A. WALKER, LL.D., late
President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
THE MIDDLE PERIOD.--By JOHN W. BURGESS, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of
Political Science and Constitutional Law in Columbia University.
THE CIVIL WAR AND THE CONSTITUTION.--By JOHN W. BURGESS, Ph.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Political Science and Constitutional Law in Columbia
University. 2 vols.
RECONSTRUCTION AND THE CONSTITUTION.--By JOHN W. BURGESS, Ph.D., LL.D.,
Professor of Political Science and Constitutional Law in Columbia
University.