REMARKS IN THE SENATE, ON RESOLUTIONS ADJOURNING CONGRESS, MARCH 23,
26, 28, AND 29, 1867.
March 23d, Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, offered a resolution
adjourning the two Houses on Tuesday, March 26th, at twelve
o’clock, noon, until the first Monday of December, at twelve
o’clock, noon. Mr. Drake, of Missouri, moved to amend by
striking out “the first Monday of December,” and inserting
“Tuesday, the 15th day of October.” This amendment was
rejected,--Yeas 19, Nays 28. Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, then
moved to amend by inserting “first Monday of November,” and
this amendment was rejected,--Yeas 18, Nays 27. Mr. Sumner then
moved the adjournment of the two Houses on Thursday, the 28th
day of March, at twelve o’clock, noon, until the first Monday
of June, and that on that day, unless then otherwise ordered
by the two Houses, until the first Monday of December. This
was rejected,--Yeas 14, Nays 31. The question then recurred on
the resolution of Mr. Trumbull. A debate ensued, in which Mr.
Sumner said:--
I am against the resolution. In my opinion, Congress ought not to
adjourn and go home without at least some provision for return to our
post. As often as I think of this question, I am met by two controlling
facts. I speak now of facts which stare us in the face.
You must not forget that the President is a bad man, the author of
incalculable woe to his country, and especially to that part which,
being most tried by war, most needed kindly care. Search history, and
I am sure you will find no elected ruler who, during the same short
time, has done so much mischief to his country. He stands alone in bad
eminence. Nobody in ancient or modern times can be his parallel. Alone
in the evil he has done, he is also alone in the maudlin and frantic
manner he has adopted. Look at his acts, and read his speeches. This is
enough.
Such is the fact. And now I ask, Can Congress quietly vote to go home
and leave such a man without hindrance? These scenes are historic. His
conduct is historic. Permit me to remind you that your course with
regard to him will be historic. It can never be forgotten, if you keep
your seats and meet the usurper face to face,--as it can never be
forgotten, if, leaving your seats, you let him remain master to do as
he pleases. Most of all, he covets your absence. Do not indulge him.
Then comes the other controlling fact. There is at this moment a
numerous population, counted by millions,--call it, if you please,
eight millions,--looking to Congress for protection. Of this large
population, all the loyal people stretch out their hands to Congress.
They ask you to stay. They know by instinct that so long as you remain
in your seats they are not without protection. They have suffered
through the President, who, when they needed bread, has given them a
stone, and when they needed peace, has given them strife. They have
seen him offer encouragement to Rebels, and even set the Rebellion on
its legs. Their souls have been wrung as they beheld fellow-citizens
brutally sacrificed, whose only crime was that they loved the Union.
Sometimes the sacrifice was on a small scale, and sometimes by
wholesale. Witness Memphis; witness New Orleans; ay, Sir, witness the
whole broad country from the Potomac to the Rio Grande.
With a Presidential usurper menacing the Republic, and with a large
population, counted by millions, looking to Congress for protection, I
dare not vote to go home. It is my duty to stay here. I am sure that
our presence here will be an encouragement and a comfort to loyal
people throughout these troubled States. They will feel that they are
not left alone with their deadly enemy. Home is always tempting. It
is pleasant to escape from care. But duty is more than home or any
escape from care. As often as I think of these temptations, I feel
their insignificance by the side of solemn obligations. There is the
President: he must be watched and opposed. There is an oppressed
people: it must be protected. But this cannot be done without effort
on the part of Congress. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
Never was there more need for this vigilance than now.
An admirable and most suggestive engraving has been placed on our
tables to-day, in “Harper’s Weekly,”[102] where President Johnson is
represented as a Roman emperor presiding in the amphitheatre with
imperatorial pomp, and surrounded by trusty counsellors, among whom it
is easy to distinguish the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the
Navy, looking with complacency at the butchery below. The victims are
black, and their sacrifice, as gladiators, makes a “Roman holiday.”
Beneath the picture is written, “Amphitheatrum Johnsonianum--Massacre
of the Innocents at New Orleans, July 30, 1866.” This inscription
tells the terrible story. The bloody scene is before you. The massacre
proceeds under patronage of the President. His Presidential nod is
law. At his will blood spurts and men bite the dust. But this is only
a single scene in one place. Wherever in the Rebel States there is
a truly loyal citizen, loving the Union, there is a victim who may
be called to suffer at any moment from the distempered spirit which
now rules. I speak according to the evidence. This whole country is
an “Amphitheatrum Johnsonianum,” where the victims are counted by
the thousand. To my mind, there is no duty more urgent than to guard
against this despot, and be ready to throw the shield of Congress over
loyal citizens whom he delivers to sacrifice.
The resolution of Mr. Trumbull was agreed to,--Yeas 29, Nays 16.
March 25th, on motion of Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, the
resolution was returned from the House of Representatives for
reconsideration. Meanwhile the House adopted the following
resolution, which was laid before the Senate:--
“That the Senate and House of Representatives do hereby
each give consent to the other that each House of Congress
shall adjourn the present session from the hour of twelve
o’clock, meridian, on Thursday next, the 28th day of March
instant, to assemble again on the first Wednesday of
May, the first Wednesday of June, the first Wednesday of
September, and the first Wednesday of November, of this
year, unless the President of the Senate _pro tempore_ and
the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall by joint
proclamation, to be issued by them ten days before either
of the times herein fixed for assembling, declare that
there is no occasion for the meeting of Congress at such
time.”
On motion of Mr. Fessenden, this resolution was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
March 26th, the House resolution was reported by Mr. Trumbull,
with a substitute adjourning the two Houses “on the 28th
instant, at twelve o’clock, meridian.” Debate ensued, when Mr.
Howe, of Wisconsin, moved an adjournment on the 29th of March
until the first Monday of June, and on that day, unless then
otherwise ordered by the two Houses, until the first Monday of
December. After debate, this amendment was rejected,--Yeas 17,
Nays 25. Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, moved to amend the substitute
of the Committee by adding “to meet again on the first Monday
of November next,” which was rejected,--Yeas 16, Nays 25. Mr.
Sumner then moved to amend the substitute by adding:--
“_Provided_, That the President of the Senate _pro tempore_
and the Speaker of the House of Representatives may by
joint proclamation, at any time before the first Monday
of December, convene the two Houses of Congress for the
transaction of business, if in their opinion the public
interests require.”