Showing posts with label Andrew Johnson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Andrew Johnson. Show all posts

Thursday, February 29, 2024

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, April 2, 1866

Called with General Bolles on the President in relation to the case of Raphael Semmes. The call was pursuant to appointment. Secretary Harlan was with the President when we called, about 1 P.M. The President inquired as soon as the subject was taken up whether any facts were yet public in relation to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Indiana cases. He said the Court was nearly tied, but that judgment would probably be rendered to-morrow, at all events within a day or two. That decision might have a bearing on Semmes's case. I remarked that it might be well to delay action until we heard from the Court. The President said he thought so and that was why he had made the inquiry, but added we might as well talk over the matter at this time and get the points designated. Bolles said he had, perhaps, no remarks to make in the present position of things, but if Semmes was not to be immediately tried, a parole would be advisable, unless the case was wholly abandoned. I remarked that it appeared to me best that he should be tried or the case abandoned, rather than have a parole. A trial would best satisfy the public and serve the ends of justice. It would place the Government in the best attitude. If tried at all it should be for violating the laws of war, — a case which the established legal tribunals could not reach. His conduct as a buccaneer or rebel in capturing and destroying the ships of peaceful merchants was not the question, but, escaping after striking his colors and sending his boat to the Kearsarge announcing his surrender, and without an exchange, he had subsequently entered first the Rebel naval service and then the military, and made war upon those who claimed him as their lawful prisoner. If in this he had not acted in bad faith and violated the usages of civilized warfare, we had no case against him. But if he had done these things, it was proper he should be tried, and it must be by a military commission, for it did not belong to the courts. It was in that view I favored a trial. The courts were proceeding against no parties for treason; partisans were blaming the President because there were no trials and convictions when it was not within his province to prosecute or try. But here was a case which belonged to him specially and no one else. Hence if he ordered Semmes to trial the country would be satisfied that he was sincere and discharging his duty towards the worst Rebels, and they would understand that the courts were not as prompt as the Executive. He would, however, await the decision of the Court.

When alone I brought up the subject of placing his son on a naval vessel. Told him of the Monocacy, Commander Carter, late brigadier-general in Tennessee. The President said at once he did not wish connection with Carter in this matter. I then mentioned the Chattanooga, Captain McKinstry. This vessel would have an interesting voyage. Stated to him the purpose of the Department in regard to her. He approved it. Said, however, it was desirble Robert should have something to do. We spoke of positions, and, perhaps the Secretary of State would find him some civil employment. This met his views. I inquired if he or I should see Seward. He desired me to do so, and, feeling that he should be relieved of the care and anxiety of a parent in this crisis, I took upon myself that object. I called immediately at the State Department. Seward, appreciating the whole case, at once entered into the subject and said he would employ Robert, whom he knew to be capable, to look into the slave-trade at Cape of Good Hope and on the African coast.

I stated to Seward that he had named too high a price for the Danish islands; that five millions was, I apprehended, more than our people would feel like giving; that I would not offer more than three. He thanked me; said he would inquire their lowest terms, that Raasloff was anxious to sell, etc., etc., but thought not less than five millions would be required.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 471-3

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, April 4, 1866

Consulted again with the President in regard to the case of Semmes. Peace having been declared in all the States and the decision of the Supreme Court in the Indiana cases—Milligan and others—being adverse to military commissions, I thought there should be prompt decision. The President inquired if it would not be best to parole him and require him to be in readiness when called. I replied it was for him to decide, but that it seemed to me best to dispose of Semmes, and if it was determined not to proceed to try him after this decision of the Court, I would advise his unconditional release rather than a parole. The President said he had some doubts, but wished to get rid of the subject, for Semmes's wife was annoying him, crying and taking on for her husband. The President has a gentle and kind heart, melted by woman's tears. I said I should be satisfied with whatever conclusion he came to; that it might go over to the next meeting of the Cabinet, or he could decide when it pleased him and send me word.

Commodore Stockton came to see me. Says things are in a satisfactory condition in the New Jersey Legislature. Is confident that his son John will be returned to the Senate with a good Johnson Republican. Is confident Scovel will hold out, and have, if necessary, others to help him; and assures me that enough Republicans will unite with the Democrats to return two such men. Wright, the present Senator, is ready for the arrangement. This may all be so, but I have grave doubts of its success. It is undoubtedly Stockton's arrangement, and he and his associates have heretofore been omnipotent in New Jersey, which is a strange State in some respects. Possibly he may succeed there. He could not in any other State. But the return of John Stockton, after what has taken place, would be honorable to New Jersey and one of the greatest triumphs that was ever achieved.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 474-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, April 5, 1866

The Senate did not get to a vote today on what is called the Civil Rights Bill. Much interest is felt in the result, increased by the uncertainty which exists in regard to the decision. Just about one third of the Senate is with the President, but two of the Senators are in bad health, and it is doubtful if they can be present, though it is believed they will be. Wright of New Jersey has been brought here at the peril of his life, and will, it is said, be present and vote. Dixon, long and seriously ill, rode out a short time to-day, and will attend if a time be fixed for the vote. Stewart of Nevada has persuaded himself that it is best for him to desert and go with the majority. Stockton was deprived of his seat by the Radical majority in order to carry this vote. There are some vague intimations that Morgan is equivocating and may go with Stewart, but I discredit it. He has, without direct assurance, given me to understand otherwise; took tea with me night before last, and spent an hour or more in conversation, chiefly on this subject. While I did not get or expect a pledge, I could form no other conclusion than that he approved and stands by the President's veto. He spoke, among other things, of a letter he wrote the editor of the Evening Post, indicating his difference with them on the Civil Rights Bill. In speaking of the fate of the bill in the House, in case it should pass the Senate, I alluded to the position and strong feeling of Bingham and told him what the President had that day said to me of the committals of Bingham. Morgan expressed himself highly gratified with this, for he had heard that Bingham was wavering. I, therefore, gave little heed to the insinuations that Morgan dissembles or will prove false; should not give it a second thought, did I not, since these rumors, recall a remark of Mr. George D. Morgan, that the Senator, E. D. M., would vote for the bill. But every look and thought, as well as expression, is watched and published. The sentiments, language, and course of Senator Wade and some others are in the highest degree reprehensible.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 475-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, April 6, 1866

The decision of the Supreme Court in the Indiana cases Milligan, Bolles, and others was discussed. Attorney-General Speed could not state exactly the points. The judges do not give their opinions until next winter. They seem to have decided against the legality of military commissions.

I inquired what should be done in Semmes's case, which had been long pending. Little was said, and the President remarked he would see me after the session, and I therefore remained. He remarked that there was a somewhat strange state of things. Grant thought the paroles he had given covered almost everything. The courts were taking up some of the cases for treason and were showing themselves against military commissions. He therefore thought it would be as well to release Semmes on his parole.

I suggested, in view of the present condition of affairs, and this late decision of the Court, that if Semmes could not have a prompt trial, it would be better to release him from his present arrest unconditionally. We already have two paroles from him, one on the surrender of the Alabama, and another at the time of Johnston's surrender. I would not take another. Nor would it be right, after holding him over three months in custody, to prolong his imprisonment.

The President assented to my suggestion and wished me to present it in some form for his action. My first thought was to place the grounds of his release, first on the proclamation, and second on the recent decision of the Supreme Court, making no allusion to Semmes's long imprisonment; but on second thought I omitted the President's own act, the proclamation, for it would be used against him by the captives.

The Senate by a vote of 33 to 15 this evening overrode the veto on the Civil Rights Bill. Wright of New Jersey was in his seat, but Dixon was not. Morgan, unexpectedly to me, and, I think, to most persons, voted with the majority. The vote of M. was one of calculation, not of conviction. I shall be disappointed if he does not lose rather than gain by the step he has taken. Such is usually the righteous termination of calculations made by scheming and ambitious men who consent to do wrong. In this instance M. may have had honest reasons. It is true he voted for the passage of the bill, but that was, as he has said to me, without much consideration given to the law, and, in repeated interviews and conversations since, he had left the impression on my mind that he should sustain the veto.

General and Mrs. Grant gave their last reception for the season this evening. Being somewhat indisposed, I did not propose to attend, but Edgar had not returned and there was no one to accompany Mrs. Welles and her friend, and I was, consequently, under the necessity of going, though afflicted with a severe headache. The party was in some respects unlike any of the season, and there was present not only a numerous but a miscellaneous company of contradictions. There had been some pre-understanding on the part of the Radicals, or a portion of them, to attend and to appropriate General Grant, or at least his name and influence, to themselves. But, most unexpectedly to them, as I confess it was to me, the President and his two daughters appeared early, and Montgomery Blair and some of his ladies were also on hand. There came also Alexander H. Stephens, Vice-President of the late Confederacy, so called. When, therefore, Thad Stevens, Trumbull, and others, not exactly homogeneous though now acting together, came in, they were evidently astonished and amazed.

Stevens, though a brave old stager, was taken aback and showed himself discomfited. Trumbull betrayed surprise. I was not in a condition to circulate much in the crowd, but heard repeatedly, amid the exultation over the vote of the Senate, expressions of vexation that there was such a strange attendance here. Theodore Tilton, as full of fanatical, fantastical, and boyish enthusiasm as of genius and talent, but with no sensible ideas of the principles on which our government is founded or accurate knowledge of our republican federal system, or of the merits involved in pending questions, was boisterous over the result in the Senate. It was sufficient for him that a victory had been achieved for an ideal and fanciful theory, regardless of consequences, and indifferent whether we had a union or an empire, so that he could do a little more for the black man than for the white man. When a little older, if his erratic genius does not spoil him, he will be a little wiser. For a time he fastened himself on me, but I was too indisposed to do more than listen. He gloated over Morgan's vote; said he could have thrown his hat to the ceiling when he heard it, not that he cared for Morgan.

General and naval officers, as well as politicians, were present, with most of the foreign ministers. Of the Cabinet I saw none but Harlan.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 476-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, April 10, 1866

Though not well to-day nor for several days past, I went to Department and to Cabinet meeting. Quite a discussion on the Mexican question. Seward proposes to give Austria notice that she must not assist the Imperialists in Mexico. Some of us asked why notice to that effect had not already been served upon the French. He said the French had been notified, but there had not been sufficient time to receive an answer. I had little faith in French promises, as I have often said when this subject has been up. Dennison to-day expressed similar opinion and has always been ardent on this matter of French occupancy in Mexico. Seward showed some irritability, as I have seen him on one or two occasions when this subject has been discussed.

The President inquired privately in regard to the Chattanooga,—when she would probably be ready, what Mr. Seward thought of it, etc. I told him all was right, that the vessel would probably sail soon after the 1st prox.

The Civil Rights Bill passed the House yesterday by a vote of nearly three to one. The party drill was very effective. Only Raymond of the Radicals voted to sustain the veto. He has been general manager in the House, but could not carry a single member with him if he tried, nor could Seward help him, or he did not. All of Stanton's pets were active in opposing the veto. Bingham, who had been vehement in denouncing the bill as a bundle of unconstitutional outrages, had besought a veto, urged objections, was quieted, paired off; did not vote; listened to Stanton and could not shake off the fetters of party. Not a word escaped the President to-day on the subject, but it was evident he felt deeply. I, for one, would not introduce the topic, for I could not, unasked, state my opinions, which would be in opposition, and almost discourteous, to some of my associates. Oh, Bingham! Bingham!

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 479-80

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, April 13, 1866

I do not get well. But little of interest. British fund agents and brokers show great impudence in regard to Rebel debts and cotton loans. McHenry, Richardson, and others present plans and schemes which are deserving such a rebuke as should be felt by them and their countrymen.

Stanton made some crude suggestions for national quarantine, not very explicit, and beset with difficulties. I asked if anything of the kind had ever been attempted, if it was not a matter for State or municipal, rather than federal, regulation. He admitted it was, but the other members had not given the subject a thought and did not like to come athwart Stanton.

Doolittle called on me last night full of exceeding great trouble. Insists the President has not as yet taken so firm and decided a stand as duty requires. Wishes me to counsel and urge upon him the necessity of doing something positive. Says the impression is getting pretty universal that the President can do nothing for himself, etc., etc. There is some truth in all this; not that the President lacks courage, but he dislikes to break with those who elected him.

Doolittle wishes Speed to leave, and Stanton also. Says the first has no stamina, nor power, nor character as a lawyer. That he is the laughing-stock of the court and of the first lawyers. Does not and cannot strengthen the President. Suggests that Stanton should be turned out and that Grant should be assigned, temporarily, to the Department. Doolittle earnestly desires me to counsel the President. I told him it would be delicate for me to do so, even if invited by the President, but I would not obtrude upon him in such a matter concerning my colleagues.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 480

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, April 14, 1866

This being the anniversary of the assassination of President Lincoln, the several Departments were closed by order of the President.

Had an hour's talk with the President on several matters, but chiefly in relation to the policy of the Administration, which was brought about by my referring to the interview which I had had with Senator Doolittle on Thursday evening, and his urgent request that I would communicate with the President on the subject-matter of our consultation. I remarked that there were certain suggestions, which delicacy forbade me to mention, unsolicited, but that there was an apprehension that the Radicals were strengthening themselves by the non-action, or limited actions, of the Executive and by conceding to Members of Congress almost all opportunities [for placing] their Radical friends.

The President said it was exceedingly annoying and discouraging to witness so good a man as Doolittle desponding, and especially on the subject of removals and appointments, when Doolittle himself was not prepared to take or recommend action, even in his own State. It was true that his Cabinet was not in all respects what he wished; but he had taken it as he found it. Harlan, to be sure, came in later, but it was understood he sought and desired the position, although he had since obtained an election to the Senate. He supposed Harlan was not in accord with the policy of the Administration, and delicacy and propriety would seem to prompt him to resign. But he had, as yet, shown no disposition to give up his place. Speed, he said, certainly added no strength to the Administration, was manifestly in harmony with the Radicals, advising with and encouraging them. Delicacy should cause him, feeling as he did, to retire, but he had made no advance in that direction, nor would he, probably, uninvited. Stanton, he remarked, was claimed by the Radicals to be in their interst, and probably such was the fact, yet he had given him no intimation of that character, except in some general criticism on one or two measures in which he finally yielded and acquiesced. His Department had been an absorbing one during the War and still was formidable. To have an open rupture with him in the present condition of affairs would be embarrassing certainly, yet Stanton held on.

The delicacies and proprieties which should govern the relations that are supposed to exist between a President and his Cabinet associates—his political family, as it were—would indicate to men of proper sensibility the course which they should pursue, if they did not agree with the person whom they were expected to advise in the administration of affairs. If these three men did not approve his general policy, the President said they had not, as he was aware, disapproved of it. Statements were made in some of the Radical papers that the persons named were opposed to the Administration of which they were a part. Rumors to that effect had come to him in such a way and from such sources that he was not at liberty to doubt it. "Still they hold on here, and some of them likely report our proceedings. I do not, however, know the fact. What, then, can I do? Are these men to whom I give my confidence hypocrites, faithless, insincere, treacherous? The time has not arrived for a decisive stand. With mischievous Radical leaders, who appear to have little regard for the country, it is not a proper time to take upon ourselves other quarrels nearer home."

The President said he had borne, as well as he could, the malicious war which had been waged upon him for doing his duty, administering the Government for the whole country, not for a faction. If the schemes of the Radical managers to control the Executive had sometimes annoyed him, they had not caused him to deviate from what he was satisfied was right and for the best interest of the country. But it did grieve and wound him to witness such men as Doolittle desponding and giving way. Cowan, an intelligent, sensible, and good Senator, he said, was also complaining, and it was hard to be under the necessity of holding these men up, while compelled to encounter the whole opposition. Their discouragement afflicted him more than all that the Radicals had done or would do.

Only a day or two since Cowan had, with others, pressed earnestly for some changes in Pennsylvania which they said ought by all means to be made, and on their representations he had finally agreed to make some changes. But just as they were being ordered, Cowan began to show and have doubt, asked a suspension, and finally backed down and would consent to but two of the same changes he had urged. "These men take upon themselves no responsibility while goading me on to move, when I am breasting this storm." This he said he was ready to do. It was a duty and he could meet it, but it pained him to have good and true friends waver.

At the proper time he should be ready to act, but his friends must permit him to judge when to act. It would be pleasanter to him to have more cordiality, a more free interchange of opinions, more unity and earnestness on the part of all his Cabinet, for there was obvious distrust among them,—distrust of each other, and that on topics where the Administration was most interested.

I have given the substance and, so far as I can recall, the words. There was much desultory conversation intermixed.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 481-3

Thursday, February 22, 2024

Congressman Albert G. Brown’s Speech on Homesteads, July 26, 1850

WHEN arrested in the progress of my remarks yesterday, I was about to say that I approved of the main object of the bill reported by the Committee on Agriculture, and which had been advocated with so much zeal and ability by the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Johnson]. I was about to say that my judgment approved the policy of supplying, by some appropriate means, a home to every citizen.

Ours is essentially an agricultural community. The national prosperity of this country, more than any other, depends upon the production of its soil. Whatever tends to increase that production, enhances the national wealth, and, by consequence, increases the national prosperity. The first care of this nation should be to promote the happiness and prosperity of its citizens; and acting on this hypothesis, it has been my constant aim to promote the passage of all laws which tended to ameliorate the condition of the toiling millions.

I have always thought, and now think, that some salutary reform in our land system, by which a fixed and permanent home should be placed within the reach of every citizen, however humble his condition in life, would promote the national prosperity, add to the wealth of the states, and give fresh impetus to the industry and perseverance of our people.

I repeat, sir, that I am for giving to every man in the United States a home—a spot of earth—a place on the surface of God's broad earth which shall be his against the demands of all the world—a place where, in the full enjoyment of all his senses, and the full exercise of all his faculties, he may look upon the world, and, with the proud consciousness of an American citizen, say, This is my home, the castle of my defence; here I am free from the world's cold frowns, and exempt from the Shylock demands of inexorable creditors. These, sir, are my sentiments, long entertained, and now honestly expressed; nor am I to be deterred from their advocacy by any general outcry. Call these sentiments Socialism, Fourierism, Free-Soilism—call them what you please—say this is the doctrine of "vote yourself a farm"—say it is anti-rentism—say what you please—it is the true doctrine; it embraces great principles, which, if successfully carried out, will lead us on to higher renown as a nation, add to the wealth of the separate states, and do more for the substantial happiness of the great mass of our people than all your other legislation combined.

Congress has been in session nearly eight months, and what have you done?—what have you been trying to do? More than six months of that time has been expended in attacking and defending the institution of slavery—the North depreciating and trying to destroy the sixteen hundred millions of dollars invested in this species of property; and the South, forgetting for a season her party differences, banding together for the defence of this vast interest. Sometimes the monotony of this tedious drama has been relieved by a glance at other matters,—a member has appeared to advocate the manufacturing interests, or possibly to put on foot some grand scheme of internal improvement. But, whatever has been said in all our discussions, or by whomsoever it has been said, "the upper ten" have been constantly in view. No one has thought it worth his while to take account of the wants of the millions who toil for bread. The merchants and the manufacturers, the mariners and the speculators, the professions and the men of fortune everywhere, have their advocates on this floor. I speak to-day for the honest, hard-fisted, warm-hearted toiling millions—I speak here, in the councils of this nation, as I speak in the midst of my constituents; and whilst I do not object to the consideration which you give to other interests and other pursuits, I stand up here to demand even-handed justice for the honest but humble cultivator of the soil.

I cannot forget my allegiance—I know the men whose devotion sustains this government—I know the men whose friendship sustains me against the attacks of slander and the malignity of the interested few. For them I speak, and by no senseless cry of demagoguism, will I be turned from my purpose of vindicating their rights on this floor.

Talk, sir, of your lordly manufacturers, your princely merchants, your professional gentry, and your smooth-tongued politicians. The patriotism of one simple-hearted, honest old farmer would outweigh them all; and, for private friendship, I had rather have the hearty good will of one of those plain old men than the hypocritical smiles of as many of your smooth-tongued oily fellows as would fill this Capitol from its dome to its base.

It is my fortune to represent a constituency in which is mingled wealth and poverty;—whilst some are wealthy, and many possess more than a competency, there are many others on whom poverty has fixed his iron grasp. All, I hope, are patriotic. But, sir, if I were going to hunt for patriots who could be trusted in every emergency; patriots who would pour out their blood like water; and who would think it no privation to lay down their lives in defence of their country, I would go among the poor, the squatters, the preemptors, the hardy sons of toil. Though I should expect to find patriots everywhere, I know I should find them here.

Sir, in the great matter of legislation, shall men like these be neglected? I invoke gentlemen to forget for a moment the loom and the furnace, the storehouse, and the ships on the high seas, and go with me to the houses of these people; listen to the story of their wrongs, and let us together do them justice.

Men in affluent circumstances know but little of the wants of other men, and, unfortunately, care less for the miseries of the poor. Rocked in the cradle of fortune from infancy to manhood, they do not understand why it is that some men toil with poverty all their lives, and die at last in penury. Let gentlemen picture to themselves a man reared in humble life, without education, and with no fortune but his hands; see him going into the wild woods with a wife and a family of small children, there, by his unaided exertions, to rear his humble dwelling, to clear the forest and make way for his planting. See him after the toils of the day are over, returning to that humble dwelling to receive the smiles of his wife and hear the merry prattle of his little children. Watch him as he moves steadily and firmly on from day to day; fancy to yourself his heart buoyant with hope as he marks the progress of his growing crop, and pictures to himself the happiness of his wife and little children when he shall have gathered the reward of his summer's toil, sold it, and with the proceeds secured this his humble home.

Look, sir, at this scene; gaze on that sun-burnt patriot, for he is worthy of your admiration. Now go with me one step further, and behold the destruction of all these fairy visions; blighting seasons, low prices, disease, a bad trade, or some unforeseen disaster has overtaken him. His year of honest industry is gone-the time has come when government demands her pay for this poor man's home. He is without money—government, with a hard heart and inexorable will, turns coldly away, and the next week or the next month she sells her land, and this man's labor, his humble house and little fields, are gone. The speculator comes, and with an iron will, turns him and his family out of doors; and all this is the act of his own government—of a government which has untold millions of acres of land. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me ask you, can this man love a government that treats him thus? Never, sir, never. To do so, he should be more than man, and scarcely less than God. Treatment like this would have put out the fire of patriotism in Washington's breast, and almost justified the treachery of Arnold.

Instead of treating her citizens thus, I would have this government interpose its strong arm to protect them from the iron grasp of the heartless speculator. By doing so, you encourage industry, promote happiness, develope the resources of the soil, make better men and purer patriots. In a word, you perform a vast amount of good without the possibility of doing harm.

Not having seen the bill reported by the committee under circumstances which afforded an opportunity for a critical examination, I am not prepared to say that its details meet my approbation.

I am disinclined to give to the settler an absolute title to lands. I am so, sir, because I would secure him in the possession of his home against his misfortunes, and even against his own improvidence. If he is an honest and industrious man, he should have a home where that honest heart could repose in peace, and where the hand of industry could find employment. If he be dishonest, give him a home where, in the bosom of his family, he may hide his shame, and where they may find shelter from the frowns of a cruel world. If he is idle and worthless, give him a home where his wife and children may toil, and, by their example, bring him back to habits of honest industry. In any and in every event, give him a home, and secure him in the possession of that home, against all the contingencies of life and vicissitudes of fortune. When you have done this, rest satisfied that you have at least made a better man, and done something towards the general prosperity.

My own scheme has been reduced to the form of a bill, and before I take my seat I beg leave to send it to the Clerk's desk, that it may be read—promising that I am wedded to no special plan. The object is a good one; it meets my cordial approbation, and I shall most heartily unite in any scheme which gives reasonable promise of success.

I offer the paper which I hold in my hand as a substitute for the original proposition, and ask that it may be included in the motion to print.

Mr. Brown's proposition was read.

Strike out all after the enacting clause, and insert as follows:

 

That the laws now in force granting preemption to actual settlers on the public lands, shall continue until otherwise ordered by Congress, and that the same be extended to all the territories of the United States.

 

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That from and after the passage of this act, the rights of preemptors shall be perpetuated: that is to say, persons acquiring the right of preemption shall retain the same without disturbance, and without payment of any kind to the United States, but on these conditions: First, The preemptor shall not sell, alienate or dispose of his or her right for a consideration, and if he or she voluntarily abandons one preemption and claims another, no right shall be acquired by such claim, until the claimant shall first have testified, under oath, before the register of the land office when the claim is preferred, that he or she has voluntarily abandoned his or her original preemption, and that no consideration, reward or payment of any kind has been received, or is expected, directly or indirectly, as an inducement for such abandonment; and any person who shall testify falsely in such case, shall be deemed guilty of perjury. Second: Any person claiming and holding the right of preemption to lands under this act, may be required by the state within which the same lies, to pay taxes thereon in the same manner, and to the same extent, as if he or she owned the said land in fee simple; and in case such lands are sold for taxes, the purchaser shall acquire the right of preemption only. Third: Absence of the preemptor and his family for six consecutive months, shall be deemed an abandonment, and the land shall, in such case, revert to the United States, and be subject to the same disposition as other public lands.

 

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That lands preempted, and the improvements thereon, shall not be subject to execution sale, or other sale for debt; and all contracts made in reference thereto, intended in anywise to alienate the right, or to embarrass or disturb the preemptor in his or her occupancy, shall be absolutely null and void.

 

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That the preemptor may, at any time, at his or her discretion, enter the lands preempted, by paying therefor to the proper officer of the United States one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre.

 

SEC. 5. And be it further enacted, That in case of the preemptor's death, if a married man, his right shall survive to his widow and infant children, but the rights of the older children shall cease as they respectively come of age, or when they reach the age of twenty-one years; in all cases the right of preemption shall remain in the youngest child. And in case of the death of both father and mother, leaving an infant child or children, the executor, administrator, or guardian, may at any time within twelve months after such death, enter said preempted lands in the name of said infant child or children, or the said preemption, together with the improvements on the lands, may be deemed property, and as such, sold for the benefit of said infants, but for no other purpose, and the purchaser may acquire the right of the deceased preemptor by such purchase.

 

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

In reply to Mr. Morse, of Louisiana, Mr. BROWN said: Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Morse], in the progress of his remarks was understood by me to assume the ground that my proposition is unconstitutional. I did not, as you know, Mr. Speaker, undertake to explain, much less to vindicate that proposition. Its provisions are so few and so simple, that it may be well left to speak its own vindication, even against the furious assault of the honorable gentleman.

It proposes simply to perpetuate a law which has stood for years on your statute book, an honorable monument to the wisdom and justice of Congress. To-day, for the first time, it has been discovered to be unconstitutional. The preemption law struggled into existence against the combined opposition of many of the first minds in the country. It has received the repeated sanction of Congress, and to-day I know of no man from the new states who desires its repeal, or who has the boldness to avow such desire if he feels it. Instead of limiting the right of the preemptor to one year or two years, I simply propose to perpetuate that right, and this is the measure which the astute gentleman from Louisiana says is unconstitutional. I shall not stop to vindicate the measure from such a charge. The government has full power to dispose of the public lands, and in the exercise of this power, it has from time to time reduced the price, and in many hundred instances given them away.

I ask the honorable gentleman if the act by which five hundred thousand acres of the public lands were given to the state of Louisiana was unconstitutional? Were the various acts giving lands to the states, Louisiana among the rest, for educational purposes, unconstitutional? Did the honorable gentleman violate the Constitution last year, when he voted to give to his own state five millions of the public lands for works of internal improvement? Did we all violate the Constitution the other day, when we voted bounty lands to the soldiers of the last war with Great Britain and all our Indian wars?

No one knows better than the honorable gentleman, that this government has habitually given away the public lands—given them to the states for internal-improvement purposes; given them to establish colleges and primary schools; given them to railroad and canal companies given them to states and to soulless corporations, for almost every conceivable purpose; and all this has been done within the Constitution; but now, sir, when it is proposed to allow the humble citizen to reside on these lands, the gentleman starts up as though he had just descended from another world, and startles us with a declaration that we are violating the Constitution.

It has pleased the honorable member to denominate this as a villanous measure; and with great emphasis he declares, that its supporters are demagogues. It will not surprise you or others, Mr. Speaker, if I speak warmly in reply to language like this. The gentleman was pleased to extract the poison from his sting, by declaring that he used these words in no offensive sense. In reply, I shall speak plainly, but within the rules of decorum.

"Demagoguing,"—“demagoguing," says the honorable gentleman, "for the votes of the low, ill-bred vagrants and vagabonds." Sir, this is strange language, coming from that quarter. I know something of the gentleman's constituents. Many of the best of them are of this despised caste; many of them are the low, ill-bred vagabonds, of which the gentleman has been speaking. Many, very many, of them are squatters on the public lands. Sir, I should like to hear the honorable gentleman making the same speech in one of the upper parishes of Louisiana, which he has this day pronounced in the American Congress. I can well conceive how his honest constituents the squatters, would stare and wonder, to hear a gentleman, so bland and courteous last year, now so harsh and cruel. Yes, sir, the gentleman's squatter constituents would stand aghast to hear the representative denouncing them as a dirty, ill-bred set of vagabonds and scoundrels—when the candidate, with a face all wreathed in his blandest smile, had told them they were the cleverest fellows in the world!

It may do very well, Mr. Speaker, for gentlemen, when they come on to Washington, to get upon stilts and talk after this fashion. It may sound beautiful in the ears that are here to catch the sound, thus to denounce a measure intended to relieve the poor man's wants as villanous, and its advocates as demagogues. But, sir, I take it upon myself to say there is not a congressional district in the West or Southwest where a candidate for Congress would dare to use such language.

Sir, I know very well how popular electioneering canvasses are conducted, and bold and valiant as the gentleman is, he would scarcely commit the indiscretion of saying to any portion of the voters in his district that they were an ill-bred set of vagabonds, and if he did, they would hardly commission him to repeat the expression in Congress. Let me warn the gentleman, that if the speech made by him to-day shall ever reach his constituents, it will sound his political death-knell. If I owed the gentleman any ill-will, which I take this occasion to say I do not, it would be my highest hope that he would write out and print that speech just as he delivered it. I should at least have a comfortable assurance that the speech would be the last of its kind.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I have to repeat that, notwithstanding the maledictions of the gentleman from Louisiana, I am still for this proposition; and though that gentleman may continue to denounce the squatters on the public lands as a worthless, ill-bred set of vagabonds, I am still their friend. They are honest men, pure patriots, and upright citizens. They are worthy of our care. If the candidate can afford to flatter them for their votes, the representative should not skulk the responsibility of voting to protect their interests. I hold but one language, and it shall be the language of honest sincerity. I would scorn to flatter a poor squatter for his vote in the swamps of Louisiana, and then stand up before the American Congress as his representative, and denounce him as a worthless vagabond.

Sir, if the men are worthless the women are not, and I could appeal to the well-known gallantry of the honorable member to interpose in their behalf. If you will do nothing for the ruder sex, interpose the strong arm of the law to shield the women and children, at least, from the rude grasp of the avaricious speculator. If a man be worthless, let the appeal go up for his wife and little children. Secure them a home, and that wife will make that home her castle. It will shelter her and her little children from the rude blasts of winter, and the rude blows of a wicked world. She will toil there for bread, and with her own hand. plant a shrub, perchance a flower. She will make it useful by her industry, and adorn it by her ingenuity. Give it to her, sir, and she will invoke such blessings on your head as a pious woman alone can ask.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana, not for his speech, but for his courtesy in giving me a part of his time in which to reply.

SOURCE: M. W. Cluskey, Editor, Speeches, Messages, and Other Writings of the Hon. Albert G. Brown, A Senator in Congress from the State of Mississippi, p. 194-9

Monday, February 12, 2024

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, March 17, 1866

This being St. Patrick's Day, considerable apprehensions were entertained by the Englishmen here that there would be more active demonstration by the Fenians. Sir Frederick Bruce did not hesitate to say to me on Thursday evening at the Marquis Montholon's party when I met him, that he had great anxiety and should feel relieved after Saturday. But the day has passed off peaceably. We have had no telegraphs of riot or disorder on the frontier or in Canada. There is less disturbance in our own country than is usual on this anniversary.

By special invitation from Secretary Seward himself, I went this evening to meet a Belgian delegation at his house. Mrs. Welles and Edgar went with me. McCulloch, Dennison, and Speed were similarly invited, as were others. I found we were after-dinner guests, appendages to the special party, called in to set off the Secretary's party. The evening was cold, fires low or out, and though the persons assembled put on the best face, it was an uncomfortable affair, and I for one in no very good humor, believing I had been uselessly put to inconvenience without cause.

Am having sharp questions and importunities in regard to the Connecticut election, and do not choose to answer them or to be mixed up in the contest, which has been badly shaped. The fault is as much here in Washington as elsewhere. Foreseeing the issues which the Radicals in Congress were forming, I suggested near the commencement of the session to the President, that unless the lines were sharply drawn, they would have him at disadvantage. We now see it in the result in New Hampshire, and similar consequences may be expected in Connecticut. General Hawley's sympathies and feelings are with the Radicals in the differences between the President and Congress, or rather with Congress than the President. English, on the other hand, is wholly with the President, and totally, earnestly opposed to the Congressional policy. The election of English would secure a friend to the President, but English and those who support him opposed his (the President's) election and most of them opposed the War. Hawley, while not in full accord with the President on present questions, and I am afraid not on the rights of the States, supported his election, and was an earnest soldier from the beginning of the War until the whole Rebel force surrendered and dispersed. While I think well of both candidates, I have a particular personal regard for Hawley now, as well as intimate party relations in the past.

The President and very many of his friends would be pleased to have English succeed. But they do not comprehend the whole circumstances, personal and political, for they cannot know them. It is not a personal question. The organization is a revival of ante-War differences. It commenced and has gone on under the old party banners. A stand for the Administration should have been made last autumn, but the nominations from Governor down have been made by parties as organized years ago. It is too late to change front, or get up a new arrangement. Such an issue should have commenced last December, and the President himself should have led in the fight by announcing the policy of his Administration and rallying his friends to its support. He would have had the State, the country, and Congress with him, but he hesitated, was reluctant to encounter those who elected him, and then postponed too long for us to begin in Connecticut, for this election takes place in three weeks.

As things are, I cannot take an active part in this contest. Were Hawley more emphatic and unequivocally with the President, I should enter earnestly, heartily, into the struggle, although I did not advise his nomination, or wish it to be made. I think, when elected, he will give the Administration fair support, but he is an ardent partisan. A doubt on the subject of his course paralyzes my zeal and efforts. I am unwilling to believe that Hawley dissembles.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 454-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, March 19, 1866

Allen of the Intelligencer called upon me to-day in reference to the Connecticut election. Says it is stated in the papers that I have written letters urging Hawley's election, yet Hawley is making speeches against the President. Told him I had written no letters of the purport indicated, had purposely abstained and intended to. Asked what statements and what papers he referred to, and doubted if Hawley had made speeches in opposition to the Administration. It would not be politic for him to do so. That English is in favor of the President's policy as distinguished from that of Stevens or Congress, is true. The Republicans of Connecticut thought they did a shrewd thing in passing one resolution in favor of the President and another in favor of Congress. This inconsistency, equivocation, or contradiction is now troublesome.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 456-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, March 20, 1866

Little of interest at the Cabinet meeting. After the others had left had a free talk with the President. He thinks, in view of the feeling manifested by Congress and the favorable reception of Stewart's resolutions for general amnesty, it will be well to delay the case of Semmes.

I read to him a letter received from General Hawley in regard to the election in Connecticut, and a letter from myself to Crofut, stating my views on present questions, and, believing General H. concurred in them, I wished him success, but not if he was opposed to them and the Administration.

The President approved my letter. Said Mr. English appeared to be a gentleman of character and friendly. Asked what had been his previous party course and whether I had seen a series of questions which were put to Hawley and Hawley's answer. I informed him that English had always been a Democrat, but patriotic, gentlemanly, and not extreme or ultra. Had given support to some important questions of ours during the War. The questions and answers I had seen, but knew not how correct.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 457

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, March 21, 1866

Collectors Babcock of New Haven and Smith of Bridgeport called on me this morning. They had just arrived, having come on in relation to the Connecticut election. English appears to have created an excitement, almost a panic, in regard to the wishes of the Administration. There is alarm on the part of the gentlemen and doubtless much at home which has impelled them to come here. English has represented to them that he had had a long interview on one or two occasions with the President, and that United States officers were to be turned out if they voted for Hawley. Babcock said three or four in his office had their resignations ready and he should tender his if that was exacted. They informed me that Cleveland, Postmaster at Hartford, had called, or was to participate in, a meeting favorable to English, and under the excitement Starkweather of Norwich, Chairman of the State Committee of the Republicans, had sent in his resignation as Postmaster. There is excitement and a party panic in that State. Both Babcock and Smith admitted and asserted that these troubles had their origin in the equivocal, ambiguous, and inconsequential resolutions of the Republican Convention, which spoke two voices, and made the party support antagonistic positions.

General Hawley and Mr. E. H. Owen came and spent more than an hour with me after the interview with B. and S. They had come to Washington impelled by the same causes as those of the other two gentlemen, but without preconcert. Much the same ground was reviewed and the same arguments used, and I told them their difficulties were the results in a great measure of the inconsistent attitude of the convention in indorsing both the President and the Radical majority in Congress, who were in direct antagonism; that no man could support the two honestly.

Hawley two or three times expressed a wish that I would write a letter indorsing him. This, had the issue been direct and fair, I could have done cheerfully, but I asked him what I could say. I was a supporter of the measures of the policy of the Administration; these measures and that policy had my earnest approval; I was advising to them, was identified with them. Of course I desired their success. If I knew that he was in favor of the Administration policy and opposed to the schemes of the Radicals who would defeat it, I could say something definite and positive, but unless that were the case I could do him no good. As things were, I should be compelled, while expressing my personal regard and belief that he would, if elected, be in accord with the Administration, [to say] that my understanding of his position was that his views coincided with those of the President, and particularly that he favored the early reëstablishment of the Union and of the Government in all its departments, that he recognized the rights of each and all of the States, was for the admission of loyal Senators and Representatives promptly, was against sectional division and the exclusion of any of the States. Both Hawley and Owen gave a hesitating but full assent at first; but Hawley thought the word confidence or belief would be better than understanding. Owen concurred, yet all of us saw the embarrassment, and I expressed again my doubts whether I could give any letter or written statement as things were without accompanying it with qualifications which would destroy its effect.

They left me at 1 P.M. to meet Senator Foster, who was to accompany them to the President, and they were to see me after the interview, which lasted over two hours. They expressed themselves satisfied with the views of the President and his course in regard to the election, his object being to sustain his own measures and policy and his preference being for those candidates of his own party who occupy that position. He had given Mr. English no letter and did not intend to take part with any candidates in a merely local election.

Hawley wished to know if I had read the Civil Rights Bill and whether I thought the President would veto it. I told him I had been through the bill, but had exchanged no opinions regarding it; that I thought it very centralizing and objectionable, and my impressions were the President would disapprove of it, though very reluctant to have further difficulty with Congress.

They left, I thought, better satisfied with the President than I was with the course of the Republicans in Connecticut.

In yesterday's Intelligencer was a leading editorial article in relation to myself and my position. The editor had called on me the preceding evening, and we had a conversation in relation to public affairs, the substance of which he has incorporated in his article. What he says regarding my course or stand in the Connecticut election is a little stronger than the actual conversation will warrant. I declined giving any letter or authorization of the use of my name, and informed him I did not wish to become mixed up with the election, which was in many respects unpleasant to me, in consequence of the ambiguous and equivocal course of the Republican Convention. An honest, open, fair expression of views on their part would have left me free to approve or condemn.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 457-60

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, March 22, 1866

Messrs. Babcock and Smith called this morning with a written statement correcting the Chronicle, which they proposed to present that paper for publication. I concurred in the propriety of their course. Both gentlemen expressed themselves highly pleased with their interview with the President and with other friends in Washington.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 460

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, March 23, 1866

Special notice from the President that there would be no Cabinet-meeting. Called upon him this P.M. and gave him, generally, my views in regard to what is called the Civil Rights Bill, which, if approved by him, must lead to the overthrow of his Administration as well as that of this mischievous Congress which has passed it. The principles of that bill, if carried into effect, must subvert the government. It is consolidation solidified, breaks down all barriers to protect the rights of the States, concentrates power in the General Government, which assumes to itself the enactment of municipal regulations between the States and citizens and between citizens of the same State. No bill of so contradictory and consolidating a character has ever been enacted. The Alien and Sedition Laws were not so objectionable. I did not inquire of the President what would be his course in regard to the bill, but we did not disagree in opinion on its merits, and he cannot give it his sanction, although it is unpleasant to him to have these differences with Congress.

He tells me that Senator Pomeroy disavows having stated that he saw the President drunk at the White House, but says he (Pomeroy) wrote Lincoln, the Postmaster at Brooklyn, that he saw Robert, the President's son, in liquor, and he thought the same of his son-in-law, Senator Patterson.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 460-1

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, March 24, 1866

The Intelligencer of this morning contains an adroit letter from Cleveland, the Hartford Postmaster, stating that he is openly supporting English for Governor, who is in favor of the measures, policy, veto, and speech of the President, and that he is opposing Hawley, who is opposed to them, and tendering his resignation if his course is disapproved. On this letter the President indorsed that his (C.'s) action in sustaining his (the President's) measures and policy is approved and the resignation is, therefore, not accepted.

This correspondence will be misconstrued and misunderstood, I have no doubt. The Democrats will claim that it is a committal for English, and the Republicans will acquiesce to some extent. Yet the disposition of the subject is highly creditable to the sagacity and tact of the President. I regret that he did not earlier and in some more conspicuous case take action.

I do not like the shape things are taking in Connecticut, and to some extent the position of the President is and will be misunderstood. He is, I think, not satisfied with the somewhat equivocal position of Hawley, and would now prefer that English should be the Union candidate. Herein he errs, as things are situated, for most of his friends are supporting Hawley and some of his bitterest opponents are supporting English. He should soon draw the line of demarcation. In the break-up of parties which I think is now upon us, not unlikely Hawley will plunge into centralism, for thither go almost all Radicals, including his old Abolition associates. The causes or circumstances which take him there will be likely to bring English into the President's support. Nevertheless, under the existing state of things, I should, unless something farther occurs between this and election, probably, on personal grounds, prefer Hawley. It is too late to effect a change of front with parties.

Senator Sumner came this P.M. as usual on Saturdays. He doubts the correctness of taking naval vessels for the French Exhibition. Grimes, with whom I have had some conversation, has contributed to Sumner's doubts. It is certainly a strange proceeding to require or expect the Navy to furnish four vessels with their crews for this carrying service without any appropriation of funds for that object. It is not a naval matter, enters not into our estimates, and we have no suitable vessels. The House is very loose and reckless, however, in its proceedings, and appears to be careless of current legislation. Specific appropriations they would misapply, and are, in fact, pressing and insisting that I shall divert funds appropriated by law for one purpose to another and different purpose. But this was not Sumner's trouble. He thought it bad economy, as it undoubtedly is. I said to him that if I was called to do this transportation without instructions, I would, as a matter of economy, sooner charter merchant ships than dismantle and attempt to convert and use naval vessels for the purpose.

I learn in confidence from Sumner that dispatches from our legation in France have reached the State Department which have not been brought before the Cabinet. Louis Napoleon has quarreled with his cousin, who was president of the commission of savants, and he has left Paris and resigned the presidency. Napoleon has appointed in his place, as president of the World's Congress of wise men and inventors, his son, now some eight or ten years of age. This Sumner thinks an insult or worse, and is disposed to give the whole thing a rebuff. I shall be glad to have him, but he will not attempt to move without first consulting Seward, and that gentleman has his heart so much in the interest of France, his friends are so engaged in the Exhibition, that he has held back this information and will set himself earnestly at work to overpersuade Sumner, who, as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, has seen the dispatches. He may succeed. Sumner was, however, very earnest and pleased with his own idea of hitting Louis Napoleon a blow.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 461-3

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, March 26, 1866

Senator Doolittle called at my house last evening on the subject of the Civil Rights Bill, which it is now well understood, outside, will meet an Executive veto. Doolittle has an elaborate bill of his own which he proposes to submit. Something, he thinks, must be done. His bill is, perhaps, somewhat less offensive than the one which has been passed by both houses, but the whole thing is wrong and his plan has the same objectionable machinery as the other. I frankly told him that the kind of legislation proposed, and which Congress was greedy to enact, was not in my view correct, was sapping the foundation of the government and must be calamitous in its results. We went together to Senator Morgan's and talked over the subject an hour or more with him.

The President convened the Cabinet this A.M. at ten and read his message returning the Civil Rights Bill with his veto. Before reading it he desired the members to express their opinions. Seward said he had carefully studied the bill and thought it might be well to pass a law declaring negroes were citizens, because there had been some questions raised on that point, though there never was a doubt in his own mind. The rest of the bill he considered unconstitutional in many respects, and having the mischievous machinery of the Fugitive Slave Law did not help commend it.

McCulloch waived remark; had not closely scrutinized the bill, and would defer comment to Stanton, merely remarking that he should be gratified if the President could see his way clear to sign the bill.

Stanton made a long argument, showing that he had devoted much time to the bill. His principal point was to overcome the obnoxious features of the second section, which he thought should be construed favorably. He did not think judges and marshals, or sheriffs and local officers should be fined and imprisoned; did not think it was intended to apply to officers, but merely to persons. The bill was not such a one as he would have drawn or recommended, but he advised that under the circumstances it should be approved.

The President having previously been put in possession of my views, I briefly remarked that my objections were against the whole design, purpose, and scope of the bill, that it was mischievous and subversive.

Mr. Dennison thought that, though there might be some objection to parts, he, on the whole, would advise that the bill should receive Executive approval.

Mr. Harlan had not closely read the bill, but had met difficulties in the second section, and in one or two others which had been measurably removed by Stanton's argument. He thought it very desirable that the President and Congress should act in concert if possible.

Speed was ill and not present.

The Senate to-day deprived Stockton of New Jersey of his seat. It was a high-handed, partisan proceeding, in which Sumner, Fessenden, Morrill, and others exhibited a spirit and feeling wholly unworthy of their official position. While I have no special regard for Stockton and his party in New Jersey, I am compelled to believe they have in this instance certainly been improperly treated and for a factious purpose, and I apprehend that I can never think so well of some of the gentlemen who have been conspicuous in this proceeding. Had Stockton acted with Sumner and Fessenden against the veto, he never would have been ousted from his seat. Of this I have no doubt whatever, and I am ashamed to confess it, or say it. I am passing no judgment on his election, for I know not the exact facts, but the indecent, unfair, arbitrary conduct of the few master spirits is most reprehensible.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 463-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, March 30, 1866

Mr. Seward brought up in the Cabinet to-day the subject of the purchase of the Danish islands in the West Indies, particularly St. Thomas. For a year or so the question has been under consideration. The Danes wish to sell and first edged in the matter gently. The Secretary of State did not give the matter earnest attention, but the Navy Department in our war, feeling the want of a station in the West Indies, has favored the subject. My Report of 1865 roused the Secretary of State, and he began when the War was over to press the purchase, first talking round about the French islands. Finally he visited St. Thomas in a public ship. I do not think there has been over-much shrewdness in the transaction on our part as yet. It would have been better for Seward to have remained away from the islands, but should we acquire it his visit will undoubtedly become historical, and it will not afflict him, perhaps, if the country pays largely for the record of his name and visit.

He proposes to offer ten millions for all the Danish islands. I think it a large sum. At least double what I would have offered when the islands were wanted, and three times as much as I am willing the Government should give now. In fact I doubt if Congress would purchase for three millions, and I must see Seward and tell him my opinion.

I again brought the subject of Semmes's trial before the Cabinet. The question should be disposed of, for we are detaining our officers and others as witnesses. Speed has recommended that the trial should go forward under the mixed commission, and to-day recommended it anew. Said it would be an interesting trial. Stanton said he did not advise it for mere curiosity, but if the proceedings were to take place he would wish thorough work should be made and the extreme penalty of the law inflicted. Governor Dennison was very prompt and decided in the expression of his wish that Semmes should be tried and punished.

I repeated what I have frequently stated, that the Navy Department would have nothing to do with trying him for treason, piracy, or any offense which could be reached by the civil courts, but he was charged with, and I suppose was guilty of, violating the usages and laws of war. The truth was, however, on investigating the subject, the points had been narrowed down and mitigated, so that I believed his offense was really less aggravated than had been charged and believed.

The President was evidently not prepared to decide what course to take. I submitted Semmes's application for a parole, which was favorably indorsed by Judge-Advocate General Bolles. As the session of the Cabinet was somewhat protracted and Stanton was wishing a special interview, I proposed to the President to call to-morrow, which seemed to relieve and gratify him.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 466-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, March 31, 1866

I had an interview with the President concerning Semmes, as understood yesterday. Showed him the papers, and, after some conversation, he proposed to see Judge-Advocate-General Bolles, Solicitor of the Navy Department; said he would on the whole prefer him to the Attorney-General in this matter, and named Monday next.

By the President's request I went into the library and was introduced to Doctor Norris, with whom the President desired me to have some conversation. Doctor N. said he believed that the President and I had had some consultation in relation to a sea voyage for Robert, the President's son. He supposed I knew the circumstances. I told him I was aware of the young man's infirmity, that he had once spoken to me himself on the subject in a manner to touch my sympathy in his behalf. That I had also conversed with his father, as he seemed to be aware, and as he (the father) had doubtless advised him. He said that was so, and proceeded to tell me that R. had been beguiled into intemperance after he became of age, through his generous qualities, goodness of heart, and friendly disposition. He, therefore, thought it possible to reclaim him.

I had very little expectation of such a result, but it is important, for his father's sake and for the country's, that the President should in these days be relieved of the care and anxiety which his excesses and passions involve. To send him abroad in a public ship is the best disposition that can be made of him, and a voyage to the East Indies would be better than any other, and such a voyage was now in preparation. Doctor Norris thought this desirable.

I subsequently saw the President and told him what had taken place and that I could make the arrangement with little trouble to him. It seemed to give him consolation.

Letters from Connecticut do not speak with confidence of the result of the election next Monday. But my impressions are that the Union Party with Hawley will be successful. The battle will not be on the strict political issues before the country. On these issues, if well defined and the candidates were squarely presented, I have no doubt that the Administration would be triumphantly sustained. It would be union against disunion, the President versus Congress under the lead of Stevens. But politics and parties have become strangely mixed. Hawley, I am apprehensive, leans to the Congressional policy at present, but I trust observation and reflection will bring him right.

The true Union men who sustain the President feel that the defeat of Hawley would be a triumph to Toucey, Seymour, Eaton, and others who opposed the Government in war and whom they, for that reason, detest, and they will band together to support Hawley from matters of the past rather than issues of the present. Moreover Hawley has popular qualities. For ten years he has fought the Union battles in our political contests and in the field, and though he may be touched with Radicalism, he has good reasoning faculties and a sense of right within him on which I rely. The people have correct instincts in these matters, and I therefore feel pretty sure he will succeed. The worst is, should that be the case, the curse of party will claim that it is a triumph over the Administration. No harm will come of it, perhaps, but it is annoying and vexatious to have results to which men have contributed turned against themselves. But it cannot be helped. The distinction cannot now be drawn. Parties are in a transition state.

Sumner tells me this P.M. that his committee will go against the use of naval vessels for the French Exhibition. This will be counter to Banks, who laid himself out largely in this matter, and Sumner will not be grieved to have Banks disappointed. There is obviously no special love between these two gentlemen. They are opposites in many respects. Banks has thought to gain popularity in this move, which was concocted by himself and Seward, to use naval vessels and naval appropriations for a purpose not naval. To make their scheme appear less expensive, I am told that General Butler has succeeded in inducing the Secretary of the Treasury to interfere in the matter of the Grey Jacket, condemned as prize. If so, I regret it. McCulloch has been imposed upon. Butler is reckless, avaricious, unscrupulous. He knows there is neither law nor justice in his course on this question, but he has the promise of large fees. For three months he has been annoying me on this subject. He then went to the Attorney General and for a time made some headway. Failing there, he has now imposed upon McCulloch, who has been deceived by Butler's cunning and browbeaten by his audacity.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 467-70 

Sunday, November 5, 2023

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, March 3, 1866

The week as usual has been busy. The faction in Congress holds possession of the majority in both houses, yet there are signs of restiveness, of misgiving, on the part of many. Baldwin, from the Worcester District, Massachusetts, who is on the Directory, or Reconstruction, Committee, assures me that Stevens has in a great measure lost his influence in that committee. I have no doubt that Baldwin and others so believe when away from Stevens and perhaps when with him, but without intending it or even being fully aware of the extent to which it is carried, they are subjected, controlled, and directed by him. They may, by appeals, modify, but not to great extent, Stevens's plans. Baldwin intimates that action will be taken in behalf of the Tennessee Members, admitting them to the seats to which they are elected, early next week. The same thing has been repeated to me to-day by others. There is a manifest feeling of the gross wrong committed by their exclusion, not only to the State but to the Federal Union.

They have made the necessity of action in this case felt, and Stevens has had to yield, but he will, I presume, make the proceeding odious and unjust. Baldwin asks, Why not pass a law admitting those States? I told him Tennessee had been admitted seventy years ago. He said he did not strictly mean admission, but a law authorizing them to resume their relations with the Government. I said I could not see the necessity, or even the expediency of such a law, for, the Rebellion being suppressed, Tennessee and each of the States resumed their position as States, and if they sent loyal men here, I thought they should be admitted; if disloyal or unpardoned Rebels, such could be rejected. He was, however, very tenacious on this point, and I doubt not is committed to it. What harm, inquired he, can come from passing such a law, preliminary to receiving the Members. I told him it was, as a general rule, harmful to over-legislate, it is harmful to pass laws without authority, to assume powers or to concede them; that Congress, as a body, had no business with the election of Members, but the Constitution directs each house shall decide for itself in regard to the members of the respective bodies. The two houses could not legally or by any constitutional authority exclude a State or deny it representation. It was, however, unpleasant for the President and Congress to be in antagonism, and if it was mere form which he had in view without objectionable points or ulterior purpose, possibly such a bill might not be vetoed, yet I thought it very questionable, for it would be centralizing and magnifying federal power here and dwarfing the State.

I therefore anticipate that Stevens, finding the Committee and Congress are determined to admit the Tennessee Members to their seats, will set to work to frame an offensive bill such as the President cannot sign, or which, if he does sign, will discredit himself and violate his, and all correct, principles. This, however, I am satisfied he will not do. Then on him is to be thrown the responsibility of excluding the Tennessee Members.

I intimated to the President my conjectures, and he remarked he was prepared for such an alternative whenever it was presented. He had, from some quarter, been previously admonished in regard to the doings of the Committee.

Stevens is determined to have an issue between the Executive and Congress, and, notwithstanding a majority of Congress and of the country deprecate such an issue, and Members to me and others express their dislike of and opposition to Stevens, I incline to the opinion that he will, by the working of his Directory machinery, be successful in raising that issue. Should he, the result will be likely to rend the party, unless the minority are subservient and tamely submissive. The Administration must be supported or opposed. The positive and violent will oppose; the mild and passive will yield. Congress must be with the Administration or against it. Double-dealing cannot continue. I am apprehensive that there is treachery to the President in quarters which he will ultimately keenly feel. Sometimes I think he suspects the mischief, but is unwilling to have a breach just at this time and listens to those who advise temporizing and expediency.

Sherman (Senator), after speaking against the concurrent resolution, finally voted for it in the face of his own delivered opinion, argument, and conviction. This is a specimen of the influence of party discipline at this time in Congress. It is all-powerful.

Governor Dennison tells me this evening that he has written a letter to Patterson of New Hampshire, stating that he has removed no man and intends to remove none on account of differences between Congress and the President, provided they belong to the Union party. I am afraid he has gone farther than is wise in this matter, for if Stevens gets up the issue between the President and Congress, it may be necessary for the President to relieve himself of troublesome and officious electioneers in post-offices. I suspect Dennison has been entrapped by fair words.

If I mistake not, the Union League organization has contributed largely to present difficulties. It is controlled by extreme Radicals and rules many Members of Congress. An irresponsible faction, organized for mischief.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 441-4

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, March 6, 1866

The Secretary of the Treasury is embarrassed by the test oath. He finds it difficult to procure good officers for collectors and assessors in the Rebel States and still more difficult to get good subordinates. When he attempts to reason with Members of Congress, they insist that their object is to exclude the very men required and say they want Northern men sent into those States to collect taxes. As if such a proceeding would not excite enmities and the foreign tax-gatherer be slain!

I advised McCulloch to address a strong and emphatic letter to the President, stating the difficulties, which letter the President could communicate to Congress. A direct issue would then be made, and the country could see and appreciate the difficulties of the Administration. Dennison took the same view, and stated some of his difficulties, and I suggested that he should also present them to the President. Seward was not prepared to act. Harlan was apprehensive that a confession of the fact that it was not possible to procure men of integrity who could take the test oath, would operate injudiciously just at this time. There is, he thinks, a growing feeling for conciliation in Congress, and such a confession would check this feeling. The suggestion was adroitly if not ingenuously put. Stanton half-responded to Harlan; doubted the expediency of a letter from McCulloch; said it was unnecessary; that he paid officers who could not take the oath; thought the Secretary of the Treasury might also; but concluded by saying he had not examined the question. Finally the subject was postponed to Friday. Stanton said it had presented itself to him in a new form during the discussion, and he required a little time for examination and reflection before submitting his views.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 445