of the highest military officer of the United
States, the commander-in-chief of the army
and navy; when I urn called upon here, in
addition to the oaths which are previously
required in this section, to support the consti-
tution and the laws, to go further and swear
that I have never in any shape opposed the
views of the government, for that is the
amount of it—1 reject it as a demand on me
which there is no just power to execute, a de-
mand which there is no constitution or law
to require or authorize; a demand which 1
will not say I never will submit to, for 1
think a freeman does well to give himself the
power to judge of any emergency when it
shall arise, but one which I cannot but be-
lieve is designed—if it is not calculated to
have an effect just the reverse of that which
the gentleman has anxiously expressed to me
as the object of some of its supporters—to
secure them votes at the election. If these
men were pot bound hand and foot by these
provisions, and kept away from the polls,
such gentlemen could not be elected. It is a
case of life and death; a case of existence
and non-existence. Sir) I fear that this is
the lurking motive which moves the whole
machine.
1 desire to see every freeman in the State
who has not made himself amenable to the
laws—nay, I go further, every freeman in
the State—white man, of course, for I take it
for granted that it is not to include the ne-
gro; and I mean the men by whom the gov-
ernment was formed, the white people—1
desire to see every such man vote, qualified
by the terms of the constitution to vote, al-
though be may have made himself amenable
to the laws, unless according to the terms of
the constitution he has been tried and con-
victed.
1 desire to see this the more, because I now
know a man who holds office, who, were it
not for the bayonet, could not have received,
as they themselves will tell you, one vote in
ten) and perhaps not one vote in a hundred.
1 believe I can state without the fear of con-
tradiction that within the precincts of my own
county, an individual desirous of holding
one of the very best offices, proclaimed with-
out any very great secrecy that if be could
only secure twelve voters in the county he
would have that office.
1 desire to see no such elections, whether
they be by the bayonets of the soldier or
whether they be by the stringent oaths sup-
posed to apply to every other person but those
who are friends of the national government.
1 desire to .see every man come to the polls
freely to cast his vote. I want no officer to
rule over him. I want no man elected by the
people unless he can show a majority of their
totes.
1 tell gentlemen that this is a dangerous
weapon. You have the power to-day. You
CM) exercise it with an iron hand. You can |
exercise it without reference to any constitu-
tion or laws. You can pile up, and keep up,
and throw all into the hands of your mili-
tary chieftain. But how soon Tempera
mutantur et nos may be said again with reference
to these things, no man can tell. Now,
only conceive your term of power at an end.
Consider that others may come into your
places, and that passion and prejudice may
incite them to treat you as you now propose
lo treat those who are unfriendly to the po-
litical administration of the country. Now,
there is an idea that no man can be a friend
to the government unless he can support the
war; that no man can be anything but a
traitor from the teeth outward unless he sup-
ports the administration. There must be a
power to rule somewhere.
Mr. PUGH. Will the gentleman allow me
to tell him that I never made use of any such
remark ?
Mr. CHAMBERS. If the gentleman disclaims
it, that is enough; but I understood him so.
Mr. PUGH. I will state what I did say ;
that there were people in this State and
throughout the country who professed to be
Union men, who really were rebels at heart.
I have no doubt of that. I suggested there-
fore that they were only from the teeth out-
wards Union men, but at heart were rebels.
Mr. CHAMBERS. As I suppose there are
traitors at heart who would have this con-
stitution destroyed. Why is Jeff. Davis a
traitor? What his offence? Opposition to
the government of the United States—that is,
to the constitution and the laws, which op-
position lie thinks proper to evince by tile
means which he has used, the military power
of the territory over which be has control.
Is it any less treason—the gentleman will
excuse me, but I am only putting the abstract
idea—is it any less treason, opposition to the
government of the United States and the
constituion of the United States because it
is not armed? Is it any less undermining
this government to do it by votes, in this
body, than it is to undermine it by Paixban
guns and shells and batteries of every sort?
I do not see any difference.
Was Aaron Burr less a traitor because he
did not do as Jeff. Davis did, arm a whole
section of the country? it is the under-
mining of the government, by any overt act.
Every gentleman here is not a lawyer, and I
regret it. There certainly has been very
strong evidence of the want of those legal
ideas and views which gentlemen educated
to that profession entertain. It would seem
that treason is understood to be committed
by taking up arms and shooting at the gov-
ernment. There never was a greater mislake
in the world. That is not one whit more
treason, not one atom more treason than un-
dermining the constitution and destroying
the government in any other mode.
Mr. STIRLING. I should like to ask the |
