Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

Need I speak of the man who went to Atlanta through a field of fire and amid the hail of lead and iron, and who from Atlanta went to the sea, and-? But I need say no more. His name belongs to Ohio and belongs to the nation, and I trust and believe that while the name of Grant lives the name of Sherman will not be forgotten. And when the place now held by General Grant shall be vacated by his promotion I want the hearts of the American people to be permitted to speak out what they now feel, and that the name of Sherman shall take the place now occupied by that of Grant.

Mr. DEMING. I now call the previous question.

Mr. WHALEY. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?

Mr. DEMING. It is now late and I cannot yield.

The previous question was seconded and the main question ordered; which was upon agreeing to the amendment proposed by Mr. STEVENS.

The amendment was again read, as follows: Provided, That whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of lieutenant general, by promotion or otherwise, the vacancy shall not be filled until after the death or resignation of Lieutenant General Winfield Scott; and thereafter there shall be but one lieutenant general.

Mr. STEVENS. I call for the yeas upon the amendment.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

and nays

The question was taken; and it was decided in the negative-yeas 50, nays 78, not voting 55; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Ames, Baker, Baxter, Beaman, Benjamin, Bidwell, Boutwell, Brandegee,Bromwell, Broomall, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Conkling, Defrees, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eliot, Farnsworth, Grinnell, Abner C. Harding, Hart, Henderson, Higby, Holmes, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, Hulburd, Kelso, George V. Lawrence, Loan, Longyear, Lynch, McClurg, McKee, Mercur, Miller, Morris, Paine, Perham, Plants, Scofield, Stevens, Francis Thomas, Van Aernamn, Warner, Williams, and Stephen F. Wilson-50.

NAYS-Messrs. Allison, Ancona, Anderson, Baldwin, Banks, Bingham, Blow, Boyer, Buckland, Chanler, Cobb, Coffroth, Cook, Cullom, Dawson, Delano, Deming, Denison, Eckley, Eldridge, Farquhar, Ferry, Finck, Glossbrenner, Griswold, Chester D. Hubbard, James R. Hubbell, James Humphrey, Ingersoll. Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Ketcham, Kuykendall, Laflin, Latham, William Lawrence, Le Blond, Marshall, Marston, McRuer, Myers, Niblack, Noell, O'Neill, Orth, Patterson, Phelps, Pike, Samuel J. Randall, William II. Randall, Raymond, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Rogers, Rollins, Ross, Rousseau, Sawyer, Shellabarger, Sitgreaves, Smith, Spalding, Strouse, Taylor, Thornton, Trowbridge, Upson, Burt Van Horn, Robert T. Van Horn, Elihu B. Washburne. Henry D. Washburn, Welker, Whaley, James F. Wilson, Windom. Winfield, and Wright-78.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Barker, Bergen, Blaine, Bundy, Culver, Darling, Davis, Dawes, Dumont, Eggleston, Garfield, Goodyear Grider, Hale, Aaron Harding, Harris, Hayes, Hill, Hogan, Hooper, Demas Hubbard, John H.Hubbard, Edwin N. Hubbell, James M. Humphrey, Jenckes, Johnson, Jones, Kerr, Marvin, McCullough, McIndoe, Moorhead, Morrill, Moulton, Newell, Nicholson, Pomeroy, Price, Radford, Ritter, Schenck, Shanklin, Sloan, Starr, Stilwell, Taber, Thayer, John L. Thomas, Trimble, Ward, William B. Washburn, Wentworth, and Woodbridge-55.

So the amendment was not agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time.

Mr. LE BLOND. Trusting that the vote on the passage of the bill will be unanimous, or nearly so, I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 116, nays 11, not voting 56; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Anderson, Baldwin, Banks, Baxter, Beaman, Bidwell, Bingham, Blow, Boutwell, Boyer, Brandegee, Bromwell, Broomall, Buckland, Chanler, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Conkling, Cook, Cullom, Dawson, Defrees, Delano, Deming, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eckley, Eldridge, Eliot, Farquhar, Ferry, Finck, Glossbrenner, Grinnell, Griswold, Abner C. Harding, Hart, Henderson, Holmes, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, Chester D. Hubbard, James R. Hubbell, Hulburd, James Humphrey, Ingersoll, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Kelso, Ketcham, Kuykendall, Laflin, Latham, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Le Blond. Longyear, Lynch, Marshall, Marston, McRuer, Miller, Morris, Myers, Niblack, Noell, O'Neill, Orth, Paine, Patterson, Perham, Phelps, Pike, Plants, Samuel J. Randall, William H. Randall, Raymond, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Rogers, Rollins, Ross, Rousseau, Sawyer, Schenek, Scofield,

Shellabarger, Sitgreaves, Smith, Spalding, Stevens, Strouse, Taylor, Francis Thomas, Thornton, Trowbridge, Upson, Van Acrnam, Burt Van Horn, Robert T. Van Horn, Warner, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, Welker, Whaley, James F. Wilson, Windom, Winfield, and Wright-116.

NAYS-Messrs. Baker, Coffroth, Denison, Farnsworth, Harris, Higby, Loan, McKee, Mercur, Morrill, and Stephen F. Wilson-11.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Ancona, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Barker, Benjamin, Bergen, Blaine, Bundy, Culver, Darling, Davis, Dawes, Dumont, Eg

gleston, Garfield, Goodyear, Grider, Hale, Aaron Harding, Hayes, Hill, llogan, Hooper, Demas Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Edwin N. Hubbell, James M. Humphrey, Jenckes, Johnson, Jones, Kerr, Marvin, McClurg, McCullough, McIndoe, Moorhead, Moulton, Newell, Nicholson, Pomeroy, Price, Radford, Ritter, Shanklin, Sloan, Starr, Stilwell, Taber, Thayer, John L. Thomas, Trimble, Ward, William B. Washburn, Wentworth, Williams, and Woodbridge-56.

So the bill was passed.

During the call of the roll,

Mr. ANCONA stated that he had paired with Mr. BLAINE.

The result was announced as above stated. Mr. DEMING moved to reconsider the vote just taken; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

ORDER OF PROCEEDING TO-MORROW.

Mr. STEVENS. I move that the session of to-morrow be devoted exclusively to debate, as in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the President's message. The motion was agreed to.

MONTANA.

Mr. SMITH. I move that leave be granted to the Delegate from Montana [Mr. McLAIN] to have printed as part of the debates some remarks in regard to the interests of his Territory.

The motion was agreed to.

[His remarks will be found in the Appendix.]

NATIONAL CURRENCY.

Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill relative to the national currency; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

MARY C. REEVES.

Mr. NOELL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of Mary C. Reeves, administratrix of Albert Reeves, deceased; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee of Claims.

INTERNAL REVENUE BILL.

Mr. LAFLIN. The Committee on Printing, to whom was referred a motion for printing extra copies of the internal revenue bill with the amendments agreed upon by the Committee of Ways and Means, have instructed me to state that they have examined the amendments so far as they have been determined upon by the Committee of Ways and Means, and have consulted with the chairman of that committee; and the conclusion which they have reached is, that as the amendments thus far agreed on are not material in their character, it is not advisable to order any extra copies at present. The committee, however, will be very glad to order the printing of extra copies, if there should be made hereafter any amendments of such a character as to justify the expenditure.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

A message from the Senate, by Mr. W. J. MCDONALD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment bills and joint resolution of the following titles:

An act (H. R. No. 214) for the relief of Colonel R. E. Bryant;

An act (H. R. No. 347) for the relief of R. L. B. Clarke;

An act (No. 473) to extend the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims; and

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 107) for the relief of Rev. Harrison Heermance, late chaplain of the one hundred and twenty-eighth regiment New York volunteers.

The message also announced that the Senate

had passed bills of the following titles, in which they requested the concurrence of the House. An act (S. No. 149) for the relief of Daniel Winslow;

An act (S. No. 176) for the relief of George Henry Preble, a commander in the Navy of the United States;

An act (S. No. 225) for the relief of the Amoskeag Manufacturing Company;

An act (S. No. 253) to incorporate the First Congregational Society of Washington; and

An act (S. No. 278) for the relief of Captain John H. Crowell, quartermaster of the United States Army.

The message also announced that the Senate had concurred in the amendment of the House to joint resolution (S. R. No. 80) extending the time for the completion of the Union Pacific railway, eastern division.

MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER.

Mr. ELIOT, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to authorize the construction of a ship-channel across the mouth of the Mississippi river; which was read a first and second time, ordered to be printed, and referred to the Committee on Commerce.

CONFISCATION, ETC.

The SPEAKER laid before the House a message from the President of the United States in answer to a resolution of the 5th of March last requesting the names of persons worth more than $20,000 to whom special pardons have been issued and a statement of the amount of property which has been seized as belonging to enemies of the Government or as abandoned property returned to those who claimed to be the original owners, transmitting reports from the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War, and the Attorney General, together with a copy of the amnesty proclamation of the 29th of May, 1865, and copies of the warrants issued in cases in which special pardons are granted, and the second, third, and fourth conditions of the warrant prescribing the terms, so far as property is concerned, upon which all such pardons are granted and accepted; which were ordered to be printed, and laid upon the table.

Mr. STEVENS moved that twenty thousand extra copies be printed.

The motion, under the law, was referred to the Committee on Printing.

STATE DEPARTMENT.

The SPEAKER also laid before the House the following concurrent resolution from the Senate:

Resolved by the Senate, (the House of Representatives concurring,) That the standing Committees of the two Houses on Public Buildings and Grounds be instructed to inquire and report what further provisions, if any, should be made for the accommodation of the State Department.

On motion of Mr. RICE, of Maine, the resolution was concurred in.

Mr. RICE, of Maine, moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was concurred in; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

WAGON ROAD IN DAKOTA TERRITORY.

Mr. BURLEIGH by unanimous consent submitted the following preamble and resolu tion; which were read, considered, and agreed

to:

Whereas an act of Congress was passed March 3, 1865, entitled "An act to provide for the construction of certain wagon roads in the Territories of Idaho, Montana, Dakota, and Nebraska;" and whereas by said act the sum of $20,000 was appropriated for the construction of a wagon road from a point at or near the mouth of the Big Sioux river, via Yaneton, Dakota Territory, to a point at or near the mouth of the Big Cheyenne river, thence up said river to its main fork, thence up the north fork to a point of intersection with the road from Niobrara; and whereas the work on said wagon road is reported to have been commenced and far advanced in 1865, by orders from the Secretary of the Interior, during the prosecution of which work treaties are claimed to have been made with the Indian tribes occupying the country through which said road is located, by which the right of way was secured to the United States; and whereas the Secretary of the Interior is represented to have ordered a suspension of work

upon said Cheyenne road, and required the superintendent having charge of the construction of the same to turn over all the stock, implements, and money appropriated and purchased for the said road to the superintendent of the Niobrara road, whereby the opening and construction of the Cheyenne road are prevented, to the great injury of the Territory of Dakota: Tucrefore,

Resolved. That the Secretary of the Interior be requested to inform this House whether the work on the said road has been arrested or interrupted by his orders, and if so, for what reason the same has been done; whether any of the moneys appropriated thereto have been diverted to the uses of the Niobrara or any other road mentioned in said act, with the authority, if any in that case, for said diversion.

LOST DISCHARGES OF SOLDIERS.

Mr. FERRY, by unanimous consent, submitted the following preamble and resolution; which were read, considered, and agreed to:

Whereas in view of the vast number of military discharges now in the hands of soldiers of the United States liable to be, as many already have been, lost beyond replacement, thereby subjecting the losers to great expense and inconvenience in verifying rights to which they are entitled: Therefore,

Be it resolved, That the Committee on Invalid Pensions be, and are hereby, instructed to consider the justice and propriety of providing by law for such county or other local registration of soldiers' discharges as shall provide against losses of originals, and which shall be sufficient evidence in all cases to entitle the parties in interest to all the benefits thereof, and that the committee be authorized to report by

bill or otherwise.

VENTILATION OF THE HALLS OF CONGRESS.

Mr. RICE, of Maine, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior be directed to communicate to this House the report made to him by Thomas U. Walter, late architect of the Capitol extension, on the warming and ventilation of the two Houses of Congress, with the reports of Professor Joseph Henry and Dr. Charles M. Wetherill accompanying the same.

And then, on motion of Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, (at four o'clock and thirty minutes p. m.,) the House adjourned.

PETITIONS, ETC.

The following petitions, &c., were presented under the rule and referred to the appropriate committees: By Mr. ALLISON: The petition of R. W. Tirrell, and 500 others, citizens of Manchester, Iowa, for a law to regulate inter-State insurances.

By Mr. DRIGGS: The petition of Hill Gamble, and 34 others, of East Saginaw, Michigan, asking for the equilization of bounties.

By Mr. ECKLEY: The petition of E. M. Jenkins, and 110 others, wool-growers of Hammondsville, Jefferson county, Ohio, for an additional duty on foreign wool.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, May 5, 1866.

The House met at twelve o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.

The SPEAKER. In accordance with the order of the House no business is in order today except debate on the President's message, upon which the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. BUNDY,] is entitled to the floor.

NATIONAL SAFE DEPOSIT COMPANY. Mr. WARNER. I desire to enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which House bill No. 338, to incorporate the National Safe Deposit Company, of Washington, was laid on the table. The SPEAKER. The motion will be entered on the Journal.

ENROLLED JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED. Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that the committee had examined and found truly enrolled a joint resolution (S. R. No. 80) to extend the time for the completion of the Union Pacific railroad, castern division; when the Speaker signed

the same.

RECONSTRUCTION.

Mr. BUNDY. It was my intention to address the House to-day extemporaneously, but I am entirely too unwell to proceed. I therefore ask to be allowed to print some remarks, in which I will embody the substance of what I would have said.

The SPEAKER. The Chair hears no objection, and leave is granted.

[His remarks will be found in the Appendix.]

Mr. PHELPS. Mr. Speaker, on the 1st of May, 1865, the Union Army numbered one million five hundred and sixteen men. After a struggle, unprecedented in ancient or in modern history, the purpose for which that vast power had been called forth was accomplished. Four years of civil war between people of the same race, of the highest type of modern civilization, and of equal intelligence, courage, and determination, had been waged upon a theater of continental proportions, had employed in its prosecution the most finished and destructive enginery, had in its terrific battles and daily skirmishes cost this generation over half a million lives, and had entailed upon the nation a debt of three thousand and upon the insurgent section a loss of seven thousand million dollars. But remarkable as was this contest in all the clements of material grandeur, it was still more memorable for the importance of the issue involved, and the extraordinary precision with which it was defined. Slavery, struggling for perpetuity, expansion, and power, struck at the existence of the Government, which, in the growth and progress of ideas necessarily came to stand in its path, arrest its advance, and menace its security. Slavery was the cause, and the only cause, of the rebellion. The idea of secession would never have been practically adopted, certainly never enforced by arms, but in defense of that institution. Hence the war policy of the Government necessarily became antislavery. Hence, in the fullness of time, came the proclamation of emancipation, the organi zation and arming of liberated slaves, the immediate and uncompensated abolition of slavery within her limits by the State of Maryland -an offering voluntarily made by that loyal State, as her contribution to the common cause in furtherance of the general policy settled upon as the only one to suppress the rebellion-and following that, the passage by Congress by a two thirds majority of the proposition to be submitted to the several States to abolish slavery throughout the country forever by constitutional amendment.

The policy thus adopted and persevered in by the Government ultimately forced a similar policy of emancipation and enlistment of slaves upon the consideration of the rebel authorities. The instant the confederate government found itself reduced to that dilemma the scales fell from all eyes. No sooner was it discovered that the thinned ranks of the rebel army, exhausted by four bloody years of incessant combat, and required to face the fresh columns that poured down with endless tramp from the North, could only be recruited from among those very slaves, to rivet whose fetters that army was in fact fighting, than the whole fabric tumbled into ruin. To arm the slaves was of course to free them, and to free the slaves to fight the battles of slavery was simply a reductio ad absurdum and a ghastly farce.

In the providence of God, it seems necessary that this most cruel of wars should have been fought to the bitter end upon the "line" which has been indicated: first, to secure from the South the complete, irrevocable, and final surrender of slavery; second, to remove all occasion for hindering the immediate pacification of the country by a desultory guerrilla warfare, so much feared and predicted; and third, to obviate all danger, and thus to extinguish in every candid mind all reasonable fear of a possible future rebellion in the interest of the defeated insurgents.

This generation cannot fully appreciate, but history will recognize the great fact of the abo lition of the institution of human slavery. It is too sudden, too violent, and too vast to be fully comprehended to-day. Not the least among the many great evils of this system was the specific influence it produced over the moral sense, dwarfing and contracting the consciences of men to its narrow standard, just as darkness contracts the physical eye. Bursting suddenly and with great noise and fury into the bright air of freedom, what wonder that we should still see with dazzled and bewildered vision, that

we should grope and clutch vaguely at the objects around us, that we should be tormented with panic fears and haunted with hideons dreams of the dark prison-house. It is, therefore, by no means strange to me. but quite natural, that many well-meaning but purblind patriots should still afflict themselves and society with their panic dread of rebellion; should predict the revival or even affirm the actual pres ent existence of slavery; should start at every sound, and stampede at every shadow; should see walking by moonlight the ghost of slavery, and behind every bush a "red-handed rebel;" should rend the air with clamors for protection against this imaginary monster, and make both day and night hideous with their jargon of guar antees, conditions, and constitutional amendments. Nor is it at all surprising that these same purblind patriots, in their blundering frenzy, should strike by mistake their best friends, should attack the Secretary of State, should denounce and threaten the President, and involve in the same censure the sacred memory of his lamented predecessor.

Sir, who is Secretary Seward, that he should be hawked at and torn, not now by the knife of the traitor assassin striking slavery's last blow at its greatest human antagonist, but this time by the loud and blatant champions of loyalty? I remember him well, with his "higher law" and his "irrepressible conflict," the scarred and reenlisted veteran in this great war of liberty; and I recollect him as he stood in the Senate many years ago, when men who now revile him as recreant and denounce him as a rebel sympathizer, then scoffed at him as an abolition fanatic, as he stood at the head of a corporal's guard gallantly attacking slavery in its stronghold. Sir, it may be said of him that while Phillips and Garrison and the other humbugs of both sexes were fighting valiantly in the rear, William H. Seward was at the front, leading not the advanced guard, but the skirmish line of freedom right up to the breastworks. With Henry Ward Beecher, he has devoted all the best years of his life to the destruction of human slavery. He struck at it whenever it lifted one of its hydra heads; he has put the searing iron, hissing hot, to the last of them; he felt anxiously and skillfully for the last pulsation of the dying monster's heart; he has pronounced it dead, and he who feared it not when living and terrible is not scared at its carrion. He belongs to a more vigerous and a more practical school of statesmen. He takes this view of the case, and all sensible men of firm nerves, clear eye-sight, and good digestion, agree with him, or soon will. The South was formerly possessed of the devil, in the scripture sense, and dwelt among the tombs. While this unclean spirit was present, there was much foaming and gnashing. It was finally exorcised, and as it came rending its way from out its tormented and bleeding victim, it howled out its name, not as legion, but slavery. It became incarnate in the person of Booth, and astonished and appalled mankind by the su preme horror and last convulsion of demoniac madness, before it died the death of a dog.

Now, there are those who would scourge and manacle and cuff and curse the rescued, regenerated, and emancipated South, even before her wounds are stanched from this frightful, this worse than Cesarean operation. Beecher and Seward are of a different school of philanthropists. They see the one but lately possessed of the unclean spirit and gnashing among the tombs, now sitting, clothed, and in his right mind. They do not look for uniform amiability, nor do they require the patient immediately, and while smarting with pain, to express profound satisfaction and intense delight with the process, nor unfeigned personal love and gratitude toward those who per formed it. On the contrary, it is fair to presume that those men of honor would abandon the unhappy victim to the tormentors should it exhibit so craven a spirit and so contempti ble a hypocrisy. Nor is it deemed indispensably necessary that men, otherwise loyal, should profess now to hold the doctrines which

they have endeavored to maintain by the sword as false and heretical ab initio. For forty years and more they have been educated to believe the false and dangerous heresy which bore them the bitter fruits they reaped from the attempt at rebellion. It would be unreasonable to require, as it would be impossible to expect, that these people should all of a sudden sincerely and honestly believe that the principle for which they contended was false, because those who professed it have been routed upon the field. What we require and have a right to require of them is that they abandon that doctrine as a principle of action for the future. We have lost too many of our people in this war, we have shed too much blood and lost too much property and spent too much money to be altogether indifferent about the legitimate fruits of our dearly bought victory. We fought for Union, for the integrity, the immortality of our Government, and by the help of God we have conquered. We owe it to ourselves and to posterity to assure the one and the other against danger in the future. We therefore demand a searching, adequate, and irreversible guarantee of future practical loyalty. That demand is the sum and substance of the Administration policy, which it has lately become the fashion to scoff at.

Here is the "policy" in the exact language of President Johnson. I quote from his annual message to Congress, of the 4th December, 1865, a state paper that for clearness, terseness, cogency, and elegance has never been surpassed, and that for broad and catholic statesmanship and heroic intrepidity has taken the world by surprise:

"It is not too much to ask. in the name of the whole people, that on the one side the plan of restoration shall proceed in conformity with a willingness to cast the disorders of the past into oblivion; and that on the other the evidence of sincerity in the future maintenance of the Union shall be put beyond any doubt by the ratification of the proposed amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the abolition of slavery forever within the limits of our country.

"The adoption of the amendment reunites us beyond all power of disruption. It heals the wound that is still imperfectly closed; it removes slavery, the element which has so long perplexed and divided the country; it makes of us once more a united people, renewed and strengthened, bound more than ever to mutual affection and support."

And again:

"As no State can throw a defense over the crime of treason, the power of pardon is exclusively vested in the executive government of the United States. In exercising that power I have taken every precaution to connect it with the clearest recognition of the binding force of the laws of the United States, and an unqualified acknowledgment of the great social change of condition in regard to slavery which has grown out of the war.'

[ocr errors]

The same plan of restoration was embodied by President Lincoln in his famous proclamation of July 18, 1864:

To whom it may concern :

Any proposition which embraces the restoration of peace, the integrity of the whole Union, and the abandonment of slavery, *

*

*

will

be received and considered by the executive government of the United States, and will be met by liberal terms on other substantial and collateral points.

To secure the definite, unequivocal, and irrevocable surrender of slavery, the one only cause of rebellion, the one solitary root of disloyalty, to secure it by the voluntary surrender of the insurgents themselves, and to secure it by their legislative ratification of the constitutional amendment, acting upon it as States; as States of and States in the Union; as States of and in the Union under the Constitution; not only so, but as States of the Union above the Constitution by actually exercising the supreme State prerogative of amendment, by, in fact, sharing the State omnipotence of organic creation; this, then, was the aim and end of the Administration policy, this was the practical restoration of the Union.

Contrasts are sometimes more useful for purposes of illustration than analogies. The stars are not visible until the blackness of night devours the light of day. With this view let us hear the bold and outspoken leader of the House, speaking, as he frankly admits, upon his own responsibility; but speaking, as he

claims, with equal candor, "so as to secure perpetual ascendency to the party of the Union," or, as he otherwise phrases it, to "continue the Republican ascendency."

"Two things are of vital importance"

I am quoting the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. STEVENS]

"so to establish a principle that none of the rebel States shall be counted in any of the amendments of the Constitution until they are duly admitted into the family of States by the law-making power of their conqueror. For more than six months the amendment of the Constitution abolishing slavery has been ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the States that acted on its passage by Congress, and which had Legislatures, or which were States capable of acting, or required to act, on the question.

"I take no account of the aggregation of whitewashed rebels who without any legal authority have assembled in the capitals of the late rebel States and simulated legislative bodies."

The reference is to the Legislatures elected in the several States by virtue originally of proclamations emanating from provisional governors appointed by the President; all the electors and members being required to take the prescribed amnesty oath of allegiance to the Government, and acquiescence in martial emancipation.

To proceed:

"Nor do I regard with any respect the cunning byplay with which they deluded the Secretary of State by frequent telegraphic announcements that South Carolina had adopted the amendment:' 'Alabama has adopted the amendment, being the twenty-seventh State,' &c. This was intended to delude the people, and accustom Congress to hear repeated the naines of these extinct States as if they were alive, when, in truth, they have now no more existence than the revolted cities of Latium, two thirds of whose people were colonized and their property confiscated and their right of citizenship withdrawn by conquering and avenging Rome."

Here we have outlined with the freedom and boldness of a master hand the framework of a plan which was at a very early day of the session (December 18) proposed for the consideration and adoption of Congress. This plan had for its basis the theory of " 'defunct," "dead," or "extinct States," or if that were adjudged impossible or absurd, then they were to be called States out of the Union and now

conquered Territories." In either case, that is, whether on the one hand they are 66 not out of the Union but only dead carcasses lying within the Union," or whether on the other hand they are and for four years have been out of the Union for all legal purposes"-in either of these hypotheses the logical sequence resulted that "being now conquered they are subject to the absolute disposal of Congress."

This programme then goes on to dispose of them as subjugated foreign provinces, to manacle their outlawed people, and hold them indefinitely as the mere slaves of Congress; to force them "to mingle with those to whom Congress shall extend the right of suffrage," and in that condition, excluded from representation, though subject to taxation, governed and disciplined by imported agents and commissioners, dragooned, court-martialed, and plundered, they are to be kept "for some years" "to eat the fruit of foul rebellion." Should this training fail to develop a spirit of earnest and sincere loyalty; should the advantages of this school, in which with exquisite and inimitable humor it is declared that they are to learn the principles of freedom, "practice justice to all men," and accustom themselves to make and to obey equal laws" appear to have been thrown away upon ingrates unable to appreciate and unwilling to profit by them, does the programme on that account fail? Not at all. It has but just begun to succeed. The remedy for obstinate disloyalty is at hand. Permanent, incurable disaffection may read its fate very plainly in that of the revolted cities of Latium, two thirds of whose people were colonized and their property confiscated and their right of citizenship withdrawn by conquering and avenging Rome."

46

As a speculation upon disloyalty, this policy could not possibly be improved. If general confiscation of property, under pretext, is what is wanted, no surer road to it can be found. It

is a process which, if put in operation upon a community whose loyalty was immaculate, would speedily convert it into a community of rebels. Why, sir, I believe that the spirited people of my own native State of Vermont, dignantly revolt and turn upon teased by so tormenting a tyranny, would in their oppress

ors at every hazard and against all odds. If they did not, they would not prove their legitimate descent from those gallant men of 1781, upon whom Ethan Allen relied in his demand on behalf of the self-constituted State of Vermont for her immediate admission into the Union and representation in the Continental Congress.

"He declared to that body that no person could dispute his attachment to and sufferings in the cause of his country; but he did not hesitate to assert that Vermont had an indubitable right to agree on terms of cessation of hostilities with Great Britain, provided the United States persist in rejecting her application for a union with the States. Vermont, of all people, would be the most miserable were she obliged to defend the independence of the United States, and they at the same time at full liberty to overthrow and ruin the independence of Vermont. I am persuaded, when Congress consider the circumstances of this State, they will not be more surprised that I have transmitted these letters (letters from British emissaries containing treasonable overtures] than that I have kept them in custody; for I am as resolutely determined to defend the independence of Vermont as Congress are that of the United States, and rather than submit will retire with the hardy Green mountain boys into the desolate caverns of the mountains and wage war with human nature at large."-Hoskins's History of Vermont, page 102.

Such was the resolute and defiant attitude maintained by the infant State of Vermont, demanding of Congress admission into the Union as a right, although her independence had never been recognized nor her sovereignty established; and even her boundaries were disputed and her territory claimed by the neighboring States. And yet the memory of the bold Ethan Allen is to-day as much revered for that spirited and emphatic declaration to Congress as for his famous reply to the British commander of Ticonderoga, asking by what authority he demanded its surrender: "I demand it in the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress!"

The congressional treatment of the eleven States lately in insurrection, according to the plan of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, is so well adapted to provoke continued hostility to the Government and goad a maddened population into imbecile and desperate resistance that the extreme resort of confiscation which would then be justified has already been anticipated by an elaborate calculation. Four thousand million dollars are to be raised by sale of lands and such other property as can be found.

Four billions of money, mark you, to be raised out of a country blasted by a devastating war, out of a people stripped and picked by rebel sequestration, their whole slave property and their entire circulating medium annihilated; a people at this moment, many of them, begging their victuals and clothes of the North!

This programme of dissolution and reconstruction is of course incomplete without a series of amendments to the Constitution, all of which are to be consummated "before the defunct States are admitted to be capable of State action."

"They ought never to be recognized as capable of acting in the Union or of being counted as valid States until the Constitution shall have been so amended as to make it what its framers intended, and so as to secure perpetual ascendency to the party of the Union," &c.

The first of these amendments is to change the basis of representation from Federal numbers to actual voters. The others are to allow Congress to lay a duty on exports, to make all laws uniform, to prohibit the assumption of the rebel debt, and lastly, to extend the right of suffrage to the emancipated blacks, although upon this point there seems to be some doubt as to whether the result may not be reached by direct congressional action. In either case, whether by constitutional amendment or by legislation, universal negro suffrage must be enforced as well "to continue the Republican

ascendency" as because "without the right of suffrage in the late slave States the slaves had far better been left in bondage."

As an earnest of the enforcement of this policy, and as a pledge of the principle on which this Congress would legislate for Territories over which it claimed jurisdiction, the action of this House, at a very early period of the session, may be cited.

A bill passed the House in January estab lishing universal negro suffrage in the District of Columbia. This was done by a valid exercise of power, Congress having by the Constitution exclusive legislation over this District in all cases. It was done, however, in direct violation of the wishes of the people of the District, and against the almost unanimous protest of the legal and qualified voters. It was not called for by the public sentiment of the country. Since the breaking out of the rebellion, New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Connecticut had been asked to enfranchise the few colored men within their limits. They all refused. In the State of New York it assumed the form of a proposition to permit negro suffrage without a property qualification. In 1860 such a proposition had been defeated by-yeas 197,503, nays 337,984. In 1864, after the presumed advance of public sentiment upon this question, a like proposition was defeated by yeas 85,406, nays 224,336. In August, 1862, a vote was had in the State of Illinois on several propositions relating to negroes and mulattoes, with this result:

For excluding them from the State..
Against.......

.171.893 71,306

[blocks in formation]

As late as the autumn of 1865 the people of Connecticut refused by over six thousand majority to enfranchise the handful of colored men residing among them. An effort was made in the Thirty-Eighth Congress to incorporate the feature of negro suffrage in the bill to provide a temporary government for the Territory of Montana. It failed; and among those who voted persistently against negro suf frage in this new Territory, where there were perhaps no negroes at all, are the names of the entire Maryland delegation, consisting at that time (1864) of Messrs. Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Harris, Thomas, and Webster.

After so many and such decided manifestations of public opinion, showing unmistakably that the people of this country are inflexibly opposed to a general and promiscuous intermingling with negroes at the polls and in public office, it was scarcely to be expected that the repudiated doctrine should be forced pon the protesting population of this District. Whatever reasons may be urged in support of universal suffrage in general, they all fail in the case of a municipal corporation. There are no people or interests within the limits of the District of Columbia of any importance that are not included within the corporate franchises of the cities of Washington and Georgetown. There is no voting done in the District except for the municipal officers of the two corporations.

It was therefore unfortunate that the political experiment of universal negro suffrage should first be applied to a city corporation, in which the horde of voters thus manufactured were, with scarcely an exception, without a particle of interest in the body whose franchises they were made to share, and whose funds they were assigned to control. Up to this time the rash feat of legislation remains a failure under the silent veto of the Senate and the

dead weight of public opinion. It is significant, however, of the fate in store for eleven States, under the false doctrine that by attempted secession they have consummated the dissolution of the Union, and by the failure of their insurrection, the surrender of their insurgent armies, and full and complete submission to the authority of the Government and obedience to its laws, have done no more nor less than lapse into the condition of conquered territories, subject to the absolute disposal of Congress.

I do not propose to review in detail the arguments or to discuss the authorities by which this doctrine has been maintained. I have been surprised, upon a question of such moment, at a crisis in our country's history of such transcendent gravity, to encounter a line of reasoning so utterly fallacious. The pivot of the whole argument is the concession of belligerent rights. Humanity required an observ ance of those restraints and courtesies which are due to an enemy by the law of nations. Cartels for the exchange of prisoners, and flags of truce to bury the dead, are therefore pointed to as the evidences of a state of war between independent foreign nations. That is what this argument amounts to, and nothing more. was still more astonished to find the narrow

I

technical doctrine of estoppel drawn from its proper sphere in the county court to reenforce this feeble logic. South Carolina must be held to be out of the Union because her convention and Legislature roundly affirmed that she was in so many words. Notwithstanding the Government took issue with South Carolina upon that identical proposition, denying that she was out of the Union in law, and in fact making good that denial by wager of battle, still South Carolina, under this doctrine of estoppel, must be held to have succeeded from the very fact of failure, and the Government to have failed from the very fact of success.

Sir, we have had a war for union, not for disunion. We have fought, not to consummate secession, but to prevent it. We were called forth, and we went forth, to put down treason, to enforce the laws, to crush out rebellion, to maintain the Government, and to save the Union. With our martyred leader we first tried to save the Union with slavery and we failed. We then tried to save it without slavery and we succeeded. We did not fight to secure the ascendency of a party, or to keep any man or set of men in office, but we fought for our country, for its Constitution, and its flag.

It was on this principle that the great contest began, and it was on this principle, held steadily in view by every department of the Government that it was prosecuted to a successful issue. These principles were clearly set forth by President Lincoln in his various proclamations and messages, letters and speeches. In his first inaugural, March 4, 1861, he laid down the correct doctrine, from which, to the day of his death, he never departed:

"It follows that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I consider, therefore, that in view of the Constitution and laws, the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States."

The executive department, speaking through the Secretary of State, explicitly declared that

"The Congress of the United States furnishes a constitutional forum for debate between the alienated

parties. Senators and Representatives from the loyal portion of the people are thus already fully empowered to confer; and seats also are vacant and inviting Senators and Representatives from the discontented party who may be constitutionally sent there from the States involved in the insurrection."

To the same principle Congress also is committed by its acts and resolutions. The act of August, 1861, laying a direct tax of $20,000,000 upon the United States, apportions that sum among the several States, including all the States

then in rebellion by name. Thus Virginia is recognized as still a State within the Union: "To the State of Virginia, $937,530.667." And so with North Carolina, South Carolina, and all the eleven. Each is taxed by name, and each is named as a State, as in the case of the loyal States.

The act of Congress of March 4, 1862, under which the present House of Representatives was chosen, recognizes the right of these States to representation, in terms.

Thus we have the great fact that these States were living States, States of this Union, States subject to taxation and entitled to representation, conclusively settled by Congress itself, and settled at the very time when the people of those States were actually in flagrant insurrection. If doubt should still exist as to the true intent and meaning of these acts let Congress be its own interpreter. The record here is familiar but cannot be too often repeated. It is one of the great landmarks in this controversy and should always be kept in sight. In July, 1861, a resolution was adopted by such large majorities in both Houses of Congress as amounted virtually to unanimity, declaring:

"That this war is not prosecuted upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws made in pursuance thereof, and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired; that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease."

The principle thus emphatically pronounced by Congress and the Executive was the common sentiment and universal understanding of the whole country throughout the entire period of the rebellion. It was affirmed by State Legislatures; it was announced in party platforms; it was enforced everywhere by loyal speakers and the loyal press. It was significantly recognized by the Union national convention which admitted the delegations from Tennessee, Arkansas, and Louisiana, upon an equal footing with the other States, following in this respect the example of Congress, and presented the name of Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, to the suffrages of the American people as the Union candidate for Vice President of the United States. It was triumphantly sustained at the ballot-box by the nation at large. And it is the same Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, who is to-day laboring to apply that same prin ciple, in perfect harmony and consistency with his own record and with the known wishes of the lamented Lincoln, surrounded and supported by a Cabinet of Lincoln's selection.

The evidence of the recognition of these States as States in the Union, by force of the combined authority of both Congress and the Executive, culminates in their ratification of the great constitutional amendment as declared by the official certificate of the Secretary of State. That certificate was officially published on the 18th of December, 1865, in pursuance of an act of Congress. (April 20, 1818.) providing that when the State Department shall have been officially notified that any proposed amendment to the Constitution had been adopted according to the provisions of that instrument

"It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, forthwith, to cause the said amendment to be published" * specifying the States

*

by which the same may have been adopted, and that the same has become valid."

After reciting the amendment, the certificate of the Secretary of State proceeds as follows: "And whereas it appears from official documents on file in this Department that the amendment to the Constitution of the United States, proposed as aforesaid, has been ratified by the Legislatures of the States of Illinois, Rhode Island, Michigan, Maryland, New York, West Virginia, Maine, Kansas, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, Nevada, Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, Tennessee, Arkansas, Connecticut, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia. in all twenty-seven States: and whereas the whole number of States in the United States is thirtysix: and whereas the before specially named States whose Legislatures have ratified the said proposed amendment constitute three fourths of the whole number of States in the United States:

"Now, therefore, be it known that I, William H.

Seward, Secretary of State, by virtue and in pursuance of the second section of the act of Congress approved the 20th of April, 1818, entitled 'An act to provide for the publication of the laws of the United States, and for other purposes,' do hereby certify that the amendment aforesaid has become valid to all intents and purposes as a part of the Constitution of the United States.'

Thus, by the joint authority of both Congress and the Executive, eight States that are claimed to be out of the Union, or dead States within the Union, from their participation in a rebellion for slavery, are finally and conclusively recognized as constitutional States of the Union for the highest of all purposes. It is a fortunate and auspicious circumstance that the highest proof that could be offered of their legal and constitutional status is connected with the strongest guarantee that could be given of their repentance for the past and their loyalty

in the future.

I use the word "repentance" designedly. True repentance consists not in loud-mouthed professions. It consists in "bringing forth fruits meet for repentance." How much the South was chastened, humbled, and punished by the stern hand of war, he only can esti mate who remembers the strange, infatuated fondness with which her people clung to their peculiar institution, and who appreciates the vast amount of wealth represented by it. It must not be forgotten by those whose clamors for the punishment of traitors grow incessantly louder as the danger from treason grows less, that in addition to the loss of the flower of the southern manhood in battle; in addition to the utter annihilation of the entire circulating medium in the pockets of these people and of the invested wealth in their safes; in addition to the wide-spread devastation and ruin of a desolating war, the crowning punishment of confiscation has already been their portion. Emancipation was punishment to every man who owned a slave. I have always believed that treason was a crime. Myself, I shrank from it as from pollution, until the time came to close with it in a death-grapple. For the leaders of rebellion, those who fired the southern heart and precipitated revolution, I have no sympathy, even now, in their disgrace. I have believed that treason ought to be punished, and I believe that it has been punished. If there be those who still thirst for vengeance, there may be exceptions, but I believe that they belong principally to that class of patriots who, in the words of General Sherman, "shun the fight and the march, and are loudest, bravest, and fiercest when danger is past.'

In the view which I have taken of the great

be kept from ruling the country they strove to ruin. "Loyal men must govern a preserved republic." That is my belief. That exigency also has been foreseen and provided for. You have a test oath searching and stringent enough to satisfy the most exacting. Under it no traitor can enter Congress or hold a Federal office. I ask you now to administer that oath to Maynard and Stokes and Cooper, and to other brave and loyal Representatives from Tennessee. I ask for the immediate and unconditional admission of the Tennessee delegation on the floor of this House upon an equal footing with those of us who come from other loyal States. It is too late to argue the claims of that State. The whole country knows them by heart. During a great portion of the war Tennessee was actually represented in Congress; in this House by Maynard, in the Senate by Andrew Johnson, the seraph Abdiel of the great rebellion: "Faithful found

Among the faithless, faithful only he; Among innumerable false, unmoved, Unshaken, unseduced, unterrified, His loyalty he kept, his love, his zeal." All the evidence taken by the joint committee on reconstruction concurs in the propriety of the prompt admission of her reprentatives to prevent the warm and glowing loyalty of her people from being chilled, as the loyalty of any people would be, by a persistent and contemptuous ostracism."

General Fisk, the commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau for Tennessee and Kentucky, headquarters at Nashville, Tennessee, testifies as follows:

"Tennessee abolished slavery by her own action; she elected a Governor by the people; she repudiated the rebel debt; she ratified the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, and did all that without executive indication or inauguration. Tennessee furnished thousands for the defense of the Union. All this is to her advantage, and were I a member of the Senate or House of Representatives of Congress I would vote most cheerfully to admit the delegation from Tennessee, believing that in so doing I would be taking a step that would increase the loyal sentiment of the State, and which would promote the tranquillity and prosperity of the State."

[ocr errors]

The testimony of General George H. Thomas is equally emphatic upon this point; and, in fact, there is but one opinion among all ac quainted with the actual condition of the people of that State. Why not, then, admit the Tennessee delegation? Is anything else demanded?

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped that the joint committee of fifteen, composed as it is of gentlemen of character, experience, and ability, would have given us, as the result of their

constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, protracted labors, some proposition on which

it appears in a fourfold aspect:

1. As a surrender of the cause of the war. 2. As a pledge of sincerity in accepting the result of the war.

3. As a guarantee of future loyalty. 4. As a punishment for treason, by confiscation.

Is anything else wanted to pacify the country, restore the Union, close up our ranks, and march with solid, unbroken front against imperialism in America and despotism throughout the world? Is anything else to be done before confidence can be restored at home, trade revived, finances strengthened, currency settled, and resources developed?

The freedmen must be cared for and protected in their rights. I admit the necessity, It is already provided for. Under the second section of the amendment Congress has all necessary power over the subject. With the learned gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. BINGHAM,] I had constitutional scruples about the civil rights bill which I could not overcome even for the pleasure of reversing a veto. But that bill is now a law; it will probably be several years before it is judicially negatived; in the mean time the freedmen under its operation are secure, and the public sentiment around them will gradually make all special legislation un

necessary.

Is anything else demanded? "Traitors must

all loyal men might unite. I did hope in the beginning that within a week after their organization, at least when Congress reassembled in January, they would report in favor of the immediate admission of the representatives of Tennessee. I believe that a majority of the House were prepared to admit those Representatives on any day when the question could be fairly got before them. Their admission has been delayed, and now, under the operation of the reconstruction programme recently reported from that committee, it appears that the State of Tennessee is to be indefinitely excluded from the Union. I say indefinitely, because her admission is made to depend upon the ratification by three fourths of the States of a series of constitutional amendments, which three fourths of all the States will never ratify. It is not enough that Tennessee herself ratifies the amendment. That does not entitle her, by this scheme, to the recognition of Congress. If the real intention had been to encourage southern loyalty by discriminating in its favor, the plan would have recognized States as they successively wheeled into line upon the platform.

Not only are these States to be excluded until every one of these amendments shall have become part of the Constitution, but each is required, by the third section of the amendment, to disfranchise nearly the whole of its voting population. Disfranchisement is a war

[ocr errors]

measure, and in time of rebellion is almost as necessary a means of defense as an army. It is altogether unsuited to a condition of peace. and, in fact, there can be no real peace in any community where such a proscriptive policy is long persisted in. It is unfortunately true that in most of these States the mass of the population adhered to the late insurrection, giv ing it aid and comfort." Whether "voluntarily or not would be, in the majority of cases, a nice question of casuistry. After the triumphant suppression of a revolt it is not wise or statesmanlike to go back for a minute inquisition into past offenses and canvass calmly and leisurely the by-gone effervescences of fierce excitement. Let the dead past bury

its dead." There are doubtless at the South inveterate, malignant, bitter, revengeful rebels. There are men there who, if tried for treason, lawfully convicted, and sentenced to be hung, could not succeed in getting even my signature to an application for executive clemency. Such men are a curse to any country. Such men brought on the rebellion, and such men are to-day doing the South more harm by their tions than all the radicals in the country. I loud-mouthed ranting and offensive demonstrabelieve such cases to be more numerous in

[ocr errors]

Maryland and the other border States than in the confederacy itself. I believe such cases to be less numerous in the late rebel army than in the great army of "sympathizers," marching like Noah's animals into the ark, male and female. On that side, as on ours, there is a class whom General Sherman's description was made to fit, A class who shun the march and the fight, and are loudest, bravest, and fiercest when danger is past." Such men. though few in number and contemptible in power, attract attention from the noise they make. One grasshopper makes more noise in a field than a herd of cattle. As a question of propriety, I should like to see such men suppressed by disfranchisement if that would get rid of them.

But, unfortunately, no practicable test can be found to discriminate such men from others whom it is not politic nor right to proscribe. I refer to men who did go into rebellion, but who, having taken the amnesty oath, mean in good faith to keep it." Such men are loyal men, and loyal men ought to participate in the government of the country. Sir, I know men who have done, and are now doing, yeoman service in the Union cause who could not literally swear that they had never "voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort." Are such men to be now kicked out into the limbo of traitors? God forbid! Let us rather take them by the hand and encourage them to persevere. Likely as not, they will one day get far beyond us in the progress of loyalty, and turn back to reproach us for our want of zeal! No, sir, you will have to abandon this sweeping indiscriminate proscription of a whole population, that is, if you are in earnest when you say "it is expedient that the States lately in insurrection should at the earliest day consistent with the future peace and safety of the Union be restored to full participation in all political rights." If you are not in earnest, but only want an issue to disturb the minds of the people of the North by telling them from the stump frightful stories about the people of the South to prevent their participation in the next presidential election, and thus to secure the Republican ascendency;" why then keep it in, and let an intelligent people decide the issue.

66

The first section of the proposed amendment is as follows:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor dery to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

By the fifth section-

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. And by the bill accompanying the proposed

« PoprzedniaDalej »