'Why does the gentleman suppose for a single moment,' he asked in the House, 'that the speech was a fact? (Laughter.)... What I say now I do not wish to have reported. It is a confidential communication and I suppose none will violate the confidence I repose in them. (Laughter.) Sir, that speech was one of the grandest hoaxes ever perpetrated, and has been more successful than any except the moon hoax, which I am told deceived many astute astronomers. (Laughter.) It is part of a cunning contrivance of the copperhead party who have been persecuting our President since the 4th of last March. Why, sir, taking advantage of an unfortunate incident that happened on that occasion (Laughter) they have been constantly denouncing him as addicted to low and degrading vices.' 1 But Thad Stevens was not through, as we shall see. It was in that speech that he declared for a reapportionment intended to deprive the South of members, to put a tax on cotton, to treat the Southern States as conquered territory. He was moving forward pushing his party with him. 1 Congressional Globe, March 10, 1866. THE CHAPTER VI THE FINAL BREAK I HE day after the serenade speech, Thad Stevens and the revolutionists put all compunctions behind them in their determination to pass their Radical measures over presidential vetoes with a two-thirds vote. Some time before, the Committee on Elections in the House, sitting on the contested seat of the eloquent Voorhees, had voted unanimously, with the exception of Dawes, the chairman, that the orator was entitled to his seat. When the news reached the floor, there was much scurrying about among the Radicals and no little storming on the part of Stevens. The committee had acted? No matter, it could act again; and in the second action all the Republican members voted, under the lash, to unseat the supporter of Johnson. When the report was submitted, Voorhees took the floor, stated the facts, and on Dawes's bold denial, asked him directly if the committee had not on a specified date voted unanimously in his favor. Dawes sanctimoniously pleaded the secrecy of the committee room amidst general merriment, and Ingersoll, Republican, demanded the truth before the putting of the question. Banks solemnly dwelt on the awfulness of a disclosure of committee deliberations, and after Ingersoll had vainly asked for the minutes of the meeting, Voorhees rose to quote Stevens's comment that 'one vote may prove of great value here,' and to charge that in disregard of the evidence he was to be denied his seat in the interest of a two-thirds vote to deal with Johnson's vetoes. A bit perturbed, Dawes again rose to explain what had happened in a statement violative of the truth, when Marshall, a member of the committee, disgusted at the mockery, declared that Voorhees had stated the original action of the committee with absolute accuracy. The roll was called, and, with Ingersoll excepted, the Republicans voted to unseat the premier orator of the Democrats.1 It was the first of many crimes to be committed. Meeting Stevens on the floor, Voorhees took him to task, half in jest, half in earnest. 'Oh, no,' said Stevens, shaking his head waggishly, 'your case was good enough, but it was that twothirds vote that killed you- that fatal two-thirds' — and, with a peculiar chuckle, he turned and hobbled off. Whatever his faults, there was no pious pretense in Thaddeus Stevens. II A little before, Trumbull had introduced his Civil Rights Bill, providing against discrimination in civil rights or immunities on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, and the debate had turned upon the constitutional power of Congress to pass laws for the ordinary administration of justice in the States. Adopting the machinery of the Fugitive Slave Law, the last clause authorized the use of the land and naval forces in the enforcement of the act. Senator Hendricks, leading the attack, chided the Republicans for adopting the features of the Fugitive Slave Law, giving the marshals the right to summon whomever they saw fit to assist in its execution. Trumbull and others rather gloated over the turning of the tables. The Opposition was especially hostile to the use of the land and naval forces. "This bill is a wasp,' said Hendricks, moving to strike out the last section with this provision. 'Its sting is in its tail.' In the House the frail, bearded statesman Michael Kerr, made the most powerful speech in opposition. Its passage was a foregone conclusion. It was the claim of Trumbull that he had consulted Johnson in an effort to meet his views in the framing of the measure, and, in the absence of contradictory evidence, this must be accepted as the truth. But it was never the intention of Johnson to approve the bill. On the morning of the delivery of the veto, he laid his Message before the Cabinet. Stanton urged him to sign.3 The next afternoon the veto was read in the Senate to a full chamber, with the galleries packed. 'Feeble as it was villainous, and we hope to override it,' wrote Julian in his diary.1 6 'In all our history,' ran the message, ... no such system as 1 Congressional Globe, February 23, 1866. 2 Callender, 155. MS. Diary, March 28, 1866. Welles, 11, 464. that contemplated by the details of this bill has ever before been proposed or adopted. They establish for the security of the colored race safeguards which go infinitely beyond any that the General Government has ever provided for the white race. In fact, the distinction of race and color is, by the bill, made to operate in favor of the colored and against the white race. They interfere with the municipal regulations of the States, with the reiations existing exclusively between a State and its citizens, or between inhabitants of the same State an absorption and assumption of power by the General Government which, if acquiesced in, must sap and destroy our federative system of limited powers, and break down the barriers which preserve the rights of the States. It is another step, or rather stride, to centralization and the concentration of all legislative power in the National Government.' In anticipation of such a veto, the Senate, after the passage of the bill, had unseated Senator Stockton, Democrat, of New Jersey, on a technicality of the most contemptible character. This crime was committed under the party lash. Trumbull had reported Stockton entitled to his seat, and the committee, with one exception, had been unanimous. But moral scruples had been conveniently shed, and when the vote on the report sustained it with a majority of one, Senator Morrill, who was paired with a sick Senator, promptly dishonored his pair and voted, to create a tie. At this, Stockton, who had not voted, cast a vote for the report. The next day, Charles Sumner, whose moral sense was never keen where his prejudices were concerned, moved a reconsideration because of Stockton's vote and the motion carried. With a new vote impending, the sick Wright of New Jersey, whose pair with Morrill had been so shockingly dishonored, wired a request for a postponement until he could arrive on the morrow. The request was refused. Stewart of Nevada, who had voted for the report before, dodged, the Jersey Senator was thrown out, and a disgraceful act consummated. That it was a brazenly partisan performance was not doubted at the time. Julian referred to it as the 'gratifying vote ousting Senator Stockton'; and two days later, we find Thad Stevens wiring his Radical friend James 1 MS. Diary, March 28, 1866. M. Scovil in the New Jersey Legislature, 'By all means hurry up your election... give us no conservative... a Radical like yourself or nothing,' because 'a copperhead is better than a twaddler.' 1 Welles was disgusted with Sumner, Fessenden, and Morrill for their part in ‘a high-handed, partisan proceeding.' 2 The revolution was hurrying on. III Even after stooping thus, the Radicals were not at all certain they could override the veto. The death of the venerable Senator Foote offered an excuse to postpone the test of strength and thus give time to whip the scrupulous into line. 'It is very sad that we should be tried this way,' wrote Sumner in martyr mood to the Duchess of Argyll. In the midst of the cracking of the whips, the funeral of Foote brought all the contestants together in the Senate Chamber, for Johnson joined in paying tribute. In the interval the excitement in streets, lobbies, and hotels was electric. Wild talk was heard of overthrowing the Government, and Johnson concentrated all his energies and resources on the struggle. Mrs. Clay, calling repeatedly, was met with hastily scrawled cards from the President. 'It will be impossible for me to see you until too late. I am pressed to death.' 'There is a committee here in consultation; I cannot tell what time they will leave.' It was at that time that Mrs. Clay wrote her father that Johnson 'will fall, if fall he must, battling.' His fine fighting spirit had won her over, and she turned to diversions, visiting the studio of Vinnie Ream, then in vogue, with Voorhees.5 Even with the beginning of the debate, no one was ready for the test. Stevens was interesting himself in postponing action until Foote's successor, hurriedly named, could arrive. The next day postponement was pressed by Administration supporters because of the serious illness of Wright and Dixon. The day before, Dixon had ridden out to gather strength for the ordeal. When Hendricks pleaded for a postponement because Wright's physician had warned that it would be dangerous for him to appear, and Trumbull, with characteristic decency, had agreed, Ben Wade objected. 1 Lancaster Intelligencer, April 13, 1866. 3 Pierce, IV, 276. 2 Welles, 11, 464-65. 4 Welles, 11, 466. 5 Mrs. Clay, 369. |