dred thousand black men tend to save the Union? Are they soldiers? We know better; they are not soldiers, and during this war you cannot make them so. I put out of sight the question as to their capacity as a military people, or what they may become by a course of education; but you cannot, in two or three, or even ten, years make efficient soldiers of them. Again, will your white soldiers serve with them? You do not even know what to do with the runaway negroes which infest you and are calling upon you for the bread which they left behind when they fled from their homes and families. You can have some color for feeding them or setting them free; but when you hold out the idea that you mean to make soldiers of them, it is but a delusion, a pretense for abolitionism, a means for placing negroes on an equality with your white soldiers. It will either raise to an equality with white soldiers those whom they regard as an inferior race, or else it will level them down to an equality with negroes. I do not know that I differ with my friend from Massachusetts, Mr. Thomas, as to the principle that this government has a right to the employment of all the force it can command in this hour of exigency and peril. I will not say that this bill, so far as it regards the enrollment of the men liable to military duty, and subjecting them to be called out for military service, does not come within the power of Congress. I will not contest that question with him here, at all events, now. But I do not think that the Constitution intended that Congress should have power to enlist negroes. They were regarded as property, and it was not intended that a man's property should be taken from him. The gentleman says "that they may be employed, if it is necessary to save the republic." He postpones the employment of negro soldiers to the last. I differ with him in this. I believe that that time not only has not come, but that it never can come. It never can (so long as we remain of the proud, free race to which we belong) be expedient to raise an army of negroes in this country. Instead of being a source of power, negroes in your army would be a source of weakness, and their presence would drive men from the field a thousand times more capable of defending the country than they can be made. A negro army unnerves the white man's hand,—the white man's heart. CHAPTER XX. 1863. Edwin M. Stanton to John J. Crittenden-Letter from Henry Gillman-Mr. Crittenden's Personal Appearance and Manner of Public Speaking-A Will found among his Papers-Mr. Crittenden's Death-Resolutions found among Mr. Crittenden's Papers-Notices of his Death-Funeral Honors-Speech of Hon. R. C. Winthrop to the Massachusetts Historical Society-Remarks of Hon. J. F. Bell in Kentucky House of Representatives-Monument erected by the State of Kentucky. DE (Edwin M. Stanton to J. J. Crittenden.) WASHINGTON, May 7, 1863. EAR SIR,-The President and general-in-chief have just returned from the Army of the Potomac. The principal operation of General Hooker failed, but there has been no serious disaster to the organization and efficiency of the army. It is now occupying its former position on the Rappahannock, having crossed the river without any serious loss in the movement. Not more than one-third of General Hooker's army were engaged. General Stoneman's operations have been a brilliant success; a part of his force advanced to within two miles of Richmond, and the enemy's communications have been cut in every direction. The Army of the Potomac will speedily resume offensive operations. EDWIN M. STANTON. (Henry Gillman to J. J. Crittenden.) DETROIT, MICHIGAN, March 21, 1863. DEAR SIR, I have read your noble speech. Such words make you the friend of every true patriot, and every true patriot your friend. (Alas! these degenerate days have made it necessary to use an adjective in conjunction with this once sacred name.) Your powerful language, unincumbered with the glitter of ornament, magnificent in its very simplicity, has cut clear to the core of the subject,-to the sundering of the very bones and marrow. Every lover of his country thanks you from his soul, speaking your name with reverence. While such a voice is heard in our Congress, may we not still cherish the hope that the good God has not utterly forsaken us, and given us over to a reprobate mind; that the counsel of reason will yet be listened to, even in this late day? You but too truly say that Congress has mistaken the disease altogether; that the disease of the public heart is loss of confidence in its representatives. How deeply I feel "it is the abolition element which has destroyed everything; that has clouded the great ideas of nationality,—the pride of the American heart!" When will they accept the remedy? Have they not long enough acted the part of the deaf adder, which heareth not the voice of the charmer, charm he never so wisely? Will a free people submit forever to systematized iniquities which are sapping their very life-blood? God give us patience and courage in these evil times; patience that we may do nothing rashly, and courage lest the hands which have stricken the fetters from the negro fasten upon our wrists. With the blessing of Providence we must leave the heritage of this goodly land unimpaired to our children's children and long generations after. In the far future, when the history of this great struggle shall be written, your name, sir, shall stand foremost among those of that brave, unselfish little band who forgot their own interests in the love of their country and her salvation. Think not that these are the utterances of cant or of adulation: they come from the heart, however feeble in their expression,-and, to one even like you, they may not be altogether purposeless, altogether without a significance and a use. I should consider it a high favor to know of your receiving this as it is meant. Believe me, sir, with profound respect and esteem, Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN, Washington, D. C. It is not possible to give a better idea of Mr. Crittenden's personal appearance than is conveyed by the following extract, from "Our Living Representative Men," by John Savage: In one of the interesting episodes of the famous Kansas-Lecompton debate, of March, 1858, an allusion in the speech of senator Green, of Missouri, brought to his feet the venerable Senator, who occupied a seat immediately next the bar of the chamber, and nearly on the extreme left of the Vice-President's chair. A man of medium height and rather spare figure, his face is strongly marked, years and thoughtful experience completing the original outlines of nature. There is a warm, healthy flush over his features, as though a strong heart con tributed to their sedate enthusiasm, and making a pleasant and picturesque contrast with the white hair that decorates his head. His manner is as marked as his features, disclosing earnestness and pathos, while his matter is presented with a freshness, vigor, and copiousness of language which command attention. But it is when, rising above the sectionalities of debate, he invokes a national inspiration and gives voice to it, that he is peculiarly affecting and effective, evoking from his hearers the tearful solicitude he portrays himself. On the present occasion he speaks of himself, and his words are consequently especially interesting. The eyes of the senators from all sides are inquiringly turned upon him. The full galleries are expectant, and many a political enthusiast, who slept in the lobbies, is thoroughly awakened by the voice of the "old man eloquent." He said, "The senator from Missouri was surprised at his feelings, and intimated that he had had bad schooling." Briefly reviewing the political points made by Senator Green, he said he knew his own defects, but did not like to hear them attributed to the school in which he had been brought up. "If my education is defective, it is on account of some defect in me, and not in the school. The gentleman is a young man and a young senator,-I hope, and wish for him a long life of public usefulness; he may have learned much more than I have ever learned; if so, it only shows the superiority of his capacity, for I am sure he has not been in a better school. Sir, this is the school in which I was taught; I took lessons here when this was a great body; indeed, I learned from your Clays, your Websters, your Calhouns, your Prestons, your Bentons, your Wrights, and such men. I am a poor scholar, I know, not likely to do much credit to the school in which I was taught. It is of but little consequence to the world whether I have learned well or ill: it will soon be of no importance to the country or any individual." This proud yet modest speech creates an interest in the speaker on the part of the strangers who do not know his person or career. They naturally ask who he is, and a dozen voices, with surprise and gratification, reply, "Crittenden, Crittenden, of Kentucky!" He is the oldest senator in the chamber; it is more than forty years since he first entered it in a representative character; he was a senator before Webster, Calhoun, and Benton; long, many years, before Wright and Preston; he was not the pupil, but the contemporary of those men: he learned with, and not, as he modestly says, from them. With the Kansas question Mr. Crittenden's name is inextricably interwoven. He opposed the admission of Kansas under the Topeka Constitution, in 1856; recorded his vote against the repeal of the territorial laws, and was in favor of Senator Toombs's Kansas bill. It was far from being unobjectionable to him; but he regarded it as a peace measure. In March, 1858, in the famous debate in which he occupied so prominent a position, he opposed the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton Constitution. The scene, on this occasion, as well as the views of the distinguished senator, were among the leading topics of the day, and properly belong to the history of the country. It took place on the 17th of March, and the appearance of the Senate-chamber and the pith of the speech were prominently given in the editorial columns of one of the leading journals. That day's doings are among the chief causes which brought Senator Crittenden's name prominently before the people for the Presidency. The article is given below almost entire. "The Senate presented the most brilliant spectacle on the occasion of Senator Crittenden's speech on the topic of the day. We have not seen the galleries so crowded this session. We have not seen so many ladies in them, or such a crowd of public men on the floor of the Senate, or so full an attendance of senators. The editorial gallery was jammed, and we honestly believe, with editors and reporters, which is not always the case. In the ladies' gallery Mrs. Crittenden commanded particular attention, even as her gifted husband was the chief object of attraction in the chamber. Indeed, as truthful chroniclers for some future historian of Congress, we may say that the crowd was of the most intellectual, elegant, and attentive character witnessed this session. Senator Crittenden spoke for two hours and a half with great clearness and force. He thought the consideration of the rights of the people to govern themselves was certainly not inapplicable in the present issue. The President had, with unusual earnestness, urged the acceptance of the Lecompton Constitution. The senator from Kentucky differed from this view, because he did not believe the Constitution had the sanction of the people of Kansas. Whatever the prima facie evidence was, he held that, on examination, it was clear that it was not the voice of the people of Kansas. It was against the overwhelming majority of the people. To the extent of some six thousand votes, it appears to have been sanctioned, but out of these six thousand votes about three thousand were proved to be fictitious and fraudulent. This is verified by the minority reports of the Committee on Territories, and is certified by the authorities appointed by Mr. Calhoun, in Kansas, to inspect the votes. This vote was taken on the 21st of December. Before that vote was taken the legislature, elected in October and convened by acting Governor Stanton, passed an |