South, and the South to the North, and we shall not have invidious doctrines preached to stir up bad feelings in either section. I know that in my own State, and in the other Southern States, the men who do not own slaves are among the first to take care of the institution. They will submit to no encroachment from abroad, no interference from other sections.

“I have said, Mr. President, much more than I intended to say, and, I fear, in rather a desultory manner, but I hope I have made myself understood. I heard that some gentleman was going to offer an amendment to this bill, providing that the Government should furnish every man with a slave. So far as I am concerned, if it suited him, and his inclination led him that way, I wish to God every head of a family in the United States had one to take the drudgery and menial service off his family. I would have no objection to that; but this intimation was intended as a slur upon my proposition. I want that to be determined by the people of the respective States, and not by the Congress of the United States. I do not want this body to interfere by inuendo or by amendment, prescribing that the people shall have this or the other. I desire to leave that to be determined by the people of the respective States, and not by the Congress of the United States.

"I hope, Mr. President, that this bill will be passed. I think it involves the very first principles of the Government; it is founded upon statesmanship, humanity, philanthropy, and even upon Christianity itself. I know the argument has been made, why permit one portion of the people to go and take some of this land and not another? The law is in general

terms; it places it in the power of every man who will go, to take a portion of the land. The Senator from Alabama suggests to me that a person, in order to get the benefit of this bill, must prove that he is not the owner of other land. An amendment was yesterday inserted in the bill striking out that provision. Then it places all on an equality to go and take. Why should this not be done? It was conceded yesterday that the land was owned by the people. There are over three million heads of families in the United States; and if every man who is the head of a family were to take a quarter-section of public land, there would still be nearly four million quarter-sections left. If some people go and take quarter-sections, it does not interfere with the rights of others, for he who goes takes only a part of that which is his, and takes nothing that belongs to anybody else. The domain belongs to the whole people; the equity is in the great mass of the people; the Government holds the fee and passes the title, but the beneficial interest is in the people. There are, as I have said, two quarter-sections of land for every head of a family in the United States, and we merely propose to permit a head of a family to take one-half of that which belongs to him.

"I believe the passage of this bill will strengthen the bonds of the Union. It will give us a better voting population, and just in proportion as men become interested in property, they will become reconciled to all the institutions of property in the country, in whatever shape they may exist. Take the institution of slavery, for instance: would you rather trust it to the mercies of a people liable to be ruled by the mobs

of which my honorable friend from South Carolina spoke, or would you prefer an honest set of landholders? Which would be the most reliable? Which would guarantee the greatest security to our institutions, when they come to the test of the ballot-box?

“Mr. President, I hope the Senate will pass this bill. I think it will be the beginning of a new state of things-a new era.

"So far as I am concerned-I say it not in any spirit of boasting or egotism-if this bill were passed, and the system it inaugurates carried out, of granting a reasonable quantity of land for a man's family, and looking far into the future I could see resulting from it a stable, an industrious, a hardy, a Christian, a philanthropic community, I should feel that the great object of my little mission was fulfilled. All that I desire is the honor and the credit of being one of the American Congress to consummate and to carry out this great scheme, that is to elevate our race and to make our institutions more permanent. I want no reputation, as some have insinuated. You may talk about Jacobinism, Red Republicanism, and so on. I pass by such insinuations as the idle wind, which I regard not.

"I know the motives that prompt me to action. I can go back to that period in my own history when I could not say that I had a home. This being so, when I cast my eyes from one extreme of the United States to the other, and behold the great number that are homeless, I feel for them. I believe this bill would put them in possession of homes; and I want to see them realizing that sweet conception when each man can proclaim, 'I have a home; an abiding-place for

my wife and for my children; I am not the tenant of another; I am my own ruler; and I will move according to my own will, and not at the dictation of another.' Yes, Mr. President, if I should never be heard of again on the surface of God's habitable globe, the proud satisfaction of having contributed my little aid to the consummation of this great measure is all the reward I desire.

"The people need friends. They have a great deal to bear. They make all; they do all; but how little they participate in the legislation of the country! All, or nearly all, of our legislation is for corporations, for monopolies, for classes, and individuals; but the great mass who produce while we consume are little cared for; their rights and interests are neglected and overlooked. Let us, as patriots, as statesmen, let us, as Christians, consummate this great measure, which will exert an influence throughout the civilized world in fulfilling our destiny. I thank the Senate for their attention."

CHAPTER III.

STATE OF THE UNION.

Two distinguishing qualities of President Johnson's mind are firmness and independence. Convinced of the correctness of his opinions, he never shrinks from their natural and logical consequences. Opposed from the very outset of his career to the doctrine of the right of a State to withdraw at pleasure from the Federal Union, when the great and eventful crisis came he was ready to meet it with dauntless courage and unfaltering faith. He broke from old ties of personal and political associations without a moment's hesitation, and threw himself into the fight. "to do or die" in defence of the national flag and an undivided country.

In a speech delivered in the Senate the 5th and 6th of February, 1861, after certain States had formally seceded and declared themselves separate and foreign communities, he seemed to rise with the occasion, and to pour forth in a stronger tide the power of his logic and the thunder-roll of his eloquence. This great effort was on the state of the Union, the Senate having