tion of the State. We have told them that the Constitution of the United States defines treason, and that definition is, that treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against the General Government of the United States. We have told them that the time would come when the principles of the Constitution and the law defining treason would be maintained. We have told them that the time would come when the judiciary of the Government would be sustained in such a manner that it could define what was treason under the Constitution and the law made in conformity with it, and that when defined, they would ascertain who were the traitors, and who it was that would stretch the hemp they had prepared for us. [Applause.]

Let me

I know that, in reference to myself and others, rewards have been offered, and it has been said that warrants have been issued for our arrest. say to you here to-day, that I am no fugitive, especially no fugitive from justice. [Laughter.] If I were a fugitive, I would be a fugitive from tyranny a fugitive from the reign of terror. But, thank God, the country in which I live, and that division of the State from which I hail, will record a vote of twenty-five thousand against the Secession Ordinance. The county in which I live gave a majority of two thousand and seven against this odious, diabolical, nefarious, hell- born and hellbound doctrine.

SPEECH ON THE WAR FOR THE UNION.

DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JULY 27, 1861.

The Senate having under consideration the joint resolution to approve and confirm certain acts of the President of the United States for suppressing insurrection and rebellion, Mr. JOHNSON said:

MR. PRESIDENT: When I came from my home to the seat of Government, in compliance with the proclamation of the President of the United States calling us together in extra session, it was not my intention to engage in any of the discussions that might transpire in this body; but since the session began, in consequence of the course that things have taken, I feel unwilling to allow the Senate to adjourn without saying a few words in response to many things that have been submitted to the Senate since its session commenced. What little I shall say to-day will be without much method or order. I shall present the suggestions that occur to my mind, and shall endeavor to speak of the condition of the country as it is.

On returning here, we find ourselves, as we were when we adjourned last spring, in the midst of a civil war. That war is now progressing, without

much hope or prospect of a speedy termination. It seems to me, Mr. President, that our Government has reached one of three periods through which all governments must pass. A nation, or a people, have first to pass through a fiery ordeal in obtaining their independence or separation from the government to which they were attached. We passed through such an one in the Revolution; we were seven years in effecting the separation, and in taking our position amongst the nations of the earth as a separate and distinct power. Then, after having succeeded in establishing its independence, and taken its position among the nations of the earth, a nation must show its ability to maintain that position, that separate and distinct independence against other powers, against foreign foes. In 1812, in the history of our Government, this ordeal commenced, and terminated in 1815.

There is still another trial through which a nation must pass. It has to contend against internal foes; against enemies at home; against those who have no confidence in its integrity, or in the institutions that may be established under its organic law. We are in the midst of this third ordeal, and the problem now being solved before the nations of the earth, and before the people of the United States, is, whether we can succeed in maintaining ourselves against the internal foes of the Government; whether we can succeed in putting down traitors and treason, and in establishing the great fact that we have a

Government with sufficient strength to maintain its existence against whatever combination may be presented in opposition to it.

This brings me to a proposition laid down by the Executive in his recent message to the Congress of the United States. In that message the President said,

"This is essentially a people's contest. On the side of the Union it is a struggle for maintaining in the world that form and substance of government whose leading object is to elevate the condition of men; to lift artificial weights from all shoulders; to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all; to afford all an unfettered start, and a fair chance in the race of life. Yielding to partial and temporary departures, from necessity, this is the leading object of the Government for whose existence we contend."

I think the question is fairly and properly stated by the President, that it is a struggle whether the people shall rule; whether the people shall have a government based upon their intelligence, upon their integrity, upon their purity of character, sufficient to govern themselves. I think this is the true issue; and the time has now arrived when the energies of the nation must be put forth, when there must be union and concert among all who agree in man's capability of self-government, in order to demonstrate that great proposition, without regard to former party divisions or prejudices.

Since this discussion commenced, it has been urged in argument, by Senators on one side, that there was a disposition to change the nature and

character of the Government; and that, if we proceeded as we were going, it would result in establishing a dictatorship. It has been said that the whole framework, nature, genius, and character of the Government would be entirely changed; and great apprehensions have been expressed that it would result in a consolidation of the Government or a dictatorship. We find, in the speech delivered by the distinguished Senator from Kentucky1 the other day, the following paragraph, alluding to what will be the effect of the passage of this joint resolution approving the action of the President:

"Here in Washington, in Kentucky, in Missouri, everywhere where the authority of the President extends, in his discretion he will feel himself warranted by the action of Congress upon this resolution to subordinate the civil to the military power; to imprison citizens without warrant of law; to suspend the writ of habeas corpus; to establish martial law; to make seizures and searches without warrant; to suppress the press; to do all those acts which rest in the will and in the authority of a military commander. In my judgment, sir, if we pass it, we are upon the eve of putting, so far as we can, in the hands of the President of the United States the power of a dictator."

Then, in reply to the Senator from Oregon,2 he seems to have great apprehension of a radical change in our form of government. The Senator goes on to say,

"The pregnant question, Mr. President, for us to decide is, whether the Constitution is to be respected in this struggle; whether we are to be called upon to follow the flag over the 1 Mr. Breckinridge. 2 Mr. Baker.