Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Download Educational Psychology Theory and Practice 11th Edition Slavin Test Bank all chapters
Download Educational Psychology Theory and Practice 11th Edition Slavin Test Bank all chapters
Download Educational Psychology Theory and Practice 11th Edition Slavin Test Bank all chapters
https://testbankfan.com/product/educational-psychology-theory-
and-practice-10th-edition-slavin-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/ethics-theory-and-practice-11th-
edition-thiroux-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/economics-11th-edition-slavin-
test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/macroeconomics-11th-edition-
slavin-test-bank/
Microeconomics 11th Edition Slavin Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/microeconomics-11th-edition-
slavin-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/health-psychology-theory-
research-and-practice-4th-edition-marks-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/juvenile-delinquency-theory-
practice-and-law-11th-edition-siegel-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/educational-psychology-14th-
edition-woolfolk-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/educational-psychology-13th-
edition-woolfolk-test-bank/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
of the early battles and negotiations with foreign powers. There was
one way in which these advantages could have been supported and
continued. Breckenridge, shrewd and able politician as he was, saw
that the way was to keep Southern Representatives in Congress, at
least as long as Northern sentiment would abide it, and in this way
win victories at the very fountain-head of power. But at the close of
the extra session this view had become unpopular at both ends of the
line, and even Breckenridge abandoned it and sought to hide his
original purpose by immediate service in the Confederate armies.
It will be noted that those who vacated their seats to enter the
Confederacy were afterwards expelled. In this connection a curious
incident can be related, occurring as late as the Senate session of
1882:
The widow of the late Senator Nicholson, of Tennessee, who was in
the Senate when Tennessee seceded, a short time ago sent a petition
to Congress asking that the salary of her late husband, after he
returned to Tennessee, might be paid to her. Mr. Nicholson’s term
would have expired in 1865 had he remained in his seat. He did not
appear at the special session of Congress convened in July, 1861, and
with other Senators from the South was expelled from the Senate on
July 11th of that year. The Senate Committee on Claims, after
examining the case thoroughly, submitted to the Senate an adverse
report. After giving a concise history of the case the committee say:
“We do not deem it proper, after the expiration of twenty years, to
pass special acts of Congress to compensate the senators and
Representatives who seceded in 1861 for their services in the early
part of that year. We recommend that the claim of the petitioner be
disallowed.”
The Sessions of the 37th Congress changed the political course of
many public men. It made the Southern believers in secession still
more vehement; it separated the Southern Unionists from their
former friends, and created a wall of fire between them; it changed
the temper of Northern Abolitionists, in so far as to drive from them
all spirit of faction, all pride of methods, and compelled them to
unite with a republican sentiment which was making sure advances
from the original declaration that slavery should not be extended to
the Territories, to emancipation, and, finally, to the arming of the
slaves. It changed many Northern Democrats, and from the ranks of
these, even in representative positions, the lines of the Republicans
were constantly strengthened on pivotal questions. On the 27th of
July Breckinridge had said in a speech: “When traitors become
numerous enough treason becomes respectable.” Senator Andrew
Johnson, of Tennessee, replied to this, and said: “God being willing,
whether traitors be many or few, as I have hitherto waged war
against traitors and treason, I intend to continue it to the end.” And
yet Johnson had the year before warmly supported Breckinridge in
his presidential campaign.
Among the more conspicuous Republicans and anti-Lecompton
Democrats in this session were Charles Sumner, a man who then
exceeded all others in scholarly attainments and as an orator, though
he was not strong in current debate. Great care and preparation
marked every important effort, but no man’s speeches were more
admired throughout the North, and hated throughout the South,
than those of Charles Sumner. An air of romance surrounded the
man, because he was the first victim of a senatorial outrage, when
beaten by Brooks of South Carolina; but, sneered his political
enemies, “no man more carefully preserved his wounds for
exhibition to a sympathetic world.” He had some minor weaknesses,
which were constantly displayed, and these centred in egotism and
high personal pride—not very popular traits—but no enemy was so
malicious as to deny his greatness.
Fessenden of Maine was one of the great lights of that day. He was
apt, almost beyond example, in debate, and was a recognized leader
of the Republicans until, in the attempt to impeach President
Johnson, he disagreed with the majority of his party and stepped
“down and out.” Yet no one questioned his integrity, and all believed
that his vote was cast on this question in a line with his convictions.
The leading character in the House was Thaddeus Stevens, an
original Abolitionist in sentiment, but a man eminently practical and
shrewd in all his methods.
The chances of politics often carry men into the Presidential Chair,
into Cabinets, and with later and demoralizing frequency into Senate
seats; but chance never makes a Commoner, and Thaddeus Stevens
was throughout the war, and up to the hour of his death, recognized
as the great Commoner of the Northern people. He led in every
House battle, and a more unflinching party leader was never known
to parliamentary bodies. Limp and infirm, he was not liable to
personal assault, even in days when such assaults were common; but
when on one occasion his fiery tongue had so exasperated the
Southerners in Congress as to make them show their knives and
pistols, he stepped out into the aisle, and facing, bid them defiance.
He was a Radical of the Radicals, and constantly contended that the
government—the better to preserve itself—could travel outside of the
Constitution. What cannot be said of any other man in history, can
be said of Thaddeus Stevens. When he lay dead, carried thus from
Washington to his home in Lancaster, with all of his people knowing
that he was dead, he was, on the day following the arrival of his
corpse, and within a few squares of his residence, unanimously
renominated by the Republicans for Congress. If more poetic and
less practical sections or lands than the North had such a hero,
hallowed by such an incident, both the name and the incident would
travel down the ages in song and story.[20]
The “rising” man in the 37th Congress was Schuyler Colfax, of
Indiana, elected Speaker of the 38th, and subsequently Vice-
President. A great parliamentarian, he was gifted with rare
eloquence, and with a kind which won friends without offending
enemies—something too rare to last. In the House were also Justin S.
Morrill, the author of the Tariff Bill which supplied the “sinews of
war,” Henry L. Dawes of Massachusetts, then “the man of Statistics”
and the “watch-dog of the treasury.” Roscoe Conkling was then the
admitted leader of the New York delegation, as he was the admitted
mental superior of any other in subsequent terms in the Senate, up
to the time of his resignation in 1881. Reuben E. Fenton, his factional
opponent, was also there. Ohio was strongly represented in both
parties—Pendleton, Cox and Vallandigham on the side of the
Democrats; Bingham and Ashley on the part of the Republicans.
Illinois showed four prominent anti-Lecompton supporters of the
administration—Douglas in the Senate; Logan, McClernand and
Richardson in the House; while prominent among the Republicans
were Lovejoy (an original Abolitionist), Washburne, a candidate for
the Presidential nomination in 1880—Kellogg and Arnold. John F.
Potter was one of the prominent Wisconsin men, who had won
additional fame by accepting the challenge to duel of Roger A. Pryor
of Virginia, and naming the American rifle as the weapon.
Fortunately the duel did not come off. Pennsylvania had then, as she
still has, Judge Kelley of Philadelphia, chairman of Ways and Means
in the 46th Congress; also Edward McPherson, frequently since
Clerk of the House, temporary President of the Cincinnati
Convention, whose decision overthrew the unit rule, and author of
several valuable political works, some of which we freely quote in this
history. John Hickman, subsequently a Republican, but one of the
earliest of the anti-Lecompton Democrats, was an admitted leader, a
man of rare force and eloquence. So radical did he become that he
refused to support the re-election of Lincoln. He was succeeded by
John M. Broomall, who made several fine speeches in favor of the
constitutional amendments touching slavery and civil rights. Here
also were James Campbell, Hendricks B. Wright, John Covode,
James K. Morehead, and Speaker Grow—the father of the
Homestead Bill, which will be found in Book V., giving the Existing
Political Laws.
At this session Senator Trumbull of Illinois, renewed the agitation
of the slavery question, by reporting from the Judiciary Committee of
which he was Chairman, a bill to confiscate all property and free all
slaves used for insurrectionary purposes.[21] Breckinridge fought the
bill, as indeed he did all bills coming from the Republicans, and said
if passed it would eventuate in “the loosening of all bonds.” Among
the facts stated in support of the measure was this, that the
Confederates had at Bull Run used the negroes and slaves against the
Union army—a statement never well established. The bill passed the
Senate by 33 to 6, and on the 3d of August passed the House, though
several Republicans there voted against it, fearing a too rapid
advance would prejudice the Union cause. Indeed this fear was
entertained by Lincoln when he recommended
COMPENSATED EMANCIPATION
To the President:
Slaves.
Kentucky had 225,490
Maryland 87,188
Virginia 490,887
Delaware 1,798
Missouri 114,965
Tennessee 275,784
C. A. Wickliffe, Ch’n,
Garrett Davis,
R. Wilson,
J. J. Crittenden,
John S. Carlile,
J. W. Crisfield,
J. S. Jackson,
H. Grider,
John S. Phelps,
Francis Thomas,
Chas. B. Calvert,
C. L. Leary,
Edwin H. Webster,
R. Mallory,
Aaron Harding,
James S. Rollins,
J. W. Menzies,
Thomas L. Price,
G. W. Dunlap,
Wm. A. Hall.
Others of the minority, among them Senator Henderson and
Horace Maynard, forwarded separate replies, but all rejecting the
idea of compensated emancipation. Still Lincoln adhered to and
advocated it in his recent annual message sent to Congress, Dec. 1,
1862, from which we take the following paragraphs, which are in
themselves at once curious and interesting:
“We have two million nine hundred and sixty-three thousand
square miles. Europe has three million and eight hundred thousand,
with a population averaging seventy-three and one-third persons to
the square mile. Why may not our country, at some time, average as
many? Is it less fertile? Has it more waste surface, by mountains,
rivers, lakes, deserts, or other causes? Is it inferior to Europe in any
natural advantage? If, then, we are at some time to be as populous as
Europe, how soon? As to when this may be, we can judge by the past
and the present; as to when it will be, if ever, depends much on
whether we maintain the Union. Several of our States are already
above the average of Europe—seventy-three and a third to the square
mile. Massachusetts has 157; Rhode Island, 133; Connecticut, 99;
New York and New Jersey, each, 80. Also two other great states,
Pennsylvania and Ohio, are not far below, the former having 63 and
the latter 59. The states already above the European average, except
New York, have increased in as rapid a ratio, since passing that
point, as ever before; while no one of them is equal to some other
parts of our country in natural capacity for sustaining a dense
population.
“Taking the nation in the aggregate, and we find its population and
ratio of increase, for the several decennial periods, to be as follows:
1870 42,323,341
1880 56,967,216
1890 76,677,872
1900 103,208,415
1910 138,918,526
1920 186,984,335
1930 251,680,914