extremely warm, we can adjourn before the usual hour. I have no objection, however, that the motion lie over until to-morrow. The PRESIDENT. If the gentleman wishes it, the motion will be considered in the nature of an order, and will, agreeably to the rules, lie over until to-morrow. The motion was accordingly laid over to be considered in the morning business of to-morrow. Presentation of a Petition. Mr. WRIGHT, of Westford, presented the petition of J. F. Evans and eighteen others, in aid of that of J. W. Le Barnes and others, and it was referred to the Committee on the Bill of Rights. On motion of Mr. WILSON, of Natick, the Convention resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, And resumed the consideration of the Report of the Committee on so much of the Constitution as relates to the Militia, The question being upon the motion of the gentleman for Wilbraham, (Mr. Hallett,) to strike out of the 12th article in the resolve the word "three" and insert "one;" and to strike out after the word "qualified" the following: "But they shall be eligible for re-election, excepting that the adjutant-general shall hold his office for such term as the legislature may prescribe," so that the resolve, as amended, would read :— 12. The several officers hereinbefore named, shall be commissioned by the governor for the term of one year from the date of their commissions, and until their successors shall have been commissioned and qualified. Mr. OLIVER, of Lawrence. In a conversation with the gentleman for Wilbraham, (Mr. Hallett,) after the session this morning, a modification of his amendment was proposed by himself, and upon a suggestion on the part of a member of the Committee, he was induced to waive his objections to that portion of the 12th article which relates to the term of three years. He proposes to alter the 10th article in some respects, and I see no objection to it. The 10th article now reads as follows: 10. The Governor shall appoint the AdjutantGeneral, the Quartermaster-General, and such other General Staff-Officers as shall be provided for by law; and Major-Generals, and BrigadierGenerals, and Commandants of regiments, squadrons, and battalions, shall severally appoint such [June 20th. staff-officers as shall be provided for by law for their respective commands. The gentleman for Wilbraham proposes to insert after the word "appoint," the words "and commissioned for one year or until their successors shall be commissioned and qualified," so that that portion of the article will read :— 10. The Governor shall appoint and commission for one year, or until their successors shall be commissioned and qualified, the Adjutant-General, the Quartermaster-General, and such other General Staff-Officers as shall be provided for by law. At that point a period is to be inserted, and the word "and" changed to "The." The whole resolution, as amended, will then read: 10. The Governor shall appoint and commission for one year, or until their successors shall be commissioned and qualified, the Adjutant-General, the Quartermaster-General, and such other General Staff-Officers as shall be provided for by law. The Major-Generals, and Brigadier-Generals, and Commandants of regiments, squadrons, and battalions, shall severally appoint such StaffOfficers as shall be provided for by law for their respective commands. I am sorry that the gentleman for Wilbraham is not in his place, so that he might offer the amendment himself, but if the amendment now pending shall be voted down, I propose to offer the amendments I have just indicated. The question was taken, and the amendment of the gentleman for Wilbraham was disagreed to. Mr. OLIVER, of Lawrence, then submitted his amendment to the tenth article, as stated above, and the question being taken thereon, it was adopted. Mr. OLIVER. I now move to amend the twelfth resolve by inserting in the first line, after the word "several," the word "elective," so that the first clause of the resolve would read 12. The several elective officers herein before named shall be commissioned by the Governor for the term of three years from the date of their commissions, and until their successors shall have been commissioned and qualified. Sir, a word of explanation in relation to that. It will be seen by this, that the officers will be divided into two classes; one the elective and the other the appointed class. The design of the amendment is to provide that the officers which are elected shall be commissioned for three years; and that the commissions of those who are appointed shall expire when the appointing officer goes out of commission, and after a successor shall be appointed. Monday,] OLIVER - BRADFORD - WILSON - PARSONS - DAVIS. If this amendment shall be adopted, I then desire to move-or, if it be in order, I will move them both in one amendment-to strike out all after the word "qualified." I desire to ask the Chairman whether they can both be moved as one amendment? The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks it will be in order for the gentleman to move to strike out and insert. Mr. OLIVER. Then I move to strike out, at the end of the resolve, the following words: "but they shall be eligible for re-election, excepting that the Adjutant-General shall hold his office for such term as the legislature may prescribe," in addition to the motion I have made to insert. The question was taken upon the motion to strike out and insert, as stated above, and it was agreed to. Mr. BRADFORD, of Essex. I view the scventh article, which I suppose was designed to take the place of the long seventh article in the Constitution as an exceedingly good substitute, comprising, as it does, in four or five lines, what occupied a whole page in the Constitution. But I think the proviso to that article ought to be retained; I move, therefore, to add at the end of the article the following: "Provided, That the said Governor shall not at any time hereafter, by virtue of any power by this Constitution granted, or hereafter to be granted to him by the legislature, to transport any of the inhabitants of this Commonwealth, or oblige them to march out of the limits of the same, without their free and voluntary consent, or the consent of the general court; except so far as may be necessary, to march or transport them by land or water, for the defence of such part of the State to which they cannot otherwise conveniently have access." Mr. WILSON, of Natick. I like the Report of the Committee upon this subject. This seventh article, as reported, is all that is necessary, as it seems to me. I like the change proposed, and I doubt whether the Report of the Committee can be made more perfect. The seventh article in the Constitution is copied from the Charter of 1692. It is a long article; there is very much in it that is entirely superfluous and unnecessary, and I am glad the Committee have made the change. I do not, however, concur in the amendment which my friend from Essex has presented. I do not think there is any danger that the governor will ever undertake to march the militia out of the State, at least, without a sufficient reason for it. It is barely possible that some emergency might arise, such as to justify such an act. I can [June 20th. see, therefore, no necessity for, nor any propriety of putting this proviso into the Constitution. There is nothing similar to it in the Constitution of a single State in the Union. Its existence there has given rise to some embarrassment in the past, and may give rise to more in the future, if it is retained. I hope, therefore, that the seventh article, as reported by the Committee will be sustained by the Committee of the Whole and by the Convention. Suppose the country were in a state of war, and a military force should be drawn up in Rhode Island, within a few miles of the boundary line of Massachusetts, and suppose there were encamped within the limits of the Commonwealth ten thousand militia, would it not be wise for the governor of Massachusetts to march them over the disputed boundary and drive the enemy into the sea? I have no expectation that such an emergency will ever arise, but I can at least see no necessity for this check being inserted in the Constitution. It seems to me entirely unnecessary to insert any proviso of that character. Mr. PARSONS, of Lawrence. I like the Report of the Committee upon this seventh article, but I am opposed to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Essex, (Mr. Bradford). I think it is entirely superfluous, because the substance is embodied in the article itself as reported by the Committee. As I understand that Report, the governor would not have the right to call out the military of the State, and march them into some other State. I do not think he can control the militia for any such purpose. If a rebellion should arise in an adjoining State which it was not in the power of that State to subdue, I do not think it would be the duty of the governor of this Commonwealth to interfere; but on the contrary, it is expressly left in the power of the government of the United States to call out such aid as they may think proper to quell any rebellion which may arise and to enforce the laws of the United States. But there are United States officers who would command in such cases and the whole matter would be left to the United States authorities. Therefore, I think the amendment is wholly unnecessary and uncalled for. The article as reported by the Committee covers the whole ground, and I hope, therefore, that the amendment will not be adopted. Mr. DAVIS, of Fall River. I should like to say one word about the Report of the Committee. I take it for granted that a large majority of the Convention are in favor of sustaining the militia system, and that some provision for it will be inserted in the Constitution. I presume, therefore, that the Report of your Committee is very proper. But it seems to me it is a rather voluminous document. It comprises some fifteen articles. In fact, containing about as many heads as an ancient sermon, although it certainly does not preach modern gospel. For myself, I am, with a very large class of people in the Commonwealth, opposed to any military legislation; but aside from this, I would ask the Convention, a majority of whom are in favor such legislation, whether it is expedient, unless the provisions of the old Constitution should be found radically defective upon this subject, to insert so great a change which must be submitted to the people, and which, should it not be received favorably, might jeopardize the acceptance of the whole labor of the Convention. I am satisfied that a large number of the votes of an entire class of persons, by no means inconsiderable in this Commonwealth, if they are compelled to vote affirmatively upon a military proposition, will be given against the Constitution. They cannot, consistently, be given for such a proposition as this, and it might jeopardize the fate of the whole Constitution. There is no question but the opponents of this Convention, without meaning any disparagement to them, will use all the means in their power to defeat the entire objects for which the Convention was called. They will appeal to the class to which I have referred with great force. They will show to them that this Report was adopted by a Committee the chairman of which, without meaning any disparagement to him, is a passionate and enthusiastic devotee of the military art and spirit; that he even, in his fervor upon this subject, goes beyond the military ardor of the last century, and the earlier part of this, and that of the armed knights-herald of the middle ages. It does really appear to me, without in fact assuming anything like pleasantry upon this subject, if we follow the lead of the gentleman, that we shall have our tilts and tournaments, and we might even have the judicial combats of the middle ages. I therefore am decidedly opposed-not merely as a matter of principle, but as a friend of the general objects of this Convention-to inserting such a mass of distinctive military features in this Constitution. Mr. OLIVER, of Lawrence. It is rather too warm weather, Mr. Chairman, for any reasonable person to presume to occupy the time of the Committee in arguing the general question, as to the necessity of an armed force for the protection of the Commonwealth in any exigency of insurrection, or of domestic violence, or of possible danger from abroad. Nor would I enter upon a comparison of the nineteenth century with the [June 20th. middle ages so far as the history of their military matters is concerned. I should be very willing, and very happy, say on some cool day of autumn, should we happen to adjourn, to talk over the subject of jousts and tournaments, and gallant cavaliers and fair ladies, with the gentleman who last spoke. If this Committee should take a recess until September, it might come off then, with, perhaps, a harmless passage-at-arms, but not now, not on this day of ninety degrees in the shade, not at the present time, the weather is quite too hot. The gentleman says that "the chairman of the Militia Committee, is undoubtedly a very ardent and ambitious military man." On this point, I might appeal, with perfect safety, to my worthy and excellent friend from North Brookfield, (Mr. Walker,) who has frequently done me the favor, (and he knows now what I am thinking of I see, by the bland smile which pervades his countenance,) to read the reports which I had the honor of writing, when I held the office of adjutant-general, to our then excellent commander-in-chief, the gentleman from Pittsfield, (Mr. Briggs,) who is not now in his seat, and to commend them as most admirable peace documents. I appeal to that gentleman for the proof of what I say, and I make use of this fact, in reply to the gentleman upon the other side, when he makes reference to me as an "enthusiastic and ambitious military man." On this point I will define my position, and let me say, in all soberness and truth, that in my judgment, if there be any one curse that has, more than another, cursed the nations of the earth, and kept back the march of civilization and the approach of the coming kingdom of Christ, it is this horrid curse of war; if there be, or has been any greater curse on the face of God's beautiful earth, than those monstrous, non-producing and tax-swelling aggregated bands of idlers, called standing armies, cursing and crushing the nations of the earth, those deadly foes of liberty, whose trade is the butchery of man for sixpence a day, then I have never yet heard of it and never wish to hear of it. These are the notions of one who is spoken of by the gentleman-who I am sure does not know me nor my inner heart-as being "an ardent, enthusiastic and ambitious military man." God forbid, in his great mercy, that the time should ever come, when war and the devastation of war should afflict our good State and our good land. God forbid, that in your day, Mr. Chairman, or in the day of any man in this Convention, or in those of our children to the latest generation, that war, with its ravaging, wasting and desolating ruin, should sweep over the fair land of our birth, leaving that which was "like the garden of Eden before it," but a desert and a desolated wilderness behind it. But if, by any possibility, it should come, then may you and I be equally ready to lay down the poor offering of our lives for the safety and protection of that country, and for the loved ones who make happy its homes. "To every man upon this earth Death cometh, soon or late; For the altars of his country, This is the sentiment of every true lover of his country, and if there be one aspiration of my heart more constant, more steady, and uniform than any other; if there be any one prayer that I breathe more fervently than any other, it is that peace may forever spread her halcyon wings over the land of my birth. I have no such feelings as the gentleman has attributed to me. I never had them, and I pray God I may never have them. Those who have had anything to do with military arrangements, or have really fought on some sternly contested battle-field, are the men to talk about the horrors and ravages of war. They who have suffered and participated in them know them better in their full and terrible reality than those who stay at home and enjoy the peaceful security and comforts of the fireside. Sir, it is among military men, of sober judgment and of feeling heart, and I assure you that there are many such, that the awful responsibility of a resort to arms is most deeply felt. It is they who most severely feel the measureless wickedness of war, when it can by any possibility be avoided. Who suffer more than they who encounter, face to face, the pitiless ravaging of death upon a battlefield? Who suffer more than they, who, leaving behind them all the dear delights of homefathers, mothers, and the endearments of wife and children, those very hearts of their household -leaving all the charms and refinements of social life-all that is lovely and beloved, to encounter the unspoken and unspeakable horrors of war. But, and let this be marked by all who stigmatize military men with the easy finger of scorn, it is not the soldier who makes war. It is the politician. It is the men of the cabinet, who, for a vague point of ambition, or for lust of power, or for territorial aggrandizement, with one dash of the pen, seal the fate of thousands that perish in fight. “Why should the soldier love war? What does he gain by it but death, wounds, pain, disease, premature old age, poverty, and insult?" I beg leave to refer gentlemen who prattle about military men and ambitious war-making he [June 20th. roes, to the remarkable and just rebuke administered by the letter of Gen. Napier to Mr. William Gurney upon this subject. I beg leave to refer them to the testimony of history to the truth of my assertion, when I declare that it is the politicians who make wars, and soldiers that end them. Who made the war with Mexico? Who forced the opium war upon China, "that iron-headed old rats" might smuggle a deadly drug into the confines and against the laws of a nation that desired and designed to keep it out? Who perfected the tyranny that precipitated the war of American Independence? Who are at this moment pushing the soldier forward into the deadly climate of the East, that the associated robbers of the lands of the Indies, may be glutted with more spoil? Answer me these things truly, and you will not say it is the soldier. I wish most earnestly that arms might yield to the white robes of perpetual peace; yet in my poor judgment, it will be unsafe, in the present condition of the world, to be without some force to sustain your laws and reIt is one thing pel invasion, if it should come. to talk about the uselessness of an armed force, and quite another to be without arms in time of need. If such a force had been brought properly, immediately, and effectually into play when, in a neighboring city, an unbridled mob were about to commit such wanton desolation of property, if they had checked, as they would certainly have done, this frantic, and lawless, and yelling mob, in the work of destruction, then your legislature would not have been importuned, year after year, to make reparation and compensation for the injuries done. I might refer to well known acts of violence that have occurred, which the prompt and effectual aid of an armed force has prevented. The presence of arms and of armed men is often the presence of peace. Gentlemen may talk about organizing citizens into an armed police to resist a mob. Suppose you should organize all the able-bodied men into an armed force. You have then to go through with the same process of legislation, same process of organizing, drilling, and training, that you have already applied in the creation and perpetuation of your present military force, and a very clumsy substitute it would be. Which will you have, for you must, in the end, take your choice-a standing army or an armed citizen soldiery? The one is a blessing in its place, and may prove a blessing to the country, while the other is but a curse, and deserves no other name. But we must take our choice, and that is already done. In every State in the Union, with the exception of Iowa and Wisconsin, we have an armed citizen soldiery. And our citizens are very easily inured to the military Monday,] BIRD. [June 20th. vide for calling forth the militia to execute the It is thus perfectly clear, that only the choice art. I venture to say, that there is not to be Mr. BIRD, of Walpole. It is about as much as a man's reputation is worth, to question the propriety of doing everything that can possibly be done, in the organic law or by statute law, to foster and strengthen the military spirit even of Massachusetts in the middle of the 19th century. It is generally understood, that that man who questions the sacredness of the military institutions of this Commonwealth, will have no chance of election by the votes of the people of the Commonwealth. I am willing to take that risk. I have taken little interest in this discussion, because I have regarded the adoption of the Report of the Committee as a foregone conclusion; but I desire to call attention to one point, and it is this. What power have we in Massachusetts, either in constitutional convention or in legislative assembly to meddle at all with this matter of the militia, except so far as is necessary for police purposes? To that question I invite the attention of the legal gentlemen of this Committee. I should like to have that question settled. It is not a quibble on my part, but it is a question upon which I have reflected somewhat carefully for years, and upon which my own mind is perfectly clear; that beyond the merest purposes of police in this Commonwealth, we have nothing whatever to do with "organizing, arming and disciplining" the militia. I believe that we delegated that power to the general government when we accepted the Federal Constitution which declares that Congress shall have power "to pro their being a part of the offensive and defensive The gentleman from Natick, (Mr. Wilson,) I am surprised that any gentleman who calls himself a democrat, or who has taken his first lessons in the doctrines of State Rights, can take such a position; that you are to give the governor a right to order the troops where he pleases, so that every citizen soldier is bound to go, no matter for what cause, no matter for what object, no matter whether for invasion, conquest, pillage or plunder. I am surprised; but why should I be surprised at any concessions to the militia when votes are expected? It is said there have been embarrassments heretofore, growing out of the existence of this proviso in our present Constitution. It may be; but there must be something more than "embarrassments to justify us putting such a power 3 |