These expressions of sympathy and good-will, overflowing from opposite quarters, are a proper prelude to other utterances, widely different in tone, aroused against Mr. Sumner by the very persistency of his course. Appearing in their proper place, these will be better comprehended from knowing already the other side.
MR. PRESIDENT,--If I can simplify this discussion, I shall feel that I have done something towards establishing the truth. The chief difficulty springs from confusion with regard to different sources of power. This I shall try to remove.
There is a saying, often repeated by statesmen and often recorded by publicists, which embodies the direct object of the war we are now unhappily compelled to wage,--an object sometimes avowed in European wars, and more than once made a watchword in our own country: “Indemnity for the past, and Security for the future.” Such should be our comprehensive aim,--nor more, nor less. Without indemnity for the past, this war will have been waged at our cost; without security for the future, this war will have been waged in vain, treasure and blood will have been lavished for nothing. But indemnity and security are both means to an end, and that end is the National Unity under the Constitution of the United States. It is not enough, if we preserve the Constitution at the expense of the National Unity. Nor is it enough, if we enforce the National Unity at the expense of the Constitution. Both must be maintained. Both will be maintained, if we do not fail to take counsel of that prudent courage which is never so much needed as at a moment like the present.
Two things we seek as means to an end: Indemnity for the past, and Security for the future.
Two things we seek as the end itself: National Unity, under the Constitution of the United States.
In these objects all must concur. But how shall they be best accomplished?
The Constitution and International Law are each involved in this discussion. Even if the question itself were minute, it would be important from such relations. But it concerns vast masses of property, and, what is more than property, it concerns the liberty of men, while it opens for decision the means to be employed in bringing this great war to a close. In every aspect the question is transcendent; nor is it easy to pass upon it without the various lights of _jurisprudence_, of _history_, and of _policy_.