Governor Sam Houston opposed secession, and the rebellious state government did not even bother impeaching him for it -- just swore in the Lt. Governor and that was that.
Andrew Jackson Hamilton, the Military Governor of Texas during the Civil War -- now there was another Texan to be proud of!
Some freepers are obviously enjoying dreams of leaving the union tonight given some of the threads.
The Act of 1863 most certainly did officially become law, but the 1861 attempt (mentioned elsewhere) to pass something similar failed. It started as a House Resolution. The Senate amended it to a very different form. I provided the complete text of the compromise version in a prior post from Senate records.
It did get enacted. However the process involved in its passage is more than a bit bothersome. On this Act there is no recorded vote, i.e., no record of Yeas and Nays. It is questionable how Sen. Trumbull was recognized by the chair, and then some senators were unaware a voice vote had occurred. I find the process a bit distasteful. We, as a nation, deserved better.
The following is excerpted from 18 pages of the Congressional Globe (official record). Some of the entries show the time. It appears this thing may have been maneuvered through at something like 4 in the morning.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=063/llcg063.db&recNum=548 The Congressional Globe
March 2, 1963
Page 1459 - 1476
[1459]
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORPUS
Mr. TRUMBULL. I must insist on calling up the report of the committee of conference on the indemnity bill, which as laid aside until seven o'clock....
[1464] Mr. SAULSBURY, (at twelve o'clock, midnight.) I move that the Senate do now adjourn.
[1464] Mr. POWELL. ... Mr. President, this bill admits upon its fact and in its very terms, that the chief officers of this Government have wronged and injured the people; it admits that they have infracted the law and have overthrown the rights of the citizen; for one of the bills that was before the committee of conference -- and this bill is the product of that committee of conference -- was entitled a bill "to indemnify the President."
[1465] Mr. POWELL. ... Would the President require or need any indemnity if he had executed the laws and administered the Government in accordance with the Constitution and laws? He who violates no law infracts no right of the citizen, does no wrong, require no indemnity. ... How can you indemnify a man for an infraction of the law? If he violates the Constitution that he has sworn to support, can you by any legislation heal the wounded conscience? If an officer infracts the constitutional and legal right of the citizen, and thereby makes himself a trespasser, and liable to an action in the courts and to be mulct in damages, can you, by any law that you may pass, so indemnify that magistrate as to prevent the citizen whose rights he has violated from appealing to the courts erected by law, under the Constitution, for redress? I hold that you can do no such thing; you have no power to do it; and if I may be allowed to borrow a simile from the President, I will say that it would have no more force than the Pope's bull against the comet.
What do you mean, sir, by indemnity? Is it closing the courts against a parto who is injured, whose rights have been violated, whose liberties have been stricken down? No, sir, that is not indemnity; but it is ruthlessly taking from the citizen his constitutional rights, which neither Congress nor the Executive can do; for I hold that the Constitution is law to us all; not the Chicago platform, that the President declared on a memorable occasion was a law unto him, but the Constitution is the law to the President, to the Cognress, to the judiciary, and to every man in the Republic. We are entitled to all of its benefits, to all of its privileges, to all of its guarantees; and whenever the citizen is deprived of those privileges, those benefits, those guarantees, that strong shield which it throws around the rights and liberties and property of every citizen, you have a despotism, and not a constitutional Government. ... Yet this bill proposes to indemnify the President for what, sir? For violating the Constitution of his country and for overthrowing its laws.
[1465] Mr. RICHARDSON, (at twenty minutes to one o'clock, a. m.) If the gentleman from Kentucky will give way, I will move that the Senate adjourn.
[1477]
Mr. POWELL. I move that the Senate do now adjourn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Pomeroy in the chair.) The Senator from Kentucky moves that the Senate do now adjourn.
Mr. HARLAN. I think the motion is not in order. The Senator from delaware is upon the floor.
Mr. POWELL. He yielded to me. I submitted the motion at his request.
Mr. HARLAN. The rule says that when a Senator concludes his speech he shall take his seat, and the Senator has not taken his seat.
Mr. POWELL, (to Mr. BAYARD.) Sit down. I now move that the Senate adjourn.
Mr. BAYARD. I yield the floor to the Senator from Kentucky.
The question being put, there was on a division -- ayes 4; noes 18; no quorum voting.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It is not necessary to have a quorum in order to defeat a motion to adjourn.
Mr. POWELL. I have no objection to the honorable Senator's motion; but I do not see how we can proceed to do any business at all without a quorum being present.
Mr. GRIMES. Well, I will withdraw the motion.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I will ask for a recount, or for the yeas and nays, if that is necessary.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion of the Senator from Iowa is withdrawn.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Let us have the yeas and nays on the adjournment.
The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken resulted -- yeas 4; nays 33; as follows:
YEAS -- Messrs. Bayard, Powell, Saulsbury, and Wall -- 4.
NAYS -- Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Cowan, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foster, Grimes, Harding, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Hicks, Howard, Howe, King, Lane of Kansas, Latham, Morrill, Nesmith, Pomeroy, Rice, Sherman, Sumner, Ten Eyek, Trumbull, Wilkinson, Witley, Wilson of Massachusetts, and Wilson of Missouri -- 33
So the Senate refused to adjourn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Pomeroy.) The question is on concurring in the report of the committee of conference. Those in favor on concurring in the report will say "ay;" those opposed "no." The ayes have it. It is a vote. The report is concurred in.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I move that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of House bill No. 599.
Mr. POWELL. I hope the Senate will proceed with this indemnity bill.
The motion of Mr. TRUMBULL was agreed to.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It is a bill relating to the validy of deeds of public squares and lots in the city of Washington.
Mr. POWELL. What has become of the other bill?
Mr. GRIMES. It has passed.
Mr. POWELL. No, it has not passed. I want the yeas and nays on its passage. It is not passed at all.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I believe I am entitled to the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is entitled to the floor.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Did the motion prevail to take up House bill No. 599?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion prevailed.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I ask the Senate to proceed to the consideration of that bill.
Mr. POWELL. I should like to know ----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Illinois yield the floor?
Mr. TRUMBULL. No, sir.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois has the floor.
Mr. BAYARD. I had the floor, and yielded it for the purpose of a motion to adjourn.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator from delaware has not the floor. He gave up the floor, and I was recognized by the Chair.
Mr. BAYARD. Well, sir, the positiveness of manner of the Senator from Illinois cannot determine the question.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I insist that the Senator is out of order. I was recognized by the Chair and called up this bill, and it is now before the Senate.
Mr. BAYARD. Neither the language nor the manner of the honorable Senator can deter me from the assertion of my rights on this floor. I claim the decision of the Chair on the question. I yielded to a motion to adjourn; which is the common practice of the Senate; and if that motion is refused, I am entitled to the floor. I rose for the purpose of addressing the Chair again; and the honorable Senator cannot anticipate my rights by any motion he makes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair did not know for what purpose the Senator yielded the floor.
Mr. POWELL. I announced it distinctly, more than once, that he yielded to a motion to adjourn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, after the vote was taken, recognized the Senator from Illinois as the first Senator on the floor; and the Senator from Illinois is entitled to the floor unless he yields it.
Mr. POWELL. Do I understand the Chair to say that this indemnity bill has passed?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has passed.
Mr. POWELL. By that kind of jockeying?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It passed by a vote of the Senate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I call the Senator from Kentucky to order.
Mr. POWELL. The Senator from Delaware yielded to a motion to adjourn, as was announded distinctly by me, and he was entitled to the floor the moment a vote was taken on that motion.
Mr. SUMNER. I believe the rule of the Senate is positive, if a Senator yields the floor he yields it absolutely. He does not yield it for any particular purpose. He cannot give and take; and he cannot take the floor when he has yielded it.
Mr. BAYARD. I only wish to know whether the Chair decides that the report of the committee of conference has been adopted by the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands that the report has been adopted. The Chair did not know that the Senator from delaware yielded the floow for a motion to adjourn.
Mr. BAYARD. I must appeal from that decision.
Mr. POWELL. Did I not announce distinctly that the Senator from delaware yielded to me to make a motion to adjourn? The Senator from Iowa (Mr. HARLAN) raised a point of order that the Senator from Delaware had not taken his seat.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair did not so understand.
Mr. POWELL. He yielded and took his seat, and I again made the motion. I put the question to the Chair for information. Did I not announce that distinctly?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I call the Senator from Kentucky to order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair did not hear the Senator from Kentucky say that the Senator from Delaware yielded for any particular purpose, no even to adjourn.
Mr. POWELL. I appeal to the Senator from Iowa if that is not the fact.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I believe I am entitled to the floor; and the rule of the Senate is positive that a Senator is not to be interrupted by another Senator while he is entitled to the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is entitled to the floor, unless he yields it.
Mr. POWELL. I desire to ask the Chair ----
Mr. TRUMBULL. If I am entitled to the floor, and the Senator insists on interrupting me, I must ask the Chair to enforce the rule.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is entitled to the floor.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Being upon the floor, I moved to take up House bill No. 599, and I understand that motion to have been put, and to have been carried.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That motion prevailed.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Then I understand that House bill No. 599 is now before the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, sir.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If that be so, I ask the Clerk to read the bill.
Mr. BAYARD. I appealed from the decision of the Chair a few moments ago, and I have a right to do that if there are any rights remaining.
Mr. WALL. There are none.
The Secretary proceeded to read the bill (H.R. No. 599) relating to the validity of deeds of public squares and lots in the city of Washington.
Mr. HOWARD. I move that the Senate do now adjourn.
Mr. RICHARDSON. I move to reconsider the vote by which the conference report on House bill No. 591 was concurred in, or is claimed to ahve been concurred in.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is a motion to adjourn pending, which takes precedence.
Mr. RICHARDSON. I have a right to enter the motion to reconsider.
Mr. GRIMES. I will inquire of the Senator how he voted?
Mr. RICHARDSON. I do not understant that there was any vote upon it.
Mr. GRIMES. Yes, sir; there was a vote upon it. I voted in the affirmative, and the Senator was not here, as I understand, to vote at all.
Mr. RICHARDSON. You assume that all the votes were in the affirmative because the bill was passed without a division, and I have a right to make the motion.
Mr. GRIMES. I do not assume any such thing; I assume that the Senator was not here to vote, and the rules requires that he shall have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. RICHARDSON. I enter the motion and the Senate can decide.
Mr. GRIMES. I call upon the Senator to state whether he voted with the majority. I thin the rule of the Senate requires that a Senator shall vote with the majority in order to establish his right to enter such a motion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Michigan withdraw his motion to adjourn?
Mr. HOWARD. No, sir.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate stands adjourned until eleven o'clock to-morrow morning.
Mr. POWELL. The Chair is mistaken. There was no motion made to meet at eleven o'clock tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct, and the Senate stands adjourned until twelve o'clock to-morrow.
=====
The Alabama-born Hamilton moved from Texas to Lousiana after the rebellion started and then became a general in the U.S. Army before President Lincoln made him governor.
My mention of criminals was in reference to the part of my post which you omitted.
The U.S. Govt had reached an agreement with the Confederate or Florida officials previously, referred to by Capt. Adams as an armistice.
Congress should have been consulted before initiating any action to violate the armistice.
The initial order was issued by the HQ of the Army on March 12, 1861 while Congress was still in session.
=====
(Extract)
Hd. Qrs. of the Army
Washington, March 12th, 1861
Sir:
(C) At the first favorable opportunity, you will land your company, reinforce Fort Pickens, and hold the same till further orders, etc.
By command of Lieut. Gen. Scott.
Signed: E.D. TOWNSEND
Asst. Adjt. Gen.
To: Captain I. Vogdes,
First Artillery, U.S. Army
on board Ship of War Brooklyn,
off Fort Pickens
Pensacola, Fla.
This order was went by U. S. S. Crusader, and received by Captain Vodges, off Pensacola, on March 31, 1861.
=====
Whether one chooses to call the conflict war or by some other name, this order would have inevitably led to combat. Congress was in session and should have been consulted.
From O.R., Vol. II, 354, (Mr. Stephens)
=====
"But the udnerstanding in the city (Washington), at the time of Mr. Douglas' speech, and the time the assurance was given to the Confederate States Commissioners was, that Fort Sumter was to be immediately evacuated.
"This intelligence was telegraphed throughout the country on the 14th of March; the second day after the date of the Confederate States Commissioner' note to Mr. Seward, and the day before the first meeting Mr. Seward had with Judge Campbell. I have little doubt, therefore, that, at that time, Mr. Lincoln had decided to withdraw all United States forces from the limits of the confederate States.
=====
It seems the Congress was deceived at the time they did adjourn on March 28th. Had they known that orders which would initiate combat had already been issued, it is highly unlikely they would have adjourned. They should have been informed that the administration was issuing orders which would initiate combat.