Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 10 (of 20)Sumner, Charles
History
Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 10 (of 20)
Sumner, Charles
Slavery -- United States; Speeches, addresses, etc., American
February 4th, the Senate considered the joint resolution. Mr.
Fessenden, of Maine, “wished to inquire what propriety there is
in our going back and paying them this increase for services
already rendered.” Mr. Wilson thought, “as an act of justice,
the bill should be retrospective,”--that “the gross injustice
done by the country toward these men ought to be corrected.”
Mr. Fessenden was in favor, and had ever been in favor, of
putting colored soldiers on a level with white, but he was
opposed to paying men for services already rendered, unless
the men were promised full pay by orders emanating from the
War Department. Mr. Sumner, after stating that there were two
classes of enlistments, first, under the statute of 1861, and,
secondly, under the statute of 1862, insisted that under the
former statute any person of African descent might be enlisted
and entitled to the same pay as a white soldier. “There was
no limitation in the statute. There was no color there. There
was nothing against the enlistment of colored men under that
statute, except a blind prejudice which we ought to forget.”
He concluded: “I wish to see our colored troops treated like
white troops in every respect. But I would not press this first
principle by any retroactive proposition, unless where the
faith of the Government is committed, and there I would not
hesitate. The Treasury can bear any additional burden better
than the country can bear to do an injustice.”
February 10th, the subject being still under consideration, Mr.
Sumner said:--
MR. PRESIDENT,--I am grateful to the Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
FOSTER] for his admirable argument on this question; and yet it seems
to me, if he will pardon me, that even in point of law he has not
stated the case as strongly in favor of this obligation as it might be
stated. It may be remembered, that, when this discussion was closing,
the other day, I ventured to throw out the remark, that there were
evidently two classes of cases: the first, where enlistments in good
faith were made under the statute of 1861; and the second, where they
were made under the statute of 1862.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account