Then again, in the same strain, at the Cooper Institute, New York, November 27, 1861, after showing Slavery to be the origin and main-spring of the Rebellion, I pleaded for Emancipation, and at the same time first sounded the key-note of Reconciliation:-- “Perversely and pitifully do you postpone that sure period of _reconciliation, not only between the two sections, not only between the men of the North and the men of the South, but, more necessary still, between slave and master_, without which the true tranquillity we all seek cannot be permanently assured. Believe it, _only through such reconciliation_, under sanction of freedom, can you remove all occasions of conflict hereafter.”[200] Thus early was reconciliation associated with my most earnest efforts; nor did I at any moment hesitate in this work. The same spirit was manifest in opposition to perpetuating the memory of victories over fellow-citizens. The question arose on a dispatch of General McClellan, where, after announcing the capture of Williamsburg, he inquired whether he was “authorized to follow the example of other generals, and direct the names of battles to be placed on the colors of regiments.”[201] This being communicated to the Senate, I felt it my duty to move, May 8, 1862, the following resolution:-- “_Resolved_, That in the efforts now making for _the restoration of the Union and the establishment of peace throughout the country_, it is inexpedient that the names of victories obtained over our fellow-citizens should be placed on the regimental colors of the United States.”[202] Here again was anxiety for peace. Mr. Wilson, my colleague, did not agree with me, and he made haste to introduce a counter-resolution;[203] but no further action was had upon it. The usage of civilized nations is against placing on regimental colors the names of victories gained over fellow-countrymen. In France, the most military country of the world, the principle was carefully discarded by King Louis Philippe, when, in preparing the Museum at Versailles, he excluded every picture or image of civil war. Everything to arouse and gratify the patriotic pride of Frenchmen, of all Frenchmen, is there, but nothing to exhibit Frenchmen warring with each other. Then came the bills for Confiscation, which I supported chiefly with a view to Emancipation. While enforcing this object, May 19, 1862, I said:-- “People talk flippantly of the gallows as the certain doom of the Rebels. This is a mistake. For weal or woe, the gallows is out of the question. It is not possible as a punishment for this rebellion.” Then declaring our supreme object to be Peace, I said: