“In pursuance of the law passed in July, 1861, calling for volunteers.”
Such was the understanding. By this lure you won these men to the field of sacrifice.
I have already said too much, but before I sit down I cannot forget that the Senator from Indiana, in his impetuous movement, brushed against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I do not remember his precise words, nor do I care to remember them. But he more than intimated that there was on the part of this State something else than a patriotic motive in pressing this obligation. I think he said this whole effort is to save the payment of this extra money. Does not the Senator know that Massachusetts has already provided for the payment of this sum, so far as its own two regiments are concerned, and that those regiments have refused to receive it? These colored troops declare that they were enlisted as soldiers of the United States, and as such are entitled to the pay of soldiers of the United States from the Government of the United States. If it be wrong to maintain their claim, then is Massachusetts wrong, then am I wrong. If the claim is maintained earnestly, it is because, both in law and in sentiment, and on every ground of policy or expediency, it commends itself to those who represent Massachusetts. And now, since this State has been called in question, I shall not content myself with merely giving my own opinions and arguments, but I ask you to listen to her honored Governor.
In an official communication to the Legislature of Massachusetts, Governor Andrew has discussed this whole question with his accustomed lucidity and thoroughness. Here is something of what he says.
“To my own mind, the right of these men, under the existing statutes, to the lawful pay and allowances of volunteers is demonstrably clear. But if it is doubtful, it is agreed, I believe, in all quarters, that it will be the duty and the pleasure of Congress to embrace an early opportunity to prevent by positive legislation the continuance of that doubt. Meantime I must embrace the earliest occasion to invoke the Legislature of Massachusetts to render justice to the men of these regiments beyond the possibility of a doubt, by the appropriation of the needful means out of our own treasury until the National Congress or the Executive Department shall correct the error.”[305]
The Governor, after considering some details of the argument, proceeds as follows.
“I think there can be no proposition of law more clear than this, namely, that colored men are competent to be enlisted into the regular army of the United States, into the volunteer army of the United States, into the navy of the United States, and to be employed in any arm of either service.
“The Military Enlistment Law of 1814 required only that the recruit shall be a ‘free, effective, able-bodied man, between the ages of eighteen and fifty years.’ (See Act of December 10, 1814.) It did not require a man to be under forty-five, nor a citizen, nor white, in which three respects it differs from the old Militia Act. The Naval Act of 1813 is not less clear.”[306]
Such is the statement of the Governor on this question in point of law. At the time these regiments were mustered into the service he believed that he was acting legally under the statutes of the United States. He so instructed these men; and these men naturally believed him, and gave themselves, generously, nobly, beautifully, to the public service. Will the country now disown them? Will the country now fasten a ban upon them, and lead them to say in their hearts that they have been duped?