February 13th, the subject being still before the Senate, Mr. Sumner offered the proviso of which he had already given notice at the close of his first remarks; but, after debate, he withdrew it at the request of Mr. Wilson, who, seeing the opposition to the joint resolution, proposed to abandon all that part making it retroactive. In withdrawing it, Mr. Sumner again vindicated it, saying, in conclusion: “I am unwilling to withdraw the proposition. I shall do it, if my colleague desires it. At any rate, I should rather, for my own satisfaction, have a vote upon it.”
In the debate that ensued, Mr. Reverdy Johnson said: “If the Governor of Massachusetts has made a promise which the law did not authorize, if he has created, as between the Massachusetts soldiers and the Governor of Massachusetts, an obligation which ought to be redeemed, let Massachusetts redeem it.” “They have passed a law to redeem it,” said Mr. Fessenden, “but these regiments refuse to receive it from Massachusetts.”
Mr. Wilson moved to insert words making the resolution applicable only “from and after the first day of January, 1864,” which was agreed to. After debate, Mr. Sumner again moved his proviso, which was lost,—Yeas 16, Nays 21. Other amendments were moved, and the debate continued for days.
February 23d, Mr. Davis moved as a substitute three resolutions,—that all negroes and mulattoes, by whatever term designated, in the military service of the United States, be discharged and disarmed, and also providing for payment to loyal owners on account of slaves taken into the service. Lost,—Yeas 7, Nays 30.
Mr. Collamer, of Vermont, having moved an amendment providing for a certain class of cases, Mr. Sumner, February 25th, brought forward his amendment in the following terms:—
“Provided, also, That all persons whose papers of enlistment shall show that they were enlisted under the Act of Congress of July, 1861, shall receive from the time of their enlistment the pay promised by that statute.”
In proposing this again, he said: “I believe, if any persons have enlisted in the national service, and, through any ambiguity or misinterpretation of legislation, their rights have been drawn in question, it belongs to Congress, as guardian and conservator of the rights of every citizen, to see that they have the proper remedy.” The amendment was adopted,—Yeas 19, Nays 18.
February 29th, Mr. Fessenden addressed the Senate in explanation of his position. He had been from the beginning in favor of placing colored soldiers on the same footing as white; but he objected to the attempt to provide for exceptional cases on this general bill, and he asked, “whether we should have had such an uproar throughout the country, if this amendment had been in regard to three or four or more white regiments, to go back and pay them an additional sum from the time of their enlistment, and the principle had been objected to.”
Mr. Sumner, in reply, reviewed the case, and in conclusion said:—