tertain the same views with the Senator from New York [Mr. Seward], then I might content myself with the expression of regret that they had occurred. But I do not do so, and therefore I have no such regret to express. For an outrage so flagrant, committed on the rights of a Slate, I seek no apology, and I will fancy no palliation or excuse, because it might give encouragement to future aggressions which would lead to the destruction of the rights of States, and of the Confederacy itself.
Under these circumstances I am bound at once to meet the occasion. By what authority, I ask, and under what sanction of constitutional law, has the Executive of the United States authorized a subordinate officer, within the limits of a sovereign State, to convoke the citizens by military authority to form a constitution within the limits of that State, and to present it to this body, at a time too, of all others, when such a course was most calculated to produce unwholesome and unpleasant effects upon the Union? And for what? To effectuate a plan which has been projected by the Executive for the carrying out of measures endeared to him, because of his claims to their paternity. Sir, this is no apology to a sovereign State for an outrage committed upon her rights; no palliation for offenses against the Constitution; nor will it be received as such by the American people. I know our correctives, and recourse to impeachment is one of them. But when was a culprit brought to condign punishment by impeachment? It is but a solemn farce, and furnishes no effectual remedy. Then, if a subaltern officer were arrested, could he be punished for an offense perpetrated in obedience to the order of his superior officer? No, sir, martial law has wisely shielded him, and though arraigned, he can not be punished if he has the warrant of his superior for what he has done. It is the more necessary, then, to ascertain whether this officer [Brevet Colonel Monroe] acted under the authority of his superior; and, if he has, severe reprobation should be visited upon the offender, and not only upon the inferior executive officer, who only executes the commands of his superior.
Sir, there has been an unfortunate prejudice entertained on the part of the Executive, whether as Commanding General in the field, or as Chief Executive of the Nation, against the citizens of the State which I have the honor, in part, to represent.
The people of that State have been unwarrantably assailed, traduced, and defamed by the present Executive of the Nation, when a General in the field. If I were not fully sustained by incontestable authority, I would scorn to impute to any high functionary of this Government aught that was unworthy of his station, or the high position which he occupies; but I am fully sustained in every word I say, as I will show by reference to testimony stronger than the mere assertion of a political opponent, that will carry conviction to the mind of every candid man who is disposed to canvass or discuss truth when it is presented to him.
On the 29th of March, previous to the war with Mexico, when General Taylor occupied a position on the banks of the Rio Grande, as commander of the army of occupation, before one blow was struck, what does the General say in reference to the Texans, not one of whom, up to that hour, had ever been placed under his command, that I am aware of, and not a solitary corps was then ranged under his banner, and yet what does he say of them? In reference to the critical position of the army, as then supposed, he said, "Under this state of things I must again urgently call your attention to the necessity of speedily sending recruits to this
