It is for all everywhere who suffer from tyranny and wrong,--for all everywhere who bend beneath the yoke,--for all everywhere who feel the blight of unjust power; it is for all mankind; it is for God Himself, whose sublime Fatherhood we…

From the beginning I have always held that the Senate erred in the establishment of secrecy, particularly with reference to treaties.

You may argue till doomsday, you may cite authorities without number, but you can add nothing to these two simple requirements, residence and intent.

It is the mind, or the intent to remain, which governs.

The rule is explicit, precise; and here I challenge contradiction.

It is simply the intent to remain, the animus manendi.

I come, then, to the point that we have before us, simply a question of intent.

Now, Sir, allow me to say,--I say it with entire respect,--the confusion in this debate has arisen from confounding the rule of law with the evidence under that rule.

The rule, I say, is precise, that there must be intent.

Allow me to say that words are sometimes acts, and especially if associated with important events.

It is a familiar phrase of law that language enters into what we call the res gestæ; language is welded into the transaction and becomes a part of it.

Words then become things; and when were words more things than when the commanding general in Mississippi distinctly declared his purpose to resign his commission in the Army of the United States and accept a nomination as Senator?

Here was a declaration constituting part of the res gestæ, and in itself an act.

The general rule undoubtedly is, that a party cannot give in evidence his own declarations in his favor, unless they accompany some act, and are a part of the res gestæ.

Now on the authority of this case it seems to me that the declaration of General Ames, accompanied by the acceptance of candidacy as a Senator, is clearly an act.

I hesitated, because it would necessitate the abandonment of my whole military life.

Finally, for personal and public reasons, I decided to become a candidate and leave the Army.

On the report of your own Committee you have explicit evidence of the intent of General Ames to reside in Mississippi; and where intent is enough, you need add nothing to it.

We are to look at the case in its essence, and, if satisfied of the intent, we cannot go further.

It may act according to its conscience on the evidence, without any constraint, except from the rule of law requiring intent.

Thus at every point are we brought back to the single rule of law and the evidence under it,--the rule being that there must be an intent to remain, and the evidence being open to the judgment of the tribunal before which the question is…

Especially must this be the case with the Senate, which will look through all technicalities, all cobwebs, to find the truth.

Nor can the Senate be so unjust to any class of citizens as to say that a military commander may not acquire inhabitancy in a State where he is fixed by military duties, provided he so intends.

Lafayette, with remarkable condensation of phrase, replied, that he was in favor of Louis Philippe, not because, but notwithstanding he was a Bourbon,--“not because, but notwithstanding.” And in this famous saying of the great…

General Ames, soldier, officer, military commander in Mississippi, became an inhabitant thereof, not because, but notwithstanding he was soldier, officer, and military commander.