Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume II.

[257] that the alternative of conceded Disunion union or constrained Emancipation might yet be avoided. His first Annual Message¹ cautiously avoided the subject; but proposed a systematic colonization — in some territory to be acquired outside of the present limits of our country — of those Blacks who had already, or might thereafter, become free in consequence of the war. He coolly added:

It might be well to consider, too, whether the free colored people already in the United States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such colonization.

Congress acceded to this, so far as to appropriate $100,000 in aid of the colonization as aforesaid of the freedmen of the District of Columbia; which sum, or most of it, was duly squandered — to the satisfaction of certain speculators, and the intense, protracted misery of a few deluded Blacks, who were taken to a wretched sand-spit, known as Cow Island, on the coast of Hayti, and kept there so long as they could be: and this was the practical finale of the Colonization project.

The XXXVIIth Congress having convened² for its second (or first regular) session, Gen. Wilson, of Mass., gave³ notice in Senate of a bill to punish officers and privates of our armies for arresting, detaining, or delivering persons claimed as fugitive slaves; and Mr. O. Lovejoy, of Ill., simultaneously introduced a bill of like tenor in the House. Mr. Wilson submitted his bill on the 23d; a resolve to the same effect having been submitted by Mr. Summer six days before; as one of like nature was this day laid before the House by Mr. James F Wilson, of Iowa. Mr. Wilson, of Mass., soon reported⁴ his bill; of which he pressed the consideration ten days afterward; but it was resisted with great ingenuity and carnestness by all the Opposition and by a few of the more conservative Administration Senators. Other bills having obtained precedence in the Senate, Mr. F. P. Blair reported⁵ to the House from its Military Committee, an additional Article of War, as follows:

All officers are prohibited from employing any of the forces under their respective commands for the purpose of returning fugitives from service or labor who may have escaped from any persons to whom such service or labor is claimed to be due. Any officer who shall be found guilty by courtmartial of violating this article shall be dismissed from the service.

This bill was strenuously opposed by Messrs. Mallory and Wickliffe, of Kentucky, as also by Mr. Vallandigham, of Ohio, while ably advocated by Mr. Bingham, of Ohio; and passed by a (substantially) party vote: Yeas 83; Nays 44. Having been received by the Senate and referred to its Military Committee, it was duly reported⁶ therefrom by Mr. II. Wilson; vehemently opposed by Messrs. Garret Davis, of Ky., Carlile, of Va., Saulsbury, of Del., and supported by Messrs. Wilson, of Mass., Howard, of Michigan, Sherman, of Ohio, McDougall, of Cal., and Anthony, of R. I., and passed:⁷ Yeas 29; Nays 9--a party vote, save that Mr. McDougall, of Cal., voted Yea. The bill thus enacted was approved by the President, March 13th, 1862.

Gen. Wilson, upon evidence that the above act was inadequate to restrain the negro-catching propensitives of some officers in the service, proposed⁸