initial commit of ebook 15393HEADmain

16 files changed, 20580 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/15393-8.txt b/15393-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2311aa3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,6686 @@
+Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4)
+       Studies In American Political History (1897)
+
+Author: Various
+
+Release Date: March 17, 2005 [EBook #15393]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+AMERICAN ELOQUENCE
+
+
+STUDIES IN AMERICAN POLITICAL HISTORY
+
+
+
+Edited with Introduction by Alexander Johnston
+
+Reedited by James Albert Woodburn
+
+
+
+Volume III. (of 4)
+
+V. --THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE (Continued from Vol. II.)
+VI.--SECESSION.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+
+     INTRODUCTION
+
+
+     SALMON PORTLAND CHASE On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, February 3, 1854.
+
+     EDWARD EVERETT On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, February 8, 1854.
+
+     STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, March 3, 1854.
+
+     CHARLES SUMNER On The Crime Against Kansas
+     --United States Senate, May 20, 1856.
+
+     PRESTON S. BROOKS On The Sumner Assault
+     --House Of Representatives, July 14, 1856.
+
+     JUDAH P. BENJAMIN On The Property Doctrine And Slavery In The
+     Territories --United States Senate, March 11, 1858.
+
+     ABRAHAM LINCOLN On The Dred Scott Decision
+     --Springfield, Ills., June 26, 1857.
+
+     ABRAHAM LINCOLN On His Nomination To The United States Senate
+     --At The Republican State Convention, June 16,1858.
+
+     THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
+     DOUGLAS In Reply To Lincoln--Freeport, Ills., August 27, 1858.
+
+     WILLIAM H. SEWARD
+     On The Irrepressible Conflict--Rochester, N. Y., October 25, 1858.
+
+
+VI.-SECESSION.
+
+     JOHN PARKER HALE On Secession; Moderate Republican Opinion
+     --United  States Senate, December 5, 1860.
+
+     ALFRED IVERSON On Secession; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States Senate, December 5, 1860.
+
+     BENJAMIN WADE On Secession, And The State Of The Union; Radical
+     Republican Opinion--United States Senate, December 17, 1860.
+
+     JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN On The Crittenden Compromise; Border State
+     Unionist Opinion--United States Senate, December 18, 1860.
+
+     ROBERT TOOMBS On Secession; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States  Senate, January 7, 1861.
+
+     SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX On Secession; Douglas Democratic Opinion
+     --House Of Representatives, January 14, 1861.
+
+     JEFFERSON DAVIS On Withdrawal From The Union; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States Senate, January 21, 1861.
+
+
+
+LIST OF PORTRAITS
+
+     WILLIAM H. SEWARD -- Frontispiece From a photograph.
+
+     SALMON P. CHASE -- From a daguerreotype, engraved by F. E. JONES.
+
+     EDWARD EVERETT -- From a painting by R. M. STAIGG.
+
+     STEPHEN A. DOUGLASS -- From a steel engraving.
+
+     JEFFERSON DAVIS -- From a photograph.
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION TO THE REVISED VOLUME.
+
+
+The third volume of the American Eloquence is devoted to the
+continuation of the slavery controversy and to the progress of the
+secession movement which culminated in civil war.
+
+To the speeches of the former edition of the volume have been added:
+Everett on the Nebraska bill; Benjamin on the Property Doctrine and
+Slavery in the Territories; Lincoln on the Dred Scott Decision; Wade
+on Secession and the State of the Union; Crittenden on the Crittenden
+Compromise; and Jefferson Davis's notable speech in which he took leave
+of the United State Senate, in January, 1861.
+
+Judged by its political consequences no piece of legislation in American
+history is of greater historical importance than the Kansas-Nebraska
+bill. By that act the Missouri Compromise was repealed and the final
+conflict entered upon with the slave power. In addition to the speeches
+of Douglas and Chase, representing the best word on the opposing sides
+of the famous Nebraska controversy, the new volume includes the notable
+contribution by Edward Everett to the Congressional debates on that
+subject. Besides being an orator of high rank and of literary renown,
+Everett represented a distinct body of political opinion. As a
+conservative Whig he voiced the sentiment of the great body of the
+followers of Webster and Clay who had helped to establish the Compromise
+of 1850 and who wished to leave that settlement undisturbed. The student
+of the Congressional struggles of 1854 will be led by a speech like that
+of Everett to appreciate that moderate and conservative spirit toward
+slavery which would not persist in any anti-slavery action having a
+tendency to disturb the harmony of the Union. That this conservative
+opinion looked upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise as an act of
+aggression in the interest of slavery is indicated by Everett's speech,
+and this gives the speech its historic significance.
+
+Judah P. Benjamin may be said to have been the ablest legal defender of
+slavery in public life during the decade of 1850-60. His speech on
+the right of property in slaves and the right of slavery to national
+protection in the territories was probably the ablest on that side of
+the controversy. Lincoln's speech on the Dred Scott Decision has been
+substituted for one by John C. Breckinridge on the same subject; this
+will serve to bring into his true proportions this great leader of the
+combined anti-slavery forces. No voice, in the beginnings of secession
+and disunion, could better reflect the positive and uncompromising
+Republicanism of the Northwest than that of Wade. The speech from him
+which we have appropriated is in many ways worthy of the attention of
+the historical student.
+
+We may look to Crittenden as the best expositor of the Crittenden
+Compromise, the leading attempt at compromise and conciliation in the
+memorable session of Congress of 1860-61. Crittenden's subject and
+personality add historical prominence to his speech. The Crittenden
+Compromise would probably have been accepted by Southern leaders like
+Davis and Toombs if it had been acceptable to the Republican leaders
+of the North. The failure of that Compromise made disunion and war
+inevitable. Jefferson Davis' memorable farewell to the Senate, following
+the assured failure of compromise, seems a fitting close to the period
+of our history which brings us to the eve of the Civil War.
+
+The introduction of Professor Johnston on "Secession" is retained as
+originally prepared. A study of the speeches, with this introduction
+and the appended notes, will give a fair idea of the political issues
+dividing the country in the important years immediately preceding the
+war. Limitations of space prevent the publication of the full speeches
+from the exhaustive Congressional debates, but in several instances
+where it has seemed especially desirable omissions from the former
+volume have been supplied with the purpose of more fully representing
+the subjects and the speakers. To the reader who is interested in
+historical politics in America these productions of great political
+leaders need no recommendation from the editor.
+
+J. A. W.
+
+
+
+
+SALMON PORTLAND CHASE,
+
+OF OHIO. (BORN 1808, DIED 1873.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL; SENATE,
+
+FEBRUARY 3, 1854.
+
+
+The bill for the organization of the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas
+being under consideration--Mr. CHASE submitted the following amendment:
+
+Strike out from section 14 the words "was superseded by the principles
+of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and;
+so that the clause will read:
+
+"That the Constitution, and all laws of the United States which are not
+locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and effect within the
+said Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except
+the eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri
+into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which is hereby declared
+inoperative."
+
+
+Mr. CHASE said:
+
+Mr. President, I had occasion, a few days ago to expose the utter
+groundlessness of the personal charges made by the Senator from Illinois
+(Mr. Douglas) against myself and the other signers of the Independent
+Democratic Appeal. I now move to strike from this bill a statement
+which I will to-day demonstrate to be without any foundation in fact
+or history. I intend afterward to move to strike out the whole clause
+annulling the Missouri prohibition.
+
+I enter into this debate, Mr. President, in no spirit of personal
+unkindness. The issue is too grave and too momentous for the indulgence
+of such feelings. I see the great question before me, and that question
+only.
+
+Sir, these crowded galleries, these thronged lobbies, this full
+attendance of the Senate, prove the deep, transcendent interest of the
+theme.
+
+A few days only have elapsed since the Congress of the United States
+assembled in this Capitol. Then no agitation seemed to disturb the
+political elements. Two of the great political parties of the country,
+in their national conventions, had announced that slavery agitation was
+at an end, and that henceforth that subject was not to be discussed in
+Congress or out of Congress. The President, in his annual message, had
+referred to this state of opinion, and had declared his fixed purpose to
+maintain, as far as any responsibility attached to him, the quiet of the
+country. Let me read a brief extract from that message:
+
+"It is no part of my purpose to give prominence to any subject which may
+properly be regarded as set at rest by the deliberate judgment of the
+people. But while the present is bright with promise, and the future
+full of demand and inducement for the exercise of active intelligence,
+the past can never be without useful lessons of admonition and
+instruction. If its dangers serve not as beacons, they will evidently
+fail to fulfil the object of a wise design. When the grave shall have
+closed over all those who are now endeavoring to meet the obligations of
+duty, the year 1850 will be recurred to as a period filled with anxious
+apprehension. A successful war had just terminated. Peace brought with
+it a vast augmentation of territory. Disturbing questions arose, bearing
+upon the domestic institutions of one portion of the Confederacy, and
+involving the constitutional rights of the States. But, notwithstanding
+differences of opinion and sentiment, which then existed in relation
+to details and specific provisions, the acquiescence of distinguished
+citizens, whose devotion to the Union can never be doubted, had given
+renewed vigor to our institutions, and restored a sense of repose and
+security to the public mind throughout the Confederacy. That this repose
+is to suffer no shock during my official term, if I have power to avert
+it, those who placed me here may be assured."
+
+The agreement of the two old political parties, thus referred to by the
+Chief Magistrate of the country, was complete, and a large majority of
+the American people seemed to acquiesce in the legislation of which he
+spoke.
+
+A few of us, indeed, doubted the accuracy of these statements, and the
+permanency of this repose. We never believed that the acts of 1850 would
+prove to be a permanent adjustment of the slavery question. We believed
+no permanent adjustment of that question possible except by a return to
+that original policy of the fathers of the Republic, by which slavery
+was restricted within State limits, and freedom, without exception or
+limitation, was intended to be secured to every person outside of State
+limits and under the exclusive jurisdiction of the General Government.
+
+But, sir, we only represented a small, though vigorous and growing,
+party in the country. Our number was small in Congress. By some we were
+regarded as visionaries--by some as factionists; while almost all agreed
+in pronouncing us mistaken.
+
+And so, sir, the country was at peace. As the eye swept the entire
+circumference of the horizon and upward to mid-heaven not a cloud
+appeared; to common observation there was no mist or stain upon the
+clearness of the sky.
+
+But suddenly all is changed. Rattling thunder breaks from the cloudless
+firmament. The storm bursts forth in fury. Warring winds rush into
+conflict.
+
+     "_Eurus, Notusque ruunt, creberque procellis Africus_."
+
+Yes, sir, "_creber procellis Africus_"--the South wind thick with storm.
+And now we find ourselves in the midst of an agitation, the end and
+issue of which no man can foresee.
+
+Now, sir, who is responsible for this renewal of strife and controversy?
+Not we, for we have introduced no question of territorial slavery into
+Congress--not we who are denounced as agitators and factionists. No,
+sir: the quietists and the finalists have become agitators; they who
+told us that all agitation was quieted, and that the resolutions of the
+political conventions put a final period to the discussion of slavery.
+
+This will not escape the observation of the country. It is Slavery that
+renews the strife. It is Slavery that again wants room. It is Slavery,
+with its insatiate demands for more slave territory and more slave
+States.
+
+And what does Slavery ask for now? Why, sir, it demands that a
+time-honored and sacred compact shall be rescinded--a compact which has
+endured through a whole generation--a compact which has been
+universally regarded as inviolable, North and South--a compact, the
+constitutionality of which few have doubted, and by which all have
+consented to abide.
+
+It will not answer to violate such a compact without a pretext. Some
+plausible ground must be discovered or invented for such an act; and
+such a ground is supposed to be found in the doctrine which was advanced
+the other day by the Senator from Illinois, that the compromise acts of
+1850 "superseded "the prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30', in the
+act preparatory for the admission of Missouri. Ay,sir, "superseded" is
+the phrase--"superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850,
+commonly called the compromise measures."
+
+It is against this statement, untrue in fact, and without foundation in
+history, that the amendment which I have proposed is directed.
+
+Sir, this is a novel idea. At the time when these measures were before
+Congress in 1850, when the questions involved in them were discussed
+from day to day, from week to week, and from month to month, in this
+Senate chamber, who ever heard that the Missouri prohibition was to be
+superseded? What man, at what time, in what speech, ever suggested the
+idea that the acts of that year were to affect the Missouri compromise?
+The Senator from Illinois the other day invoked the authority of Henry
+Clay--that departed statesman, in respect to whom, whatever may be the
+differences of political opinion, none question that, among the great
+men of this country, he stood proudly eminent. Did he, in the report
+made by him as the chairman of the Committee of Thirteen, or in any
+speech in support of the compromise acts, or in any conversation in the
+committee, or out of the committee, ever even hint at this doctrine of
+supersedure? Did any supporter or any opponent of the compromise
+acts ever vindicate or condemn them on the ground that the Missouri
+prohibition would be affected by them? Well, sir, the compromise acts
+were passed. They were denounced North, and they were denounced South.
+Did any defender of them at the South ever justify his support of them
+upon the ground that the South had obtained through them the repeal of
+the Missouri prohibition? Did any objector to them at the North ever
+even suggest as a ground of condemnation that that prohibition was swept
+away by them? No, sir! No man, North or South, during the whole of
+the discussion of those acts here, or in that other discussion which
+followed their enactment throughout the country, ever intimated any such
+opinion.
+
+Now, sir, let us come to the last session of Congress. A Nebraska bill
+passed the House and came to the Senate, and was reported from the
+Committee on Territories by the Senator from Illinois, as its chairman.
+Was there any provision in it which even squinted toward this notion of
+repeal by supersedure? Why, sir, Southern gentlemen opposed it on
+the very ground that it left the Territory under the operation of the
+Missouri prohibition. The Senator from Illinois made a speech in defence
+of it. Did he invoke Southern support upon the ground that it superseded
+the Missouri prohibition? Not at all. Was it opposed or vindicated
+by anybody on any such ground? Every Senator knows the contrary. The
+Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison), now the President of this body,
+made a speech upon the bill, in which he distinctly declared that the
+Missouri prohibition was not repealed, and could not be repealed.
+
+I will send this speech to the Secretary, and ask him to read the
+paragraphs marked. The Secretary read as follows:
+
+"I will now state to the Senate the views which induced me to oppose
+this proposition in the early part of this session.
+
+"I had two objections to it. One was that the Indian title in that
+Territory had not been extinguished, or, at least, a very small portion
+of it had been. Another was the Missouri compromise, or, as it is
+commonly called, the slavery restriction. It was my opinion at that
+time--and I am not now very clear on that subject--that the law of
+Congress, when the State of Missouri was admitted into the Union,
+excluding slavery from the Territory of Louisiana north of 36° 30',
+would be enforced in that Territory unless it was specially rescinded,
+and whether that law was in accordance with the Constitution of the
+United States or not, it would do its work, and that work would be to
+preclude slave-holders from going into that Territory. But when I came
+to look into that question, I found that there was no prospect, no
+hope, of a repeal of the Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that
+Territory. Now, sir, I am free to admit, that at this moment, at this
+hour, and for all time to come, I should oppose the organization or
+the settlement of that Territory unless my constituents, and
+the constituents of the whole South--of the slave States of the
+Union,--could go into it upon the same footing, with equal rights and
+equal privileges, carrying that species of property with them as other
+people of this Union. Yes, sir, I acknowledge that that would have
+governed me, but I have no hope that the restriction will ever be
+repealed.
+
+"I have always been of opinion that the first great error committed
+in the political history of this country was the ordinance of 1787,
+rendering the Northwest Territory free territory. The next great error
+was the Missouri compromise. But they are both irremediable. There is no
+remedy for them. We must submit to them. I am prepared to do it. It is
+evident that the Missouri compromise cannot be re-pealed. So far as that
+question is concerned, we might as well agree to the admission of this
+Territory now as next year, or five or ten years hence."--_Congressional
+Globe_, Second Session, 32d Cong., vol. xxvi., page 1113.
+
+That, sir, is the speech of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison),
+whose authority, I think, must go for something upon this question. What
+does he say? "When I came to look into that question"--of the possible
+repeal of the Missouri prohibition--that was the question he was looking
+into--"I found that there was no prospect, no hope, of a repeal of the
+Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that Territory." And yet,
+sir, at that very moment, according to this new doctrine of the Senator
+from Illinois, it had been repealed three years!
+
+Well, the Senator from Missouri said further, that if he thought it
+possible to oppose this restriction successfully, he never would consent
+to the organization of the territory until it was rescinded. But, said
+he, "I acknowledge that I have no hope that the restriction will ever be
+repealed." Then he made some complaint, as other Southern gentlemen have
+frequently done, of the ordinance of 1787, and the Missouri prohibition;
+but went on to say: "They are both irremediable; there is no remedy for
+them; we must submit to them; I am prepared to do it; it is evident that
+the Missouri compromise cannot be repealed."
+
+Now, sir, when was this said? It was on the morning of the 4th of March,
+just before the close of the last session, when that Nebraska bill,
+reported by the Senator from Illinois, which proposed no repeal, and
+suggested no supersedure, was under discussion. I think, sir, that all
+this shows pretty clearly that up to the very close of the last session
+of Congress nobody had ever thought of a repeal by supersedure. Then
+what took place at the commencement of the present session? The Senator
+from Iowa, early in December, introduced a bill for the organization
+of the Territory of Nebraska. I believe it was the same bill which was
+under discussion here at the last session, line for line, word for word.
+If I am wrong, the Senator will correct me.
+
+Did the Senator from Iowa, then, entertain the idea that the Missouri
+prohibition had been superseded? No, sir, neither he nor any other man
+here, so far as could be judged from any discussion, or statement, or
+remark, had received this notion.
+
+Well, on the 4th day of January, the Committee on Territories, through
+their chairman, the Senator from Illinois, made a report on the
+territorial organization of Nebraska; and that report was accompanied by
+a bill. Now, sir, on that 4th day of January, just thirty days ago, did
+the Committee on Territories entertain the opinion that the compromise
+acts of 1850 superseded the Missouri prohibition? If they did, they were
+very careful to keep it to themselves. We will judge the committee by
+their own report. What do they say in that? In the first place they
+describe the character of the controversy, in respect to the Territories
+acquired from Mexico. They say that some believed that a Mexican law
+prohibiting slavery was in force there, while others claimed that the
+Mexican law became inoperative at the moment of acquisition, and that
+slave-holders could take their slaves into the Territory and hold
+them there under the provisions of the Constitution. The Territorial
+Compromise acts, as the committee tell us, steered clear of these
+questions. They simply provided that the States organized out of these
+Territories might come in with or without slavery, as they should elect,
+but did not affect the question whether slaves could or could not be
+introduced before the organization of State governments. That question
+was left entirely to judicial decision.
+
+Well, sir, what did the committee propose to do with the Nebraska
+Territory? In respect to that, as in respect to the Mexican Territory,
+differences of opinion exist in relation to the introduction of slaves.
+There are Southern gentlemen who contend that notwithstanding the
+Missouri prohibition, they can take their slaves into the territory
+covered by it, and hold them there by virtue of the Constitution. On the
+other hand the great majority of the American people, North and South,
+believe the Missouri prohibition to be constitutional and effectual.
+Now, what did the committee pro-pose? Did they propose to repeal the
+prohibition? Did they suggest that it had been superseded? Did they
+advance any idea of that kind? No, sir. This is their language:
+
+"Under this section, as in the case of the Mexican law in New Mexico
+and Utah, it is a disputed point whether slavery is prohibited in the
+Nebraska country by valid enactment. The decision of this question
+involves the constitutional power of Congress to pass laws prescribing
+and regulating the domestic institutions of the various Territories
+of the Union. In the opinion of those eminent statesmen who hold that
+Congress is invested with no rightful authority to legislate upon the
+subject of slavery in the Territories, the eighth section of the act
+preparatory to the admission of Missouri is null and void, while the
+prevailing sentiment in a large portion of the Union sustains the
+doctrine that the Constitution of the United States secures to every
+citizen an inalienable right to move into any of the Territories with
+his property, of whatever kind and description, and to hold and
+enjoy the same under the sanction of law. Your committee do not
+feel themselves called upon to enter into the discussion of these
+controverted questions. They involve the same grave issues which
+produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the fearful struggle
+of 1850."
+
+This language will bear repetition:
+
+"Your committee do not feel themselves called upon to enter into the
+discussion of these controverted questions. They involve the same grave
+issues which produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the
+fearful struggle of 1850."
+
+And they go on to say:
+
+"Congress deemed it wise and prudent to refrain from deciding the
+matters in controversy then, either by affirming or repealing the
+Mexican laws, or by an act declaratory of the true intent of the
+Constitution and the extent of the protection afforded by it to slave
+property in the Territories; so your committee are not prepared now
+to recommend a departure from the course pursued on that memorable
+occasion, either by affirming or repealing the eighth section of
+the Missouri act, or by any act declaratory of the meaning of the
+Constitution in respect to the legal points in dispute."
+
+Mr. President, here are very remarkable facts. The Committee on
+Territories declared that it was not wise, that it was not prudent, that
+it was not right, to renew the old controversy, and to arouse agitation.
+They declared that they would abstain from any recommendation of a
+repeal of the prohibition, or of any provision declaratory of the
+construction of the Constitution in respect to the legal points in
+dispute.
+
+Mr. President, I am not one of those who suppose that the question
+between Mexican law and the slave-holding claims was avoided in the
+Utah and New Mexico Act; nor do I think that the introduction into the
+Nebraska bill of the provisions of those acts in respect to slavery
+would leave the question between the Missouri prohibition and the same
+slave-holding claims entirely unaffected.' I am of a very different
+opinion. But I am dealing now with the report of the Senator from
+Illinois, as chairman of the committee, and I show, beyond all
+controversy, that that report gave no countenance whatever to the
+doctrine of repeal by supersedure.
+
+Well, sir, the bill reported by the committee was printed in the
+Washington Sentinel on Saturday, January 7th. It contained twenty
+sections; no more, no less. It contained no provisions in respect to
+slavery, except those in the Utah and New Mexico bills. It left those
+provisions to speak for themselves. This was in harmony with the report
+of the committee. On the 10th of January--on Tuesday--the act appeared
+again in the Sentinel; but it had grown longer during the interval.
+It appeared now with twenty-one sections. There was a statement in
+the paper that the twenty-first section had been omitted by a clerical
+error.
+
+But, sir, it is a singular fact that this twenty-first section is
+entirely out of harmony with the committee's report. It undertakes to
+determine the effect of the provision in the Utah and New Mexico bills.
+It declares, among other things, that all questions pertaining
+to slavery in the Territories, and in the new States to be formed
+therefrom, are to be left to the decision of the people residing
+therein, through their appropriate representatives. This provision, in
+effect, repealed the Missouri prohibition, which the committee, in their
+report, declared ought not to be done. Is it possible, sir, that this
+was a mere clerical error? May it not be that this twenty-first section
+was the fruit of some Sunday work, between Saturday the 7th, and Tuesday
+the 10th?
+
+But, sir, the addition of this section, it seems, did not help the bill.
+It did not, I suppose, meet the approbation of Southern gentlemen,
+who contended that they have a right to take their slaves into the
+Territories, notwithstanding any prohibition, either by Congress or by a
+Territorial Legislature. I dare say it was found that the votes of these
+gentlemen could not be had for the bill with that clause in it. It was
+not enough that the committee had abandoned their report, and added
+this twenty-first section, in direct contravention of its reasonings and
+principles. The twenty-first section itself must be abandoned, and the
+repeal of the Missouri prohibition placed in a shape which would not
+deny the slave-holding claim.
+
+The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Dixon), on the 16th of January, submitted
+an amendment which came square up to repeal, and to the claim. That
+amendment, probably, produced some fluttering and some consultation. It
+met the views of Southern Senators, and probably determined the shape
+which the bill has finally assumed. Of the various mutations which it
+has undergone, I can hardly be mistaken in attributing the last to the
+amendment of the Senator from Kentucky. That there is no effect without
+a cause, is among our earliest lessons in physical philosophy, and I
+know of no causes which will account for the remarkable changes which
+the bill underwent after the 16th of January, other than that amendment,
+and the determination of Southern Senators to support it, and to
+vote against any provision recognizing the right of any Territorial
+Legislature to prohibit the introduction of slavery.
+
+It was just seven days, Mr. President, after the Senator from Kentucky
+had offered his amendment, that a fresh amendment was reported from the
+Committee on Territories, in the shape of a new bill, enlarged to forty
+sections. This new bill cuts off from the proposed Territory half
+a degree of latitude on the south, and divides the residue into
+two Territories--the southern Territory of Kansas, and the northern
+Territory of Nebraska. It applies to each all the provisions of the
+Utah and New Mexico bills; it rejects entirely the twenty-first
+clerical-error section, and abrogates the Missouri prohibition by the
+very singular provision, which I will read:
+
+"The Constitution and all laws of the United States which are not
+locally inapplicable shall have the same force and effect within the
+said Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except
+the eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri
+into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded by the
+principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise
+measures, and is therefore declared inoperative."
+
+Doubtless, Mr. President, this provision operates as a repeal of the
+prohibition. The Senator from Kentucky was right when he said it was in
+effect the equivalent of his amendment. Those who are willing to break
+up and destroy the old compact of 1820 can vote for this bill with full
+assurance that such will be its effect. But I appeal to them not to
+vote for this supersedure clause. I ask them not to incorporate into
+the legislation of the country a declaration which every one knows to be
+wholly untrue.
+
+I have said that this doctrine of supersedure is new. I have now proved
+that it is a plant of but ten days' growth. It was never seen or heard
+of until the 23d day of January, 1854. It was upon that day that this
+tree of Upas was planted; we already see its poison fruits. * * *
+
+The truth is, that the compromise acts of 1850 were not intended to
+introduce any principles of territorial organization applicable to any
+other Territory except that covered by them. The professed object of
+the friends of the compromise acts was to compose the whole slavery
+agitation. There were various matters of complaint. The non-surrender
+of fugitives from service was one. The existence of slavery and the
+slave-trade here in this District and elsewhere, under the exclusive
+jurisdiction of Congress, was another. The apprehended introduction of
+slavery into the Territories furnished other grounds of controversy.
+The slave States complained of the free States, and the free States
+complained of the slave States. It was supposed by some that this whole
+agitation might be stayed, and finally put at rest by skilfully adjusted
+legislation. So, sir, we had the omnibus bill, and its appendages the
+fugitive-slave bill and the District slave-trade suppression bill.
+To please the North--to please the free States--California was to be
+admitted, and the slave depots here in the District were to be broken
+up. To please the slave States, a stringent fugitive-slave act was to
+be passed, and slavery was to have a chance to get into the new
+Territories. The support of the Senators and Representatives from
+Texas was to be gained by a liberal adjustment of boundary, and by the
+assumption of a large portion of their State debt. The general result
+contemplated was a complete and final adjustment of all questions
+relating to slavery. The acts passed. A number of the friends of the
+acts signed a compact pledging themselves to support no man for any
+office who would in any way renew the agitation. The country was
+required to acquiesce in the settlement as an absolute finality. No man
+concerned in carrying those measures through Congress, and least of all
+the distinguished man whose efforts mainly contributed to their success,
+ever imagined that in the Territorial acts, which formed a part of the
+series, they were planting the germs of a new agitation. Indeed, I have
+proved that one of these acts contained an express stipulation which
+precludes the revival of the agitation in the form in which it is now
+thrust upon the country, without manifest disregard of the provisions of
+those acts themselves.
+
+I have thus proved beyond controversy that the averment of the bill,
+which my amendment proposes to strike out, is untrue. Senators, will you
+unite in a statement which you know to be contradicted by the history of
+the country? Will you incorporate into a public statute an affirmation
+which is contradicted by every event which attended or followed the
+adoption of the compromise acts? Will you here, acting under your high
+responsibility as Senators of the States, assert as a fact, by a solemn
+vote, that which the personal recollection of every Senator who was here
+during the discussion of those compromise acts disproves? I will not
+believe it until I see it. If you wish to break up the time-honored
+compact embodied in the Missouri compromise, transferred into the joint
+resolution for the annexation of Texas, preserved and affirmed by these
+compromise acts themselves, do it openly--do it boldly. Repeal the
+Missouri prohibition. Repeal it by a direct vote. Do not repeal it by
+indirection. Do not "declare" it "inoperative," "because superseded by
+the principles of the legislation of 1850."
+
+Mr. President, three great eras have marked the history of this country
+in respect to slavery. The first may be characterized as the Era of
+ENFRANCHISEMENT. It commenced with the earliest struggles for national
+independence. The spirit which inspired it animated the hearts and
+prompted the efforts of Washington, of Jefferson, of Patrick Henry, of
+Wythe, of Adams, of Jay, of Hamilton, of Morris--in short, of all the
+great men of our early history. All these hoped for, all these labored
+for, all these believed in, the final deliverance of the country
+from the curse of slavery. That spirit burned in the Declaration of
+Independence, and inspired the provisions of the Constitution, and the
+Ordinance of 1787. Under its influence, when in full vigor, State after
+State provided for the emancipation of the slaves within their limits,
+prior to the adoption of the Constitution. Under its feebler influence
+at a later period, and during the administration of Mr. Jefferson, the
+importation of slaves was prohibited into Mississippi and Louisiana, in
+the faint hope that those Territories might finally become free States.
+Gradually that spirit ceased to influence our public councils, and lost
+its control over the American heart and the American policy. Another
+era succeeded, but by such imperceptible gradations that the lines which
+separate the two cannot be traced with absolute precision. The facts of
+the two eras meet and mingle as the currents of confluent streams mix
+so imperceptibly that the observer cannot fix the spot where the meeting
+waters blend.
+
+This second era was the Era of CONSERVATISM. Its great maxim was to
+preserve the existing condition. Men said: Let things remain as they
+are; let slavery stand where it is; exclude it where it is not; refrain
+from disturbing the public quiet by agitation; adjust all difficulties
+that arise, not by the application of principles, but by compromises.
+
+It was during this period that the Senator tells us that slavery was
+maintained in Illinois, both while a Territory and after it became a
+State, in despite of the provisions of the ordinance. It is true, sir,
+that the slaves held in the Illinois country, under the French law,
+were not regarded as absolutely emancipated by the provisions of the
+ordinance. But full effect was given to the ordinance in excluding
+the introduction of slaves, and thus the Territory was preserved
+from eventually becoming a slave State. The few slave-holders in
+the Territory of Indiana, which then included Illinois, succeeded in
+obtaining such an ascendency in its affairs, that repeated applications
+were made not merely by conventions of delegates, but by the Territorial
+Legislature itself, for a suspension of the clause in the ordinance
+prohibiting slavery. These applications were reported upon by John
+Randolph, of Virginia, in the House, and by Mr. Franklin in the Senate.
+Both the reports were against suspension. The grounds stated by Randolph
+are specially worthy of being considered now. They are thus stated in
+the report:
+
+"That the committee deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair
+a provision wisely calculated to promote the happiness and prosperity
+of the Northwestern country, and to give strength and security to that
+extensive frontier. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and
+benevolent restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants of Indiana
+will, at no very distant day, find ample remuneration for a temporary
+privation of labor and of emigration."
+
+Sir, these reports, made in 1803 and 1807, and the action of Congress
+upon them, in conformity with their recommendation, saved Illinois, and
+perhaps Indiana, from becoming slave States. When the people of Illinois
+formed their State constitution, they incorporated into it a section
+providing that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall hereafter
+be introduced into this State. The constitution made provision for the
+continued service of the few persons who were originally held as slaves,
+and then bound to service under the Territorial laws, and for the
+freedom of their children, and thus secured the final extinction of
+slavery. The Senator thinks that this result is not attributable to the
+ordinance. I differ from him. But for the ordinance, I have no doubt
+slavery would have been introduced into Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio.
+It is something to the credit of the Era of Conservatism, uniting its
+influences with those of the expiring Era of Enfranchisement, that it
+maintained the ordinance of 1787 in the Northwest.
+
+The Era of CONSERVATISM passed, also by imperceptible gradations, into
+the Era of SLAVERY PROPAGANDISM. Under the influences of this new spirit
+we opened the whole territory acquired from Mexico, except California,
+to the ingress of slavery. Every foot of it was covered by a Mexican
+prohibition; and yet, by the legislation of 1850, we consented to expose
+it to the introduction of slaves. Some, I believe, have actually been
+carried into Utah and New Mexico. They may be few, perhaps, but a few
+are enough to affect materially the probable character of their future
+governments. Under the evil influences of the same spirit, we are now
+called upon to reverse the original policy of the Republic; to support
+even a solemn compact of the conservative period, and open Nebraska to
+slavery.
+
+Sir, I believe that we are upon the verge of another era. That era will
+be the Era of REACTION. The introduction of this question here, and its
+discussion, will greatly hasten its advent. We, who insist upon the
+denationalization of slavery, and upon the absolute divorce of the
+General Government from all connection with it, will stand with the men
+who favored the compromise acts, and who yet wish to adhere to them,
+in their letter and in their spirit, against the repeal of the Missouri
+prohibition. But you may pass it here. You may send it to the other
+House. It may become a law. But its effect will be to satisfy all
+thinking men that no compromises with slavery will endure, except so
+long as they serve the interests of slavery; and that there is no safe
+and honorable ground for non-slaveholders to stand upon, except that
+of restricting slavery within State limits, and excluding it absolutely
+from the whole sphere of Federal jurisdiction. The old questions between
+political parties are at rest. No great question so thoroughly possesses
+the public mind as this of slavery. This discussion will hasten the
+inevitable reorganization of parties upon the new issues which our
+circumstances suggest. It will light up a fire in the country which may,
+perhaps, consume those who kindle it. * * *
+
+
+
+
+EDWARD EVERETT,
+
+OF MASSACHUSETTS.
+
+(BORN 1794, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 8, 1854
+
+
+I will not take up the time of the Senate by going over the somewhat
+embarrassing and perplexed history of the bill, from its first entry
+into the Senate until the present time. I will take it as it now stands,
+as it is printed on our tables, and with the amendment which was offered
+by the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) yesterday, and which, iI
+suppose, is now printed, and on our tables; and I will state, as briefly
+as I can, the difficulties which I have found in giving my support to
+this bill, either as it stands, or as it will stand when the amendment
+shall be adopted. My chief objections are to the provisions on the
+subject of slavery, and especially to the exception which is contained
+in the 14th section, in the following words:
+
+"Except the 8th section of the act preparatory to the admission of
+Missouri into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded
+by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the
+compromise measures, and is hereby declared inoperative."
+
+On the day before yesterday the chairman of the Committee on Territories
+proposed to change the words "superseded by" to "inconsistent with,"
+as expressing more distinctly all that he meant to convey by that
+impression. Yesterday, however, he brought in an amendment drawn up with
+great skill and care, on notice given the day before, which is to strike
+out the words "which was superseded by the principles of the legislation
+of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and is hereby declared
+inoperative," and to insert in lieu of them the following:
+
+"Which being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by
+Congress with slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by
+the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, is
+hereby declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and
+meaning of this act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or
+State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof
+perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their
+own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, sir, I think, in the first place, that the language of this
+proposed enactment, being obscure, is of somewhat doubtful import, and
+for that reason, unsatisfactory. I should have preferred a little more
+directness. What is the condition of an enactment which is declared by a
+subsequent act of Congress to be "inoperative and void?" Does it remain
+in force? I take it, not. That would be a contradiction in terms, to say
+that an enactment which had been declared by act of Congress inoperative
+and void is still in force. Then, if it is not in force, if it is not
+only inoperative and void, as it is to be declared, but is not in force,
+it is of course repealed. If it is to be repealed, why not say so?
+I think it would have been more direct and more parliamentary to say
+"shall be and is hereby repealed." Then we should know precisely, so far
+as legal and technical terms go, what the amount of this new legislative
+provision is.
+
+If the form is somewhat objectionable, I think the substance is still
+more so. The amendment is to strike out the words "which was superseded
+by," and to insert a provision that the act of 1820 is inconsistent
+with the principle of congressional non-intervention, and is therefore
+inoperative and void. I do not quite understand how much is conveyed
+in this language. The Missouri restriction of 1820, it is said, is
+inconsistent with the principle of the legislation of 1850. If anything
+more is meant by "the principle" of the legislation of 1850, than the
+measures which were adopted at that time in reference to the territories
+of New Mexico and Utah--for I may assume that those are the legislative
+measures referred to--if anything more is meant than that a certain
+measure was adopted, and enacted in reference to those territories, I
+take issue on that point. I do not know that it could be proved that,
+even in reference to those territories, a principle was enacted at all.
+A certain measure, or, if you please, a course of measures, was enacted
+in reference to the Territories of New Mexico and Utah; but I do not
+know that you can call this enacting a principle. It is certainly
+not enacting a principle which is to carry with it a rule for other
+Territories lying in other parts of the country, and in a different
+legal position. As to the principle of non-intervention on the part
+of Congress in the question of slavery, I do not find that, either as
+principle or as measure, it was enacted in those territorial bills of
+1850. I do not, unless I have greatly misread them, find that there is
+anything at all which comes up to that. Every legislative act of those
+territorial governments must come before Congress for allowance or
+disallowance, and under those bills without repealing them, without
+departing from them in the slightest degree, it would be competent for
+Congress to-morrow to pass any law on that subject.
+
+How then can it be said that the principle of non-intervention on the
+part of Congress in the subject of slavery was enacted and established
+by the compromise measures of 1850? But, whether that be so or not, how
+can you find, in a simple measure applying in terms to these individual
+Territories, and to them alone, a rule which is to govern all other
+Territories with a retrospective and with a prospective action? Is
+it not a mere begging of the question to say that those compromise
+measures, adopted in this specific case, amount to such a general rule?
+
+But, let us try it in a parallel case. In the earlier land legislation
+of the United States, it was customary, without exception, when a
+Territory became a State, to require that there should be a stipulation
+in their State constitution that the public lands sold within their
+borders should be exempted from taxation for five years after the sale.
+This, I believe, continued to be the uniform practice down to the year
+1820, when the State of Missouri was admitted. She was admitted under
+the stipulation. If I mistake not, the next State which was admitted
+into the Union--but it is not important whether it was the next or
+not--came in without that stipulation, and they were left free to tax
+the public lands the moment when they were sold. Here was a principle;
+as much a principle as it is contended was established in the Utah and
+New Mexico territorial bill; but did any one suppose that it acted upon
+the other Territories? I believe the whole system is now abolished under
+the operation of general laws, and the influence of that example may
+have led to the change. But, until it was made by legislation, the mere
+fact that public lands sold in Arkansas were immediately subject to
+taxation, could not alter the law in regard to the public lands sold in
+Missouri, or in any other to where they were they were exempt.
+
+There is a case equally analogous to the very matter we are now
+considering--the prohibition or permission of slavery. The ordinance of
+1787 prohibited slavery in the territory northwest of the Ohio. In 1790
+Congress passed an act accepting the cession which the State of North
+Carolina had made of the western part of her territory, with the
+proviso, that in reference to the territory thus ceded Congress should
+pass no laws "tending to the emancipation of the slaves." Here was a
+precisely parallel case. Here was a territory in which, in 1787, slavery
+was prohibited. Here was a territory ceded by North Carolina, which
+became the territory of the United States south of the Ohio, in
+reference to which it was stipulated with North Carolina, that Congress
+should pass no laws tending to the emancipation of slaves. But I believe
+it never occurred to any one that the legislation of 1790 acted back
+upon the ordinance of 1787, or furnished a rule by which any effect
+could be produced upon the state of things existing under that
+ordinance, in the territory to which it applied.
+
+I certainly intend to do the distinguished chairman of the committee
+no injustice; and I am not sure that I fully comprehend his argument in
+this respect; but I think his report sustains the view which I now take
+of the subject: that is, that the legislation of 1850 did not establish
+a principle which was designed to have any such effect as he intimates.
+That report states how matters stood in those new Mexican territories.
+It was alleged on the one hand that by the Mexican _lex loci_ slavery
+was prohibited. On the other hand that was denied, and it was maintained
+that the Constitution of the United States secures to every citizen the
+right to go there and take with him any property recognized as such
+by any of the States of the Union. The report considers that a similar
+state of things now exists in Nebraska--that the validity of the eighth
+section of the Missouri Act, by which slavery is prohibited in that
+Territory, is doubtful, and that it is maintained by many distinguished
+statesmen that Congress has no power to legislate on the subject.
+Then, in this state of the controversy, the report maintains that
+the legislation of Congress in 1850 did not undertake to decide these
+questions. Surely, if they did not undertake to decide them, they could
+not settle the principle which is at stake in them; and, unless they did
+decide them, the measures then adopted must be considered as specific
+measures, relating only to those case and not establishing a principle
+of general operation. This seems to me to be as direct and conclusive as
+anything can be.
+
+At all events, these are not impressions which are put forth by me under
+the exigencies of the present debate or of the present occasion. I have
+never entertained any other opinion. I was called upon for a particular
+purpose, of a literary nature, to which I will presently allude more
+distinctly, shortly after the close of the session of 1850, to draw up a
+narrative of the events that had taken place relative to the passage of
+the compromise measures of that year. I had not, I own, the best sources
+of information. I was not a member of Congress, and had not heard
+the debates, which is almost indispensable to come to a thorough
+understanding of questions of this nature; but I inquired of those who
+had heard them, I read the reports, and I had an opportunity of personal
+intercourse with some who had taken a prominent part in all those
+measures. I never formed the idea--I never received the intimation until
+I got it from this report of the committee--that those measures were
+intended to have any effect beyond the Territories of Utah and New
+Mexico, for which they were enacted. I cannot but think that if it
+was intended that they should have any larger application, if it was
+intended that they should furnish the rule which is now supposed, it
+would have been a fact as notorious as the light of day.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+And now, sir, having alluded to the speech of Mr. Webster, of the 7th
+March, 1850, allow me to dwell upon it for a moment. I was in a position
+the next year--having been requested by that great and lamented man to
+superintend the publication of his works--to know very particularly the
+comparative estimate which he placed upon his own parliamentary efforts.
+He told me more than once that he thought his second speech on Foot's
+resolution was that in which he had best succeeded as a senatorial
+effort, and as a specimen of parliamentary dialectics; but he added,
+with an emotion which even he was unable to suppress, "The speech of the
+7th of March, 1850, much as I have been reviled for it, when I am dead,
+will be allowed to be of the greatest importance to the country." Sir,
+he took the greatest interest in that speech. He wished it to go forth
+with a specific title; and, after considerable deliberation, it was
+called, by his own direction, "A Speech for the Constitution and the
+Union." He inscribed it to the people of Massachusetts, in a dedication
+of the most emphatic tenderness, and he prefixed to it that motto--which
+you all remember--from Livy, the most appropriate and felicitous
+quotation, perhaps, that was ever made: "True things rather than
+pleasant things"--_Vera progratis:_ and with that he sent it forth to
+the world.
+
+In that speech his gigantic intellect brought together all that it
+could gather from the law of nature, from the Constitution of the United
+States, from our past legislation, and from the physical features of
+the region, to strengthen him in that plan of conciliation and peace,
+in which he feared that he might not carry along with him the public
+sentiment of the whole of that, portion of the country which he
+particularly represented here. At its close, when he dilated upon the
+disastrous effects of separation, he rose to a strain of impassioned
+eloquence which had never been surpassed within these walls. Every
+topic, every argument, every fact, was brought to bear upon the point;
+and he felt that all his vast popularity was at stake on the issue. Let
+me commend to the attention of Senators, and let me ask them to consider
+what weight is due to the authority of such a man, speaking under such
+circumstances, and on such an occasion, when he tells you that
+the condition of every foot of land in the country, for slavery or
+non-slavery, is fixed by some irrepealable law. And you are now about
+to repeal the principal law which ascertained and fixed that condition.
+And, sir, if the Senate will take any heed of the opinion of one so
+humble as myself, I will say that I believe Mr. Webster, in that speech,
+went to the very verge of the public sentiment in the non-slaveholding
+States, and that to have gone a hair's-breadth further, would have been
+a step too bold even for his great weight of character.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I conclude, therefore, sir, that the compromise measures of 1850 ended
+where they began, with the Territories of Utah and New Mexico, to
+which they specifically referred; at any rate, that they established
+no principle which was to govern in other cases; that they had no
+prospective action to the organization of territories in all future
+time; and certainly no retrospective action upon lands subject to the
+restriction of 1820, and to the positive enactment that you now propose
+to declare inoperative and void.
+
+I trust that nothing which I have now said will be taken in derogation
+of the compromises of 1850. I adhere to them; I stand by them. I do so
+for many reasons. One is respect for the memory of the great men who
+were the authors of them--lights and ornaments of the country, but now
+taken from its service. I would not so soon, if it were in my power,
+undo their work, if for no other reason. But beside this, I am one of
+those--I am not ashamed to avow it--who believed at that time, and who
+still believe, that at that period the union of these States was in
+great danger, and that the adoption of the compromise measures of 1850
+contributed materially to avert that danger; and therefore, sir, I
+say, as well out of respect to the memory of the great men who were the
+authors of them, as to the healing effect of the measures themselves,
+I would adhere to them. They are not perfect. I suppose that nobody,
+either North or South, thinks them perfect. They contain some provisions
+not satisfactory to the South, and other provisions contrary to the
+public sentiment of the North; but I believed at the time they were
+the wisest, the best, the most effective measures which, under the
+circumstances, could be adopted. But you do not strengthen them, you do
+not show your respect for them, by giving them an application which they
+were never intended to bear.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+A single word, sir, in respect to this supposed principle of
+non-intervention on the part of Congress in the subject of slavery in
+the territories. I confess I am surprised to find this brought forward,
+and stated with so much confidence, as an established principle of the
+Government. I know that distinguished gentlemen hold the opinion. The
+very distinguished Senator from Michigan (Mr. Cass) holds it, and has
+propounded it; and I pay all due respect and deference to his authority,
+which I conceive to be very high. But I was not aware that any such
+principle was considered a settled principle of the territorial policy
+of this country. Why, sir, from the first enactment in 1789, down to the
+bill before us, there is no such principle in our legislation. As far as
+I can see it would be perfectly competent even now for Congress to pass
+any law that they pleased on the subject in the Territories under this
+bill. But however that may be, even by this bill, there is not a law
+which the Territories can pass admitting or excluding slavery, which it
+is of in the power of this Congress to disallow the next day. This
+is not a mere _brutum fulmen_. It is not an unexpected power. Your
+statute-book shows case after case. I believe, in reference to a
+single Territory, that there have been fifteen or twenty cases where
+territorial legislation has been disallowed by Congress. How, then, can
+it be said that this principle of non-intervention in the government of
+the Territories is now to be recognized as an established principle in
+the public policy of the Congress of the United States?
+
+Do gentlemen recollect the terms, almost of disdain, with which this
+supposed established principle of our constitutional policy is treated
+in that last valedictory speech of Mr. Calhoun, which, unable to
+pronounce it himself, he was obliged to give to the Senate through the
+medium of his friend, the Senator from Virginia. He reminded the Senate
+that the occupants of a Territory were not even called the people--but
+simply the inhabitants--till they were allowed by Congress to call a
+convention and form a State constitution.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+A word more, sir, and I have done. With reference to the great question
+of slavery--that terrible question--the only one on which the North and
+South of this great Republic differ irreconcilably--I have not, on this
+occasion, a word to say. My humble career is drawing near its close,
+and I shall end it as I began, with using no other words on that subject
+than those of moderation, conciliation, and harmony between the two
+great sections of the country. I blame no one who differs from me in
+this respect. I allot to others, what I claim for myself, the credit of
+honesty and purity of motive. But for my own part, the rule of my life,
+as far as circumstances have enabled me to act up to it, has been, to
+say nothing that would tend to kindle unkind feeling on this subject. I
+have never known men on this, or any other subject, to be convinced by
+harsh epithets or denunciation.
+
+I believe the union of these States is the greatest possible
+blessing--that it comprises within itself all other blessings,
+political, national, and social; and I trust that my eyes may close long
+before the day shall come--if it ever shall come--when that Union shall
+be at an end. Sir, I share the opinions and the sentiments of the part
+of the country where I was born and educated, where my ashes will be
+laid, and where my children will succeed me. But in relation to my
+fellow-citizens in other parts of the country, I will treat their
+constitutional and their legal rights with respect, and their characters
+and their feelings with tenderness. I believe them to be as good
+Christians, as good patriots, as good men, as we are, and I claim that
+we, in our turn, are as good as they.
+
+I rejoiced to hear my friend from Kentucky, (Mr. Dixon), if he will
+allow me to call him so--I concur most heartily in the sentiment--utter
+the opinion that a wise and gracious Providence, in his own good time,
+will find the ways and the channels to remove from the land what I
+consider this great evil, but I do not expect that what has been done in
+three centuries and a half is to be undone in a day or a year, or a few
+years; and I believe that, in the mean time, the desired end will be
+retarded rather than promoted by passionate sectional agitation. I
+believe, further, that the fate of the great and interesting continent
+in the elder world, Africa, is closely intertwined and wrapped up with
+the fortunes of her children in all the parts of the earth to which they
+have been dispersed, and that at some future time, which is already
+in fact beginning, they will go back to the land of their fathers, the
+voluntary missionaries of Civilization and Christianity; and finally,
+sir, I doubt not that in His own good time the Ruler of all will
+vindicate the most glorious of His prerogatives, "From seeming evil
+still educing good."
+
+
+
+
+STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL;
+
+SENATE, MARCH 3, 1854.
+
+
+It has been urged in debate that there is no necessity for these
+Territorial organizations; and I have been called upon to point out any
+public and national considerations which require action at this time.
+Senators seem to forget that our immense and valuable possessions on the
+Pacific are separated from the States and organized Territories on this
+side of the Rocky Mountains by a vast wilderness, filled by hostile
+savages--that nearly a hundred thousand emigrants pass through this
+barbarous wilderness every year, on their way to California
+and Oregon--that these emigrants are American citizens, our own
+constituents, who are entitled to the protection of law and government,
+and that they are left to make their way, as best they may, without the
+protection or aid of law or government. The United States mails for New
+Mexico and Utah, and official communications between this Government and
+the authorities of those Territories, are required to be carried over
+these wild plains, and through the gorges of the mountains, where you
+have made no provisions for roads, bridges, or ferries to facilitate
+travel, or forts or other means of safety to protect life. As often as I
+have brought forward and urged the adoption of measures to remedy these
+evils, and afford security against the damages to which our people are
+constantly exposed, they have been promptly voted down as not being
+of sufficient importance to command the favorable consideration of
+Congress. Now, when I propose to organize the Territories, and allow
+the people to do for themselves what you have so often refused to do for
+them, I am told that there are not white inhabitants enough permanently
+settled in the country to require and sustain a government. True; there
+is not a very large population there, for the very reason that your
+Indian code and intercourse laws exclude the settlers, and forbid their
+remaining there to cultivate the soil. You refuse to throw the
+country open to settlers, and then object to the organization of the
+Territories, upon the ground that there is not a sufficient number of
+inhabitants. * * *
+
+I will now proceed to the consideration of the great principle involved
+in the bill, without omitting, however, to notice some of those
+extraneous matters which have been brought into this discussion with the
+view of producing another anti-slavery agitation. We have been told by
+nearly every Senator who has spoken in opposition to this bill, that
+at the time of its introduction the people were in a state of profound
+quiet and repose, that the anti-slavery agitation had entirely ceased,
+and that the whole country was acquiescing cheerfully and cordially
+in the compromise measures of 1850 as a final adjustment of this vexed
+question. Sir, it is truly refreshing to hear Senators, who contested
+every inch of ground in opposition to those measures, when they were
+under discussion, who predicted all manner of evils and calamities from
+their adoption, and who raised the cry of appeal, and even resistance,
+to their execution, after they had become the laws of the land--I say it
+is really refreshing to hear these same Senators now bear their united
+testimony to the wisdom of those measures, and to the patriotic
+motives which induced us to pass them in defiance of their threats and
+resistance, and to their beneficial effects in restoring peace, harmony,
+and fraternity to a distracted country. These are precious confessions
+from the lips of those who stand pledged never to assent to the
+propriety of those measures, and to make war upon them, so long as
+they shall remain upon the statute-book. I well understand that these
+confessions are now made, not with the view of yielding their assent to
+the propriety of carrying those enactments into faithful execution, but
+for the purpose of having a pretext for charging upon me, as the author
+of this bill, the responsibility of an agitation which they are striving
+to produce. They say that I, and not they, have revived the agitation.
+What have I done to render me obnoxious to this charge? They say that I
+wrote and introduced this Nebraska bill. That is true; but I was not a
+volunteer in the transaction. The Senate, by a unanimous vote,
+appointed me chairman of the Territorial Committee, and associated five
+intelligent and patriotic Senators with me, and thus made it our duty
+to take charge of all Territorial business. In like manner, and with the
+concurrence of these complaining Senators, the Senate referred to us a
+distinct proposition to organize this Nebraska Territory, and required
+us to report specifically upon the question. I repeat, then, we were not
+volunteers in this business. The duty was imposed upon us by the
+Senate. We were not unmindful of the delicacy and responsibility of the
+position. We were aware that, from 1820 to 1850, the abolition doctrine
+of Congressional interference with slavery in the Territories and new
+States had so far prevailed as to keep up an incessant slavery agitation
+in Congress, and throughout the country, whenever any new Territory was
+to be acquired or organized. We were also aware that, in 1850, the right
+of the people to decide this question for themselves, subject only
+to the Constitution, was submitted for the doctrine of Congressional
+intervention. This first question, therefore, which the committee were
+called upon to decide, and indeed the only question of any material
+importance in framing this bill, was this: Shall we adhere to and carry
+out the principle recognized by the compromise measures of 1850,
+or shall we go back to the old exploded doctrine of Congressional
+interference, as established in 1820, in a large portion of the country,
+and which it was the object of the Wilmot proviso to give a universal
+application, not only to all the territory which we then possessed, but
+all which we might hereafter acquire? There are no alternatives. We
+were compelled to frame the bill upon the one or the other of these two
+principles. The doctrine of 1820 or the doctrine of 1850 must prevail.
+In the discharge of the duty imposed upon us by the Senate, the
+committee could not hesitate upon this point, whether we consulted our
+own individual opinions and principles, or those which were known to be
+entertained and boldly avowed by a large majority of the Senate. The two
+great political parties of the country stood solemnly pledged before the
+world to adhere to the compromise measures of 1850, "in principle and
+substance." A large majority of the Senate--indeed, every member of the
+body, I believe, except the two avowed Abolitionists (Mr. Chase and Mr.
+Sumner)--profess to belong to one or the other of these parties, and
+hence were supposed to be under a high moral obligation to carry out
+"the principle and substance" of those measures in all new Territorial
+organizations. The report of the committee was in accordance with
+this obligation. I am arraigned, therefore, for having endeavored to
+represent the opinions and principles of the Senate truly--for having
+performed my duty in conformity with parliamentary law--for having been
+faithful to the trust imposed in me by the Senate. Let the vote
+this night determine whether I have thus faithfully represented your
+opinions. When a majority of the Senate shall have passed the bill--when
+the majority of the States shall have endorsed it through their
+representatives upon this floor--when a majority of the South and a
+majority of the North shall have sanctioned it--when a majority of the
+Whig party and a majority of the Democratic party shall have voted for
+it--when each of these propositions shall be demonstrated by the vote
+this night on the final passage of the bill, I shall be willing to
+submit the question to the country, whether, as the organ of the
+committee, I performed my duty in the report and bill which have called
+down upon my head so much denunciation and abuse.
+
+Mr. President, the opponents of this measure have had much to say about
+the mutations and modifications which this bill has undergone since it
+was first introduced by myself, and about the alleged departure of the
+bill, in its present form, from the principle laid down in the original
+report of the committee as a rule of action in all future Territorial
+organizations. Fortunately there is no necessity, even if your patience
+would tolerate such a course of argument at this late hour of the night,
+for me to examine these speeches in detail, and reply to each charge
+separately. Each speaker seems to have followed faithfully in the
+footsteps of his leader in the path marked out by the Abolition
+confederates in their manifesto, which I took occasion to expose on a
+former occasion. You have seen them on their winding way, meandering
+the narrow and crooked path in Indian file, each treading close upon the
+heels of the other, and neither venturing to take a step to the right or
+left, or to occupy one inch of ground which did not bear the footprint
+of the Abolition champion. To answer one, therefore, is to answer the
+whole. The statement to which they seem to attach the most importance,
+and which they have repeated oftener, perhaps, than any other, is, that,
+pending the compromise measures of 1850, no man in or out of Congress
+ever dreamed of abrogating the Missouri compromise; that from that
+period down to the present session nobody supposed that its validity had
+been impaired, or any thing done which endered it obligatory upon us to
+make it inoperative hereafter; that at the time of submitting the report
+and bill to the Senate, on the fourth of January last, neither I nor any
+member of the committee ever thought of such a thing; and that we could
+never be brought to the point of abrogating the eighth section of
+the Missouri act until after the Senator from Kentucky introduced his
+amendment to my bill.
+
+Mr. President, before I proceed to expose the many misrepresentations
+contained in this complicated charge, I must call the attention of
+the Senate to the false issue which these gentlemen are endeavoring to
+impose upon the country, for the purpose of diverting public attention
+from the real issue contained in the bill. They wish to have the people
+believe that the abrogation of what they call the Missouri compromise
+was the main object and aim of the bill, and that the only question
+involved is, whether the prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30'
+shall be repealed or not? That which is a mere incident they choose to
+consider the principle. They make war on the means by which we propose to
+accomplish an object, instead of openly resisting the object itself.
+The principle which we propose to carry into effect by the bill is this:
+That Congress shall neither legislate slavery into any Territories
+or State, nor out of the same; but the people shall be left free to
+regulate their domestic concerns in their own way, subject only to the
+Constitution of the United States.
+
+In order to carry this principle into practical operation, it becomes
+necessary to remove whatever legal obstacles might be found in the way
+of its free exercise. It is only for the purpose of carrying out this
+great fundamental principle of self-government that the bill renders the
+eighth section of the Missouri act inoperative and void.
+
+Now, let me ask, will these Senators who have arraigned me, or any one
+of them, have the assurance to rise in his place and declare that this
+great principle was never thought of or advocated as applicable to
+Territorial bills, in 1850; that from that session until the present,
+nobody ever thought of incorporating this principle in all new
+Territorial organizations; that the Committee on Territories did not
+recommend it in their report; and that it required the amendment of the
+Senator from Kentucky to bring us up to that point? Will any one of my
+accusers dare to make this issue, and let it be tried by the record? I
+will begin with the compromises of 1850, Any Senator who will take the
+trouble to examine our journals, will find that on the 25th of March
+of that year I reported from the Committee on Territories two bills
+including the following measures; the admission of California, a
+Territorial government for New Mexico, and the adjustment of the Texas
+boundary. These bills proposed to leave the people of Utah and New
+Mexico free to decide the slavery question for themselves, in the
+precise language of the Nebraska bill now under discussion. A few weeks
+afterward the committee of thirteen took those two bills and put a wafer
+between them, and reported them back to the Senate as one bill,
+with some slight amendments. One of these amendments was, that the
+Territorial Legislatures should not legislate upon the subject of
+African slavery. I objected to that provision upon the ground that it
+subverted the great principle of self-government upon which the bill had
+been originally framed by the Territorial Committee. On the first trial,
+the Senate refused to strike it out, but subsequently did so, after full
+debate, in order to establish that principle as the rule of action in
+Territorial organizations. * * * But my accusers attempt to raise up a
+false issue, and thereby divert public attention from the real one, by
+the cry that the Missouri compromise is to be repealed or violated by
+the passage of this bill. Well, if the eighth section of the Missouri
+act, which attempted to fix the destinies of future generations in those
+Territories for all time to come, in utter disregard of the rights and
+wishes of the people when they should be received into the Union as
+States, be inconsistent with the great principles of self-government
+and the Constitution of the United States. it ought to be abrogated.
+The legislation of 1850 abrogated the Missouri compromise, so far as the
+country embraced within the limits of Utah and New Mexico was covered
+by the slavery restriction. It is true, that those acts did not in
+terms and by name repeal the act of 1820, as originally adopted, or as
+extended by the resolutions annexing Texas in 1845, any more than the
+report of the Committee on Territories proposed to repeal the same acts
+this session. But the acts of 1850 did authorize the people of those
+Territories to exercise "all rightful powers of legislation consistent
+with the Constitution," not excepting the question of slavery; and did
+provide that, when those Territories should be admitted into the Union,
+they should be received with or without slavery as the people thereof
+might determine at the date of their admission. These provisions were
+in direct conflict with a clause in the former enactment, declaring that
+slavery should be forever prohibited in any portion of said Territories,
+and hence rendered such clause inoperative and void to the extent of
+such conflict. This was an inevitable consequence, resulting from the
+provisions in those acts, which gave the people the right to decide the
+slavery question for themselves, in conformity with the Constitution.
+It was not necessary to go further and declare that certain previous
+enactments, which were incompatible with the exercise of the powers
+conferred in the bills, are hereby repealed. The very act of
+granting those powers and rights has the legal effect of removing all
+obstructions to the exercise of them by the people, as prescribed
+in those Territorial bills. Following that example, the Committee on
+Territories did not consider it necessary to declare the eighth section
+of the Missouri act repealed. We were content to organize Nebraska in
+the precise language of the Utah and New Mexico bills. Our object was
+to leave the people entirely free to form and regulate their domestic
+institutions and internal concerns in their own way, under the
+Constitution; and we deemed it wise to accomplish that object in the
+exact terms in which the same thing had been done in Utah and New Mexico
+by the acts of 1850. This was the principle upon which the committee
+voted; and our bill was supposed, and is now believed, to have been in
+accordance with it. When doubts were raised whether the bill did fully
+carry out the principle laid down in the report, amendments were made
+from time to time, in order to avoid all misconstruction, and make the
+true intent of the act more explicit. The last of these amendments was
+adopted yesterday, on the motion of the distinguished Senator from
+North Carolina (Mr. Badger), in regard to the revival of any laws or
+regulations which may have existed prior to 1820. That amendment was not
+intended to change the legal effect of the bill. Its object was to repel
+the slander which had been propagated by the enemies of the measure in
+the North--that the Southern supporters of the bill desired to legislate
+slavery into these Territories. The South denies the right of Congress
+either to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, or out of any
+Territory or State. Non-intervention by Congress with slavery in
+the States or Territories is the doctrine of the bill, and all the
+amendments which have been agreed to have been made with the view of
+removing all doubt and cavil as to the true meaning and object of the
+measure. * * *
+
+Well, sir, what is this Missouri compromise, of which we have heard
+so much of late? It has been read so often that it is not necessary
+to occupy the time of the Senate in reading it again. It was an act of
+Congress, passed on the 6th of March, 1820, to authorize the people of
+Missouri to form a constitution and a State government, preparatory to
+the admission of such State into the Union. The first section provided
+that Missouri should be received into the Union "on an equal footing
+with the original States in all respects whatsoever." The last and
+eighth section provided that slavery should be "forever prohibited" in
+all the territory which had been acquired from France north of 36° 30',
+and not included within the limits of the State of Missouri. There
+is nothing in the terms of the law that purports to be a compact,
+or indicates that it was any thing more than an ordinary act of
+legislation. To prove that it was more than it purports to be on its
+face, gentlemen must produce other evidence, and prove that there was
+such an understanding as to create a moral obligation in the nature of a
+compact. Have they shown it?
+
+Now, if this was a compact, let us see how it was entered into. The bill
+originated in the House of Representatives, and passed that body without
+a Southern vote in its favor. It is proper to remark, however, that it
+did not at that time contain the eighth section, prohibiting slavery in
+the Territories; but in lieu of it, contained a provision prohibiting
+slavery in the proposed State of Missouri. In the Senate, the clause
+prohibiting slavery in the State was stricken out, and the eighth
+section added to the end of the bill, by the terms of which slavery was
+to be forever prohibited in the territory not embraced in the State of
+Missouri north of 36° 30'. The vote on adding this section stood in the
+Senate, 34 in the affirmative, and 10 in the negative. Of the Northern
+Senators, 20 voted for it, and 2 against it. On the question of ordering
+the bill to a third reading as amended, which was the test vote on its
+passage, the vote stood 24 yeas and 20 nays. Of the Northern Senators,
+4 only voted in the affirmative, and 18 in the negative. Thus it will be
+seen that if it was intended to be a compact, the North never agreed to
+it. The Northern Senators voted to insert the prohibition of slavery in
+the Territories; and then, in the proportion of more than four to one,
+voted against the passage of the bill. The North, therefore, never
+signed the compact, never consented to it, never agreed to be bound by
+it. This fact becomes very important in vindicating the character of the
+North for repudiating this alleged compromise a few months afterward.
+The act was approved and became a law on the 6th of March, 1820. In the
+summer of that year, the people of Missouri formed a constitution and
+State government preparatory to admission into the Union in conformity
+with the act. At the next session of Congress the Senate passed a joint
+resolution declaring Missouri to be one of the States of the Union, on
+an equal footing with the original States. This resolution was sent to
+the House of Representatives, where it was rejected by Northern votes,
+and thus Missouri was voted out of the Union, instead of being received
+into the Union under the act of the 6th of March, 1820, now known as the
+Missouri compromise. Now, sir, what becomes of our plighted faith, if
+the act of the 6th of March, 1820, was a solemn compact, as we are now
+told? They have all rung the changes upon it, that it was a sacred and
+irrevocable compact, binding in honor, in conscience, and morals, which
+could not be violated or repudiated without perfidy and dishonor! * * *
+Sir, if this was a compact, what must be thought of those who violated
+it almost immediately after it was formed? I say it is a calumny upon
+the North to say that it was a compact. I should feel a flush of
+shame upon my cheek, as a Northern man, if I were to say that it was a
+compact, and that the section of the country to which I belong received
+the consideration, and then repudiated the obligation in eleven months
+after it was entered into. I deny that it was a compact, in any sense
+of the term. But if it was, the record proves that faith was not
+observed--that the contract was never carried into effect--that after
+the North had procured the passage of the act prohibiting slavery in the
+Territories, with a majority in the House large enough to prevent its
+repeal, Missouri was refused admission into the Union as a slave-holding
+State, in conformity with the act of March 6, 1820. If the proposition
+be correct, as contended for by the opponents of this bill--that
+there was a solemn compact between the North and the South that, in
+consideration of the prohibition of slavery in the Territories, Missouri
+was to be admitted into the Union, in conformity with the act of
+1820--that compact was repudiated by the North, and rescinded by the
+joint action of the two parties within twelve months from its date.
+Missouri was never admitted under the act of the 6th of March, 1820. She
+was refused admission under that act. She was voted out of the Union
+by Northern votes, notwithstanding the stipulation that she should
+be received; and, in consequence of these facts, a new compromise was
+rendered necessary, by the terms of which Missouri was to be admitted
+into the Union conditionally--admitted on a condition not embraced in
+the act of 1820, and, in addition, to a full compliance with all the
+provisions of said act. If, then, the act of 1820, by the eighth section
+of which slavery was prohibited in Missouri, was a compact, it is clear
+to the comprehension of every fair-minded man that the refusal of
+the North to admit Missouri, in compliance with its stipulations, and
+without further conditions, imposes upon us a high, moral obligation to
+remove the prohibition of slavery in the Territories, since it has been
+shown to have been procured upon a condition never performed. * * *
+
+Mr. President, I did not wish to refer to these things. I did not
+understand them fully in all their bearings at the time I made my first
+speech on this subject; and, so far as I was familiar with them, I made
+as little reference to them as was consistent with my duty; because it
+was a mortifying reflection to me, as a Northern man, that we had not
+been able, in consequence of the abolition excitement at the time, to
+avoid the appearance of bad faith in the observance of legislation,
+which has been denominated a compromise. There were a few men then, as
+there are now, who had the moral courage to perform their duty to the
+country and the Constitution, regardless of consequences personal to
+themselves. There were ten Northern men who dared to perform their duty
+by voting to admit Missouri into the Union on an equal footing with the
+original States, and with no other restriction than that imposed by the
+Constitution. I am aware that they were abused and denounced as we are
+now--that they were branded as dough-faces--traitors to freedom, and to
+the section of country whence they came. * * *
+
+I think I have shown that if the act of 1820, called the Missouri
+compromise, was a compact, it was violated and repudiated by a solemn
+vote of the House of Representatives in 1821, within eleven months after
+it was adopted. It was repudiated by the North by a majority vote, and
+that repudiation was so complete and successful as to compel Missouri to
+make a new compromise, and she was brought into the Union under the new
+compromise of 1821, and not under the act of 1820. This reminds me of
+another point made in nearly all the speeches against this bill, and, if
+I recollect right, was alluded to in the abolition manifesto; to which,
+I regret to say, I had occasion to refer so often. I refer to the
+significant hint that Mr. Clay was dead before any one dared to bring
+forward a proposition to undo the greatest work of his hands. The
+Senator from New York (Mr. Seward) has seized upon this insinuation and
+elaborated, perhaps, more fully than his compeers; and now the Abolition
+press, suddenly, and, as if by miraculous conversion, teems with
+eulogies upon Mr. Clay and his Missouri compromise of 1820.
+
+Now, Mr. President, does not each of these Senators know that Mr.
+Clay was not the author of the act of 1820? Do they not know that he
+disclaimed it in 1850 in this body? Do they not know that the Missouri
+restriction did not originate in the House, of which he was a member? Do
+they not know that Mr. Clay never came into the Missouri controversy as
+a compromiser until after the compromise of 1820 was repudiated, and it
+became necessary to make another? I dislike to be compelled to repeat
+what I have conclusively proven, that the compromise which Mr. Clay
+effected was the act of 1821, under which Missouri came into the Union,
+and not the act of 1820. Mr. Clay made that compromise after you had
+repudiated the first one. How, then, dare you call upon the spirit of
+that great and gallant statesman to sanction your charge of bad faith
+against the South on this question? * * *
+
+Now, Mr. President, as I have been doing justice to Mr. Clay on this
+question, perhaps I may as well do justice to another great man, who
+was associated with him in carrying through the great measures of 1850,
+which mortified the Senator from New York so much, because they defeated
+his purpose of carrying on the agitation. I allude to Mr. Webster. The
+authority of his great name has been quoted for the purpose of proving
+that he regarded the Missouri act as a compact, an irrepealable compact.
+Evidently the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Everett)
+supposed he was doing Mr. Webster entire justice when he quoted the
+passage which he read from Mr. Webster's speech of the 7th of March,
+1850, when he said that he stood upon the position that every part
+of the American continent was fixed for freedom or for slavery by
+irrepealable law. The Senator says that by the expression "irrepealable
+law," Mr. Webster meant to include the compromise of 1820. Now, I will
+show that that was not Mr. Webster's meaning--that he was never
+guilty of the mistake of saying that the Missouri act of 1820 was an
+irrepealable law. Mr. Webster said in that speech that every foot of
+territory in the United States was fixed as to its character for freedom
+or slavery by an irrepealable law. He then inquired if it was not so
+in regard to Texas? He went on to prove that it was; because, he said,
+there was a compact in express terms between Texas and the United
+States. He said the parties were capable of contracting and that there
+was a valuable consideration; and hence, he contended, that in that case
+there was a contract binding in honor and morals and law; and that it
+was irrepealable without a breach of faith.
+
+He went on to say:
+
+"Now, as to California and New Mexico, I hold slavery to be excluded
+from these Territories by a law even superior to that which admits
+and sanctions it in Texas--I mean the law of nature--of physical
+geography--the law of the formation of the earth."
+
+That was the irrepealable law which he said prohibited slavery in
+the Territories of Utah and New Mexico. He went on to speak of the
+prohibition of slavery in Oregon, and he said it was an "entirely
+useless and, in that connection, senseless proviso."
+
+He went further, and said:
+
+"That the whole territory of the States of the United States, or in the
+newly-acquired territory of the United States, has a fixed and settled
+character, now fixed and settled by law, which cannot be repealed in
+the case of Texas without a violation of public faith, and cannot be
+repealed by any human power in regard to California or New Mexico; that,
+under one or other of these laws, every foot of territory in the States
+or in the Territories has now received a fixed and decided character."
+
+What irrepealable laws? One or the other of those which he had stated.
+One was the Texas compact; the other, the law of nature and physical
+geography; and he contended that one or the other fixed the character
+of the whole American continent for freedom or for slavery. He never
+alluded to the Missouri compromise, unless it was by the allusion to
+the Wilmot proviso in the Oregon bill, and therein said it was a useless
+and, in that connection, senseless thing. Why was it a useless and
+senseless thing? Because it was reenacting the law of God; because
+slavery had already been prohibited by physical geography. Sir, that was
+the meaning of Mr. Webster's speech. * * *
+
+Mr. President, I have occupied a good deal of time in exposing the cant
+of these gentlemen about the sanctity of the Missouri compromise, and
+the dishonor attached to the violation of plighted faith. I have exposed
+these matters in order to show that the object of these men is to
+withdraw from public attention the real principle involved in the bill.
+They well know that the abrogation of the Missouri compromise is the
+incident and not the principle of the bill. They well understand that
+the report of the committee and the bill propose to establish the
+principle in all Territorial organizations, that the question of slavery
+shall be referred to the people to regulate for themselves, and that
+such legislation should be had as was necessary to remove all legal
+obstructions to the free exercise of this right by the people. The
+eighth section of the Missouri act standing in the way of this great
+principle must be rendered inoperative and void, whether expressly
+repealed or not, in order to give the people the power of regulating
+their own domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the
+Constitution.
+
+Now, sir, if these gentlemen have entire confidence in the correctness
+of their own position, why do they not meet the issue boldly and
+fairly, and controvert the soundness of this great principle of popular
+sovereignty in obedience to the Constitution? They know full well that
+this was the principle upon which the colonies separated from the crown
+of Great Britain, the principle upon which the battles of the Revolution
+were fought, and the principle upon which our republican system was
+founded. They cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Revolution grew
+out of the assertion of the right on the part of the imperial Government
+to interfere with the internal affairs and domestic concerns of the
+colonies. * * *
+
+The Declaration of Independence had its origin in the violation of that
+great fundamental principle which secured to the colonies the right to
+regulate their own domestic affairs in their own way; and the Revolution
+resulted in the triumph of that principle, and the recognition of the
+right asserted by it. Abolitionism proposes to destroy the right and
+extinguish the principle for which our forefathers waged a seven years'
+bloody war, and upon which our whole system of free government is
+founded. They not only deny the application of this principle to the
+Territories, but insist upon fastening the prohibition upon all the
+States to be formed out of those Territories. Therefore, the doctrine
+of the Abolitionists--the doctrine of the opponents of the Nebraska
+and Kansas bill, and the advocates of the Missouri restriction--demands
+Congressional interference with slavery not only in the Territories, but
+in all the new States to be formed therefrom. It is the same doctrine,
+when applied to the Territories and new States of this Union, which the
+British Government attempted to enforce by the sword upon the American
+colonies. It is this fundamental principle of self-government which
+constitutes the distinguishing feature of the Nebraska bill. The
+opponents of the principle are consistent in opposing the bill. I do
+not blame them for their opposition. I only ask them to meet the
+issue fairly and openly, by acknowledging that they are opposed to the
+principle which it is the object of the bill to carry into operation.
+It seems that there is no power on earth, no intellectual power, no
+mechanical power, that can bring them to a fair discussion of the true
+issue. If they hope to delude the people and escape detection for any
+considerable length of time under the catch-words "Missouri compromise"
+and "faith of compacts," they will find that the people of this country
+have more penetration and intelligence than they have given them credit
+for.
+
+Mr. President, there is an important fact connected with this slavery
+regulation, which should never be lost sight of. It has always arisen
+from one and the same cause. Whenever that cause has been removed,
+the agitation has ceased; and whenever the cause has been renewed, the
+agitation has sprung into existence. That cause is, and ever has been,
+the attempt on the part of Congress to interfere with the question of
+slavery in the Territories and new States formed therefrom. Is it not
+wise then to confine our action within the sphere of our legitimate
+duties, and leave this vexed question to take care of itself in each
+State and Territory, according to the wishes of the people thereof, in
+conformity to the forms, and in subjection to the provisions, of the
+Constitution?
+
+The opponents of the bill tell us that agitation is no part of their
+policy; that their great desire is peace and harmony; and they complain
+bitterly that I should have disturbed the repose of the country by the
+introduction of this measure! Let me ask these professed friends of
+peace, and avowed enemies of agitation, how the issue could have been
+avoided. They tell me that I should have let the question alone;
+that is, that I should have left Nebraska unorganized, the people
+unprotected, and the Indian barrier in existence, until the swelling
+tide of emigration should burst through, and accomplish by violence what
+it is the part of wisdom and statesmanship to direct and regulate by
+law. How long could you have postponed action with safety? How long
+could you maintain that Indian barrier, and restrain the onward march of
+civilization, Christianity, and free government by a barbarian wall? Do
+you suppose that you could keep that vast country a howling wilderness
+in all time to come, roamed over by hostile savages, cutting off all
+safe communication between our Atlantic and Pacific possessions? I tell
+you that the time for action has come, and cannot be postponed. It is
+a case in which the "let-alone" policy would precipitate a crisis which
+must inevitably result in violence, anarchy, and strife.
+
+You cannot fix bounds to the onward march of this great and growing
+country. You cannot fetter the limbs of the young giant. He will burst
+all your chains. He will expand, and grow, and increase, and extend
+civilization, Christianity, and liberal principles. Then, sir, if you
+cannot check the growth of the country in that direction, is it not the
+part of wisdom to look the danger in the face, and provide for an event
+which you cannot avoid? I tell you, sir, you must provide for lines of
+continuous settlement from the Mississippi valley to the Pacific ocean.
+And in making this provision, you must decide upon what principles the
+Territories shall be organized; in other words, whether the people shall
+be allowed to regulate their domestic institutions in their own way,
+according to the provisions of this bill, or whether the opposite
+doctrine of Congressional interference is to prevail. Postpone it,
+if you will; but whenever you do act, this question must be met and
+decided.
+
+The Missouri compromise was interference; the compromise of 1850 was
+non-interference, leaving the people to exercise their rights under the
+Constitution. The Committee on Territories were compelled to act on this
+subject. I, as their chairman, was bound to meet the question. I chose
+to take the responsibility regardless of consequences personal to
+myself. I should have done the same thing last year, if there had been
+time; but we know, considering the late period at which the bill
+then reached us from the House, that there was not sufficient time to
+consider the question fully, and to prepare a report upon the subject.
+
+I was, therefore, persuaded by my friends to allow the bill to be
+reported to the Senate, in order that such action might be taken as
+should be deemed wise and proper. The bill was never taken up for
+action--the last night of the session having been exhausted in debate on
+a motion to take up the bill. This session, the measure was introduced
+by my friend from Iowa (Mr. Dodge), and referred to the Territorial
+Committee during the first week of the session. We have abundance of
+time to consider the subject; it is a matter of pressing necessity,
+and there was no excuse for not meeting it directly and fairly. We were
+compelled to take our position upon the doctrine either of intervention
+or non-intervention. We chose the latter for two reasons: first, because
+we believed that the principle was right; and, second, because it was
+the principle adopted in 1850, to which the two great political parties
+of the country were solemnly pledged.
+
+There is another reason why I desire to see this principle recognized as
+a rule of action in all time to come. It will have the effect to destroy
+all sectional parties and sectional agitations. If, in the language of
+the report of the committee, you withdraw the slavery question from
+the halls of Congress and the political arena, and commit it to the
+arbitrament of those who are immediately interested in and alone
+responsible for its consequences, there is nothing left out of which
+sectional parties can be organized. It never was done, and never can
+be done on the bank, tariff, distribution, or any party issue which has
+existed, or may exist, after this slavery question is withdrawn from
+politics. On every other political question these have always supporters
+and opponents in every portion of the Union--in each State, county,
+village, and neighborhood--residing together in harmony and good
+fellowship, and combating each other's opinions and correcting each
+other's errors in a spirit of kindness and friendship. These differences
+of opinion between neighbors and friends, and the discussions that grow
+out of them, and the sympathy which each feels with the advocates of
+his own opinions in every portion of this widespread Republic, add
+an overwhelming and irresistible moral weight to the strength of
+the Confederacy. Affection for the Union can never be alienated or
+diminished by any other party issues than those which are joined upon
+sectional or geographical lines. When the people of the North shall
+all be rallied under one banner, and the whole South marshalled under
+another banner, and each section excited to frenzy and madness by
+hostility to the institutions of the other, then the patriot may well
+tremble for the perpetuity of the Union. Withdraw the slavery question
+from the political arena, and remove it to the States and Territories,
+each to decide for itself, such a catastrophe can never happen. Then
+you will never be able to tell, by any Senator's vote for or against any
+measure, from what State or section of the Union he comes.
+
+Why, then, can we not withdraw this vexed question from politics? Why
+can we not adopt the principle of this bill as a rule of action in all
+new Territorial organizations? Why can we not deprive these agitators of
+their vocation and render it impossible for Senators to come here upon
+bargains on the slavery question? I believe that the peace, the harmony,
+and perpetuity of the Union require us to go back to the doctrines of
+the Revolution, to the principles of the Constitution, to the principles
+of the Compromise of 1850, and leave the people, under the Constitution,
+to do as they may see proper in respect to their own internal affairs.
+
+Mr. President, I have not brought this question forward as a Northern
+man or as a Southern man. I am unwilling to recognize such divisions
+and distinctions. I have brought it forward as an American Senator,
+representing a State which is true to this principle, and which has
+approved of my action in respect to the Nebraska bill. I have brought it
+forward not as an act of justice to the South more than to the North. I
+have presented it especially as an act of justice to the people of those
+Territories and of the States to be formed therefrom, now and in all
+time to come. I have nothing to say about Northern rights or Southern
+rights. I know of no such divisions or distinctions under the
+Constitution. The bill does equal and exact justice to the whole Union,
+and every part of it; it violates the right of no State or Territory;
+but places each on a perfect equality, and leaves the people thereof to
+the free enjoyment of all their rights under the Constitution.
+
+Now, sir, I wish to say to our Southern friends that if they desire to
+see this great principle carried out, now is their time to rally around
+it, to cherish it, preserve it, make it the rule of action in all future
+time. If they fail to do it now, and thereby allow the doctrine of
+interference to prevail, upon their heads the consequences of that
+interference must rest. To our Northern friends, on the other hand,
+I desire to say, that from this day henceforward they must rebuke the
+slander which has been uttered against the South, that they desire to
+legislate slavery into the Territories. The South has vindicated her
+sincerity, her honor, on that point by bringing forward a provision
+negativing, in express terms, any such effect as a result of this bill.
+I am rejoiced to know that while the proposition to abrogate the eighth
+section of the Missouri act comes from a free State, the proposition to
+negative the conclusion that slavery is thereby introduced, comes from
+a slave-holding State. Thus, both sides furnish conclusive evidence that
+they go for the principle, and the principle only, and desire to take no
+advantage of any possible misconstruction.
+
+Mr. President, I feel that I owe an apology to the Senate for having
+occupied their attention so long, and a still greater apology for having
+discussed the question in such an incoherent and desultory manner. But
+I could not forbear to claim the right of closing this debate. I thought
+gentlemen would recognize its propriety when they saw the manner
+in which I was assailed and misrepresented in the course of this
+discussion, and especially by assaults still more disreputable in some
+portions of the country. These assaults have had no other effect upon me
+than to give me courage and energy for a still more resolute discharge
+of duty. I say frankly that, in my opinion, this measure will be as
+popular at the North as at the South, when its provisions and principles
+shall have been fully developed, and become well understood. The people
+at the North are attached to the principles of self-government, and
+you cannot convince them that that is self-government which deprives a
+people of the right of legislating for themselves, and compels them to
+receive laws which are forced upon them by a Legislature in which they
+are not represented. We are willing to stand upon this great principle
+of self-government every-where; and it is to us a proud reflection that,
+in this whole discussion, no friend of the bill has urged an argument
+in its favor which could not be used with the same propriety in a free
+State as in a slave State, and vice versed. No enemy of the bill has
+used an argument which would bear repetition one mile across Mason and
+Dixon's line. Our opponents have dealt entirely in sectional appeals.
+The friends of the bill have discussed a great principle of universal
+application, which can be sustained by the same reasons, and the same
+arguments, in every time and in every corner of the Union.
+
+
+
+
+CHARLES SUMNER,
+
+OF MASSACHUSETTS.' (BORN 1811, DIED 1874.)
+
+ON THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS;
+
+SENATE, MAY 19-20, 1856.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+You are now called to redress a great transgression. Seldom in the
+history of nations has such a question been presented. Tariffs, Army
+bills, Navy bills, Land bills, are important, and justly occupy your
+care; but these all belong to the course of ordinary legislation. As
+means and instruments only, they are necessarily subordinate to the
+conservation of government itself. Grant them or deny them, in greater
+or less degree, and you will inflict no shock. The machinery of
+government will continue to move. The State will not cease to exist. Far
+otherwise is it with the eminent question now before you, involving, as
+it does, Liberty in a broad territory, and also involving the peace of
+the whole country, with our good name in history forever more.
+
+Take down your map, sir, and you will find that the Territory of Kansas,
+more than any other region, occupies the middle spot of North America,
+equally distant from the Atlantic on the east, and the Pacific on the
+west; from the frozen waters of Hudson's Bay on the north, and the tepid
+Gulf Stream on the south, constituting the precise territorial centre of
+the whole vast continent. To such advantages of situation, on the very
+highway between two oceans, are added a soil of unsurpassed richness,
+and a fascinating, undulating beauty of surface, with a health-giving
+climate, calculated to nurture a powerful and generous people, worthy
+to be a central pivot of American institutions. A few short months only
+have passed since this spacious and mediterranean country was open only
+to the savage who ran wild in its woods and prairies; and now it has
+already drawn to its bosom a population of freemen larger than Athens
+crowded within her historic gates, when her sons, under Miltiades,
+won liberty for man-kind on the field of Marathon; more than Sparta
+contained when she ruled Greece, and sent forth her devoted children,
+quickened by a mother's benediction, to return with their shields, or on
+them; more than Rome gathered on her seven hills, when, under her kings,
+she commenced that sovereign sway, which afterward embraced the
+whole earth; more than London held, when, on the fields of Crecy
+and Agincourt, the English banner was carried victoriously over the
+chivalrous hosts of France.
+
+Against this Territory, thus fortunate in position and population, a
+crime has been committed, which is without example in the records of
+the past. Not in plundered provinces or in the cruelties of selfish
+governors will you find its parallel; and yet there is an ancient
+instance, which may show at least the path of justice. In the terrible
+impeachment by which the great Roman orator has blasted through all
+time the name of Verres, amidst charges of robbery and sacrilege, the
+enormity which most aroused the indignant voice of his accuser, and
+which still stands forth with strongest distinctness, arresting the
+sympathetic indignation of all who read the story, is, that away in
+Sicily he had scourged a citizen of Rome--that the cry, "I am a Roman
+citizen," had been interposed in vain against the lash of the tyrant
+governor. Other charges were, that he had carried away productions of
+art, and that he had violated the sacred shrines. It was in the presence
+of the Roman Senate that this arraignment proceeded; in a temple of
+the Forum; amidst crowds--such as no orator had ever before drawn
+together--thronging the porticos and colonnades, even clinging to
+the house-tops and neighboring slopes--and under the anxious gaze of
+witnesses summoned from the scene of crime. But an audience grander
+far--of higher dignity--of more various people, and of wider
+intelligence--the countless multitude of succeeding generations, in
+every land, where eloquence has been studied, or where the Roman name
+has been recognized,--has listened to the accusation, and throbbed with
+condemnation of the criminal. Sir, speaking in an age of light, and a
+land of constitutional liberty, where the safeguards of elections are
+justly placed among the highest triumphs of civilization, I fearlessly
+assert that the wrongs of much-abused Sicily, thus memorable in history,
+were small by the side of the wrongs of Kansas, where the very shrines
+of popular institutions, more sacred than any heathen altar, have been
+desecrated; where the ballot-box, more precious than any work, in ivory
+or marble, from the cunning hand of art, has been plundered; and where
+the cry, "I am an American citizen," has been interposed in vain against
+outrage of every kind, even upon life itself. Are you against sacrilege?
+I present it for your execration. Are you against;robbery? I hold it up
+to your scorn. Are you for the protection of American citizens? I show
+you how their dearest rights have been cloven down, while a Tyrannical
+Usurpation has sought to install itself on their very necks!
+
+But the wickedness which I now begin to expose is immeasurably
+aggravated by the motive which prompted it. Not in any common lust for
+power did this uncommon tragedy have its origin. It is the rape of a
+virgin Territory, compelling it to the hateful embrace of Slavery; and
+it may be clearly traced to a depraved longing for a new slave State,
+the hideous off-spring of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the
+power of slavery in the National Government. Yes, sir, when the whole
+world, alike Christian and Turk, is rising up to condemn this wrong, and
+to make it a hissing to the nations, here in our Republic, force--ay,
+sir, FORCE--has been openly employed in compelling Kansas to this
+pollution, and all for the sake of political power. There is the simple
+fact, which you will in vain attempt to deny, but which in itself
+presents an essential wickedness that makes other public crimes seem
+like public virtues.
+
+But this enormity, vast beyond comparison, swells to dimensions of
+wickedness which the imagination toils in vain to grasp, when it is
+understood that for this purpose are hazarded the horrors of intestine
+feud not only in this distant Territory, but everywhere throughout the
+country. Already the muster has begun. The strife is no longer local,
+but national. Even now, while I speak, portents hang on all the arches
+of the horizon threatening to darken the broad land, which already
+yawns with the mutterings of civil war. The fury of the propagandists of
+Slavery, and the calm determination of their opponents, are now diffused
+from the distant Territory over widespread communities, and the
+whole country, in all its extent--marshalling hostile divisions, and
+foreshadowing a strife which, unless happily averted by the triumph
+of Freedom, will become war--fratricidal, parricidal war--with an
+accumulated wickedness beyond the wickedness of any war in human annals;
+justly provoking the avenging judgment of Providence and the avenging
+pen of history, and constituting a strife, in the language of the
+ancient writer, more than foreign, more than social, more than civil;
+but something compounded of all these strifes, and in itself more than
+war; _sal potius commune quoddam ex omnibus, et plus quam bellum_.
+
+Such is the crime which you are to judge. But the criminal also must be
+dragged into day, that you may see and measure the power by which all
+this wrong is sustained. From no common source could it proceed. In
+its perpetration was needed a spirit of vaulting ambition which would
+hesitate at nothing; a hardihood of purpose which was insensible to the
+judgment of mankind; a madness for Slavery which would disregard the
+Constitution, the laws, and all the great examples of our history;
+also a consciousness of power such as comes from the habit of power;
+a combination of energies found only in a hundred arms directed by
+a hundred eyes; a control of public opinion through venal pens and a
+prostituted press; an ability to subsidize crowds in every vocation
+of life--the politician with his local importance, the lawyer with his
+subtle tongue, and even the authority of the judge on the bench; and
+a familiar use of men in places high and low, so that none, from the
+President to the lowest border postmaster, should decline to be its
+tool; all these things and more were needed, and they were found in
+the slave power of our Republic. There, sir, stands the criminal,
+all unmasked before you--heartless, grasping, and tyrannical--with an
+audacity beyond that of Verres, a subtlety beyond that of Machiavel, a
+meanness beyond that of Bacon, and an ability beyond that of Hastings.
+Justice to Kansas can be secured only by the prostration of this
+influence; for this the power behind--greater than any President--which
+succors and sustains the crime. Nay, the proceedings I now arraign
+derive their fearful consequences only from this connection.
+
+In now opening this great matter, I am not insensible to the austere
+demands of the occasion; but the dependence of the crime against Kansas
+upon the slave power is so peculiar and important, that I trust to be
+pardoned while I impress it with an illustration, which to some may
+seem trivial. It is related in Northern mythology that the god of Force,
+visiting an enchanted region, was challenged by his royal entertainer to
+what seemed an humble feat of strength--merely, sir, to lift a cat from
+the ground. The god smiled at the challenge, and, calmly placing his
+hand under the belly of the animal, with superhuman strength strove,
+while the back of the feline monster arched far up-ward, even beyond
+reach, and one paw actually forsook the earth, until at last the
+discomfited divinity desisted; but he was little surprised at his
+defeat when he learned that this creature, which seemed to be a cat, and
+nothing more, was not merely a cat, but that it belonged to and was a
+part of the great Terrestrial Serpent, which, in its innumerable folds,
+encircled the whole globe. Even so the creature, whose paws are now
+fastened upon Kansas, whatever it may seem to be, constitutes in reality
+a part of the slave power, which, in its loathsome folds, is now
+coiled about the whole land. Thus do I expose the extent of the present
+contest, where we encounter not merely local resistance, but also the
+unconquered sustaining arm behind. But out of the vastness of the crime
+attempted, with all its woe and shame, I derive a well-founded assurance
+of a commensurate vastness of effort against it by the aroused masses of
+the country, determined not only to vindicate Right against Wrong,
+but to redeem the Republic from the thraldom of that Oligarchy which
+prompts, directs, and concentrates the distant wrong.
+
+Such is the crime, and such the criminal, which it is my duty in this
+debate to expose, and, by the blessing of God, this duty shall be done
+completely to the end. * * *'
+
+But, before entering upon the argument, I must say something of a
+general character, particularly in response to what has fallen from
+Senators who have raised themselves to eminence on this floor in
+championship of human wrongs. I mean the Senator from South Carolina
+(Mr. Butler), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas), who, though
+unlike as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally
+forth together in the same adventure. I regret much to miss the elder
+Senator from his seat; but the cause, against which he has run a
+tilt, with such activity of animosity, demands that the opportunity of
+exposing him should not be lost; and it is for the cause that I speak.
+The Senator from South Carolina has read many books of chivalry, and
+believes himself a chivalrous knight, with sentiments of honor and
+courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made his
+vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though
+polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight--I mean the
+harlot, Slavery. For her, his tongue is always profuse in words. Let her
+be impeached in character, or any proposition made to shut her out
+from the extension of her wantonness, and no extravagance of manner or
+hardihood of assertion is then too great for this Senator. The frenzy
+of Don Quixote, in behalf of his wench, Dulcinea del Toboso, is all
+surpassed. The asserted rights of Slavery, which shock equality of all
+kinds, are cloaked by a fantastic claim of equality. If the slave States
+cannot enjoy what, in mockery of the great fathers of the Republic, he
+misnames equality under the Constitution--in other words, the full power
+in the National Territories to compel fellow-men to unpaid toil, to
+separate husband and wife, and to sell little children at the auction
+block--then, sir, the chivalric Senator will conduct the State of South
+Carolina out of the Union! Heroic knight! Exalted Senator! A second
+Moses come for a second exodus!!
+
+But not content with this poor menace, which we have been twice told was
+"measured," the Senator in the unrestrained chivalry of his nature, has
+undertaken to apply opprobrious words to those who differ from him on
+this floor. He calls them "sectional and fanatical;" and opposition to
+the usurpation in Kansas he denounces as "an uncalculating fanaticism."
+To be sure these charges lack all grace of originality, and all
+sentiment of truth; but the adventurous Senator does not hesitate. He
+is the uncompromising, unblushing representative on this floor of a
+flagrant sectionalism, which now domineers over the Republic, and yet
+with a ludicrous ignorance of his own position--unable to see himself
+as others see him--or with an effrontery which even his white head ought
+not to protect from rebuke, he applies to those here who resist his
+sectionalism the very epithet which designates himself. The men who
+strive to bring back the Government to its original policy, when Freedom
+and not Slavery was sectional, he arraigns as sectional. This will not
+do. It involves too great a perversion of terms. I tell that Senator
+that it is to himself, and to the "organization" of which he is the
+"committed advocate," that this epithet belongs. I now fasten it upon
+them. For myself, I care little for names; but since the question has
+been raised here, I affirm that the Republican party of the Union is in
+no just sense sectional, but, more than any other party, national;
+and that it now goes forth to dislodge from the high places of the
+Government the tyrannical sectionalism of which the Senator from South
+Carolina is one of the maddest zealots. * * *
+
+As the Senator from South Carolina, is the Don Quixote, the Senator from
+Illinois (Mr. Douglas) is the Squire of Slavery, its very Sancho Panza,
+ready to do all its humiliating offices. This Senator, in his labored
+address, vindicating his labored report--piling one mass of elaborate
+error upon another mass--constrained himself, as you will remember, to
+unfamiliar decencies of speech. Of that address I have nothing to say
+at this moment, though before I sit down I shall show something of its
+fallacies. But I go back now to an earlier occasion, when, true to his
+native impulses, he threw into this discussion, "for a charm of powerful
+trouble," personalities most discreditable to this body. I will not stop
+to repel the imputations which he cast upon myself; but I mention them
+to remind you of the "sweltered venom sleeping got," which, with other
+poisoned ingredients, he cast into the caldron of this debate. Of other
+things I speak. Standing on this floor, the Senator issued his rescript,
+requiring submission to the Usurped Power of Kansas; and this was
+accompanied by a manner--all his own--such as befits the tyrannical
+threat. Very well. Let the Senator try. I tell him now that he cannot
+enforce any such submission. The Senator, with the slave power at his
+back, is strong; but he is not strong enough for this purpose. He is
+bold. He shrinks from nothing. Like Danton, he may cry, "l'audace!
+l'audace! toujours l'au-dace!" but even his audacity cannot compass this
+work. The Senator copies the British officer who, with boastful swagger,
+said that with the hilt of his sword he would cram the "stamps" down the
+throats of the American people, and he will meet a similar failure. He
+may convulse this country with a civil feud. Like the ancient madman, he
+may set fire to this Temple of Constitutional Liberty, grander than
+the Ephesian dome; but he cannot enforce obedience to that Tyrannical
+Usurpation.
+
+The Senator dreams that he can subdue the North. He disclaims the open
+threat, but his conduct still implies it. How little that Senator knows
+himself or the strength of the cause which he persecutes! He is but a
+mortal man; against him is an immortal principle. With finite power he
+wrestles with the infinite, and he must fall. Against him are stronger
+battalions than any marshalled by mortal arm--the inborn, ineradicable,
+invincible sentiments of the human heart; against him is nature in all
+her subtle forces; against him is God. Let him try to subdue these. * * *
+
+With regret, I come again upon the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+Butler), who, omnipresent in this debate, overflowed with rage at the
+simple suggestion that Kansas had applied for admission as a State;
+and, with incoherent phrases, discharged the loose expectoration of his
+speech, now upon her representative, and then upon her people. There was
+no extravagance of the ancient parliamentary debate, which he did not
+repeat; nor was there any possible deviation from truth which he did not
+make, with so much of passion, I am glad to add, as to save him from
+the suspicion of intentional aberration. But the Senator touches
+nothing which he does not disfigure--with error, sometimes of principle,
+sometimes of fact. He shows an incapacity of accuracy, whether in
+stating the Constitution, or in stating the law, whether in the details
+of statistics or the diversions of scholarship. He cannot ope his mouth,
+but out there flies a blunder. Surely he ought to be familiar with the
+life of Franklin; and yet he referred to this household character, while
+acting as agent of our fathers in England, as above suspicion; and this
+was done that he might give point to a false contrast with the agent of
+Kansas--not knowing that, however they may differ in genius and fame, in
+this experience they are alike: that Franklin, when entrusted with the
+petition of Massachusetts Bay, was assaulted by a foul-mouthed speaker,
+where he could not be heard in defence, and denounced as a "thief," even
+as the agent of Kansas has been assaulted on this floor, and denounced
+as a "forger." And let not the vanity of the Senator be inspired by
+the parallel with the British statesman of that day; for it is only in
+hostility to Freedom that any parallel can be recognized.
+
+But it is against the people of Kansas that the sensibilities of the
+Senator are particularly aroused. Coming, as he announces, "from a
+State"--ay, sir, from South Carolina--he turns with lordly disgust from
+this newly-formed community, which he will not recognize even as a "body
+politic." Pray, sir, by what title does he indulge in this egotism? Has
+he read the history of "the State" which he represents? He cannot
+surely have forgotten its shameful imbecility from Slavery, confessed
+throughout the Revolution, followed by its more shameful assumptions for
+Slavery since. He cannot have forgotten its wretched persistence in
+the slave-trade as the very apple of its eye, and the condition of its
+participation in the Union. He cannot have forgotten its constitution,
+which is Republican only in name, confirming power in the hands of the
+few, and founding the qualifications of its legislators on "a settled
+freehold estate and ten negroes." And yet the Senator, to whom that
+"State" has in part committed the guardianship of its good name, instead
+of moving, with backward treading steps, to cover its nakedness, rushes
+forward in the very ecstasy of madness, to expose it by provoking a
+comparison with Kansas. South Carolina is old; Kansas is young. South
+Carolina counts by centuries; where Kansas counts by years. But a
+beneficent example may be born in a day; and I venture to say, that
+against the two centuries of the older "State," may be already set
+the two years of trial, evolving corresponding virtue, in the younger
+community. In the one, is the long wail of Slavery; in the other, the
+hymns of Freedom. And if we glance at special achievements, it will
+be difficult to find any thing in the history of South Carolina which
+presents so much of heroic spirit in an heroic cause as appears in that
+repulse of the Missouri invaders by the beleaguered town of Lawrence,
+where even the women gave their effective efforts to Freedom. The
+matrons of Rome, who poured their jewels into the treasury for the
+public defence--the wives of Prussia, who, with delicate fingers,
+clothed their defenders against French invasion--the mothers of our
+own Revolution, who sent forth their sons, covered with prayers and
+blessings, to combat for human rights, did nothing of self-sacrifice
+truer than did these women on this occasion. Were the whole history of
+South Carolina blotted out of existence, from its very beginning down to
+the day of the last election of the Senator to his present seat on this
+floor, civilization might lose--I do not say how little; but surely
+less than it has already gained by the example of Kansas, in its valiant
+struggle against oppression, and in the development of a new science
+of emigration. Already, in Lawrence alone, there are newspapers and
+schools, including a High School, and throughout this infant Territory
+there is more mature scholarship far, in proportion to its inhabitants,
+than in all South Carolina. Ah, sir, I tell the Senator that Kansas,
+welcomed as a free State, will be a "ministering angel" to the Republic,
+when South Carolina, in the cloak of darkness which she hugs, "lies
+howling."
+
+The Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) naturally joins the Senator from
+South Carolina in this warfare, and gives to it the superior intensity
+of his nature. He thinks that the National Government has not completely
+proved its power, as it has never hanged a traitor; but, if the occasion
+requires, he hopes there will be no hesitation; and this threat is
+directed at Kansas, and even at the friends of Kansas throughout the
+country. Again occurs the parallel with the struggle of our fathers,
+and I borrow the language of Patrick Henry, when, to the cry from the
+Senator, of "treason," "treason," I reply, "if this be treason, make
+the most of it." Sir, it is easy to call names; but I beg to tell the
+Senator that if the word "traitor" is in any way applicable to those
+who refuse submission to a Tyrannical Usurpation, whether in Kansas or
+elsewhere, then must some new word, of deeper color, be invented, to
+designate those mad spirits who could endanger and degrade the Republic,
+while they betray all the cherished sentiments of the fathers and the
+spirit of the Constitution, in order to give new spread to Slavery. Let
+the Senator proceed. It will not be the first time in history, that a
+scaffold erected for punishment has become a pedestal of honor. Out of
+death comes life, and the "traitor" whom he blindly executes will live
+immortal in the cause.
+
+     "For Humanity sweeps onward; where to-day the martyr stands,
+     On the morrow crouches Judas, with the silver in his hands;
+     While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return,
+     To glean up the scattered ashes into History's golden urn."
+
+Among these hostile Senators, there is yet another, with all the
+prejudices of the Senator from South Carolina, but without his generous
+impulses, who, on account of his character before the country, and the
+rancor of his opposition, deserves to be named. I mean the Senator from
+Virginia (Mr. Mason), who, as the author of the Fugitive-Slave bill, has
+associated himself with a special act of inhumanity and tyranny. Of him
+I shall say little, for he has said little in this debate, though within
+that little was compressed the bitterness of a life absorbed in the
+support of Slavery. He holds the commission of Virginia; but he does not
+represent that early Virginia, so dear to our hearts, which gave to us
+the pen of Jefferson, by which the equality of men was declared, and
+the sword of Washington, by which Independence was secured; but he
+represents that other Virginia, from which Washington and Jefferson
+now avert their faces, where human beings are bred as cattle for the
+shambles, and where a dungeon rewards the pious matron who teaches
+little children to relieve their bondage by reading the Book of Life.
+It is proper that such a Senator, representing such a State, should rail
+against free Kansas.
+
+Senators such as these are the natural enemies of Kansas, and I
+introduce them with reluctance, simply that the country may understand
+the character of the hostility which must be overcome. Arrayed with
+them, of course, are all who unite, under any pretext or apology, in
+the propagandism of human Slavery. To such, indeed, the time-honored
+safeguards of popular rights can be a name only, and nothing more. What
+are trial by jury, habeas corpus, the ballot-box, the right of petition,
+the liberty of Kansas, your liberty, sir, or mine, to one who lends
+himself, not merely to the support at home, but to the propagandism
+abroad, of that preposterous wrong, which denies even the right of a
+man to himself! Such a cause can be maintained only by a practical
+subversion of all rights. It is, therefore, merely according to reason
+that its partisans should uphold the Usurpation in Kansas.
+
+To overthrow this Usurpation is now the special, importunate duty of
+Congress, admitting of no hesitation or postponement. To this end it
+must lift itself from the cabals of candidates, the machinations of
+party, and the low level of vulgar strife. It must turn from that Slave
+Oligarchy which now controls the Republic, and refuse to be its tool.
+Let its power be stretched forth toward this distant Territory, not to
+bind, but to unbind; not for the oppression of the weak, but for the
+subversion of the tyrannical; not for the prop and maintenance of a
+revolting Usurpation, but for the confirmation of Liberty.
+
+     "These are imperial arts and worthy thee!"
+
+Let it now take its stand between the living and dead, and cause this
+plague to be stayed. All this it can do; and if the interests of Slavery
+did not oppose, all this it would do at once, in reverent regard for
+justice, law, and order, driving away all the alarms of war; nor would
+it dare to brave the shame and punishment of this great refusal. But the
+slave power dares anything; and it can be conquered only by the united
+masses of the people. From Congress to the People I appeal. * * *
+
+The contest, which, beginning in Kansas, has reached us, will soon be
+transferred from Congress to a broader stage, where every citizen will
+be not only spectator, but actor; and to their judgment I confidently
+appeal. To the People, now on the eve of exercising the electoral
+franchise, in choosing a Chief Magistrate of the Republic, I appeal, to
+vindicate the electoral franchise in Kansas. Let the ballot-box of
+the Union, with multitudinous might, protect the ballot-box in that
+Territory. Let the voters everywhere, while rejoicing in their own
+rights, help to guard the equal rights of distant fellow-citizens; that
+the shrines of popular institutions, now desecrated, may be sanctified
+anew; that the ballot-box, now plundered, may be restored; and that the
+cry, "I am an American citizen," may not be sent forth in vain against
+outrage of every kind. In just regard for free labor in that Territory,
+which it is sought to blast by unwelcome association with slave labor;
+in Christian sympathy with the slave, whom it is proposed to task
+and sell there; in stern condemnation of the crime which has been
+consummated on that beautiful soil; in rescue of fellow-citizens now
+subjugated to a Tyrannical Usurpation; in dutiful respect for the early
+fathers, whose aspirations are now ignobly thwarted; in the name of the
+Constitution, which has been outraged--of the laws trampled down--of
+Justice banished--of Humanity degraded--of Peace destroyed--of Freedom
+crushed to earth; and, in the name of the Heavenly Father, whose service
+is perfect Freedom, I make this last appeal.
+
+
+May 20, 1856.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I shall not detain the Senate by a detailed reply to the
+speech of the Senator from Massachusetts. Indeed, I should not deem it
+necessary to say one word, but for the personalities in which he has
+indulged, evincing a depth of malignity that issued from every sentence,
+making it a matter of self-respect with me to repel the assaults which
+have been made.
+
+As to the argument, we have heard it all before. Not a position, not a
+fact, not an argument has he used, which has not been employed on the
+same side of the chamber, and replied to by me twice. I shall not follow
+him, therefore, because it would only be repeating the same answer which
+I have twice before given to each of his positions. He seems to get up
+a speech as in Yankee land they get up a bedquilt. They take all the old
+calico dresses of various colors, that have been in the house from
+the days of their grandmothers, and invite the young ladies of the
+neighborhood in the afternoon, and the young men to meet them at a dance
+in the evening. They cut up these pieces of old dresses and make pretty
+figures, and boast of what beautiful ornamental work they have made,
+although there was not a new piece of material in the whole quilt. Thus
+it is with the speech which we have had re-hashed here to-day, in regard
+to matters of fact, matters of law, and matters of argument--every thing
+but the personal assaults and the malignity. * * *
+
+His endeavor seems to be an attempt to whistle to keep up his courage
+by defiant assaults upon us all. I am in doubt as to what can be his
+object. He has not hesitated to charge three fourths of the Senate with
+fraud, with swindling, with crime, with infamy, at least one hundred
+times over in his speech. Is it his object to provoke some of us to kick
+him as we would a dog in the street, that he may get sympathy upon the
+just chastisement? What is the object of this denunciation against the
+body of which we are members? A hundred times he has called the Nebraska
+bill a "swindle," an act of crime, an act of infamy, and each time
+went on to illustrate the complicity of each man who voted for it in
+perpetrating the crime. He has brought it home as a personal charge to
+those who passed the Nebraska bill, that they were guilty of a crime
+which deserved the just indignation of heaven, and should make them
+infamous among men.
+
+Who are the Senators thus arraigned? He does me the honor to make me the
+chief. It was my good luck to have such a position in this body as to
+enable me to be the author of a great, wise measure, which the Senate
+has approved, and the country will endorse. That measure was sustained
+by about three fourths of all the members of the Senate. It was
+sustained by a majority of the Democrats and a majority of the Whigs
+in this body. It was sustained by a majority of Senators from the
+slave-holding States, and a majority of Senators from the free States.
+The Senator, by his charge of crime, then, stultifies three fourths
+of the whole body, a majority of the North, nearly the whole South, a
+majority of Whigs, and a majority of Democrats here. He says they are
+infamous. If he so believed, who could suppose that he would ever show
+his face among such a body of men? How dare he approach one of those
+gentlemen to give him his hand after that act? If he felt the courtesies
+between men he would not do it. He would deserve to have himself spit in
+the face for doing so. * * *
+
+The attack of the Senator from Massachusetts now is not on me alone.
+Even the courteous and the accomplished Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+Butler) could not be passed by in his absence.
+
+MR. MASON:--Advantage was taken of it.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--It is suggested that advantage is taken of his absence.
+I think that this is a mistake. I think the speech was written and
+practised, and the gestures fixed; and, if that part had been stricken
+out the Senator would not have known how to repeat the speech. All that
+tirade of abuse must be brought down on the head of the venerable, the
+courteous, and the distinguished Senator from South Carolina. I shall
+not defend that gentleman here. Every Senator who knows him loves him.
+The Senator from Massachusetts may take every charge made against him in
+his speech, and may verify by his oath, and by the oath of every one
+of his confederates, and there is not an honest man in this chamber who
+will not repel it as a slander. Your oaths cannot make a Senator feel
+that it was not an outrage to assail that honorable gentleman in the
+terms in which he has been attacked. He, however, will be here in due
+time to speak for himself, and to act for himself too. I know what will
+happen. The Senator from Massachusetts will go to him, whisper a secret
+apology in his ear, and ask him to accept that as satisfaction for a
+public outrage on his character! I know the Senator from Massachusetts
+is in the habit of doing those things. I have had some experience of his
+skill in that respect. * * *
+
+Why these attacks on individuals by name, and two thirds of the Senate
+collectively? Is it the object to drive men here to dissolve social
+relations with political opponents? Is it to turn the Senate into a bear
+garden, where Senators cannot associate on terms which ought to prevail
+between gentlemen? These attacks are heaped upon me by man after man.
+When I repel them, it is intimated that I show some feeling on the
+subject. Sir, God grant that when I denounce an act of infamy I shall do
+it with feeling, and do it under the sudden impulses of feeling, instead
+of sitting up at night writing out my denunciation of a man whom I
+hate, copying it, having it printed, punctuating the proof-sheets, and
+repeating it before the glass, in order to give refinement to insult,
+which is only pardonable when it is the outburst of a just indignation.
+
+Mr. President, I shall not occupy the time of the Senate. I dislike to
+be forced to repel these attacks upon myself, which seem to be repeated
+on every occasion. It appears that gentlemen on the other side of the
+chamber think they would not be doing justice to their cause if they did
+not make myself a personal object of bitter denunciation and malignity.
+I hope that the debate on this bill may be brought to a close at as
+early a day as possible. I shall do no more in these side discussions
+than vindicate myself and repel unjust attacks, but I shall ask the
+Senate to permit me to close the debate, when it shall close, in a calm,
+kind summary of the whole question, avoiding personalities.
+
+
+MR. SUMNER: Mr. President, To the Senator from Illinois, I should
+willingly leave the privilege of the common scold--the last word; but I
+will not leave to him, in any discussion with me, the last argument, or
+the last semblance of it. He has crowned the audacity of this debate by
+venturing to rise here and calumniate me. He said that I came here, took
+an oath to support the Constitution, and yet determined not to support a
+particular clause in that Constitution. To that statement I give, to his
+face, the flattest denial. When it was made on a former occasion on this
+floor by the absent Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), I then
+repelled it. I will read from the debate of the 28th of June, 1854, as
+published in the Globe, to show what I said in response to that calumny
+when pressed at that hour. Here is what I said to the Senator from South
+Carolina:
+
+"This Senator was disturbed, when to his inquiry, personally, pointedly,
+and vehemently addressed to me, whether I would join in returning a
+fellow-man to slavery? I exclaimed, 'Is thy servant a dog, that he
+should do this thing?'"
+
+You will observe that the inquiry of the Senator from South Carolina,
+was whether I would join in returning a fellow-man to slavery. It was
+not whether I would support any clause of the Constitution of the United
+States--far from that. * * *
+
+Sir, this is the Senate of the United States, an important body, under
+the Constitution, with great powers. Its members are justly supposed,
+from age, to be above the intemperance of youth, and from character to
+be above the gusts of vulgarity. They are supposed to have something of
+wisdom, and something of that candor which is the handmaid of wisdom.
+Let the Senator bear these things in mind, and let him remember
+hereafter that the bowie-knife and bludgeon are not the proper emblems
+of Senatorial debate. Let him remember that the swagger of Bob Acres and
+the ferocity of the Malay cannot add dignity to this body. The
+Senator has gone on to infuse into his speech the venom which has been
+sweltering for months--ay, for years; and he has alleged facts that
+are entirely without foundation, in order to heap upon me some personal
+obloquy. I will not go into the details which have flowed out so
+naturally from his tongue. I only brand them to his face as false. I
+say, also, to that Senator, and I wish him to bear it in mind, that no
+person with the upright form of man can be allowed--(Hesitation.)
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--Say it.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--I will say it--no person with the upright form of man can
+be allowed, without violation to all decency, to switch out from his
+tongue the perpetual stench of offensive personality. Sir, that is not
+a proper weapon of debate, at least, on this floor. The noisome, squat,
+and nameless animal, to which I now refer, is not a proper model for an
+American Senator. Will the Senator from Illinois take notice?
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I will; and therefore will not imitate you, sir.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--I did not hear the Senator.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I said if that be the case I would certainly never imitate
+you in that capacity, recognizing the force of the illustration.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--Mr. President, again the Senator has switched his tongue,
+and again he fills the Senate with its offensive odor. * * *
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I am not going to pursue this subject further. I will only
+say that a man who has been branded by me in the Senate, and convicted
+by the Senate of falsehood, cannot use language requiring a reply, and
+therefore I have nothing more to say.
+
+
+
+
+PRESTON S. BROOKS,
+
+OF SOUTH CAROLINA. (BORN 1819, DIED 1857.)
+
+ON THE SUMNER ASSAULT;
+
+HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JULY 14, 1856.
+
+
+MR. SPEAKER:
+
+Some time since a Senator from Massachusetts allowed himself, in an
+elaborately prepared speech, to offer a gross insult to my State, and to
+a venerable friend, who is my State representative, and who was absent
+at the time.
+
+Not content with that, he published to the world, and circulated
+extensively, this uncalled-for libel on my State and my blood. Whatever
+insults my State insults me. Her history and character have commanded my
+pious veneration; and in her defence I hope I shall always be prepared,
+humbly and modestly, to perform the duty of a son. I should have
+forfeited my own self-respect, and perhaps the good opinion of my
+countrymen, if I had failed to resent such an injury by calling the
+offender in question to a personal account. It was a personal affair,
+and in taking redress into my own hands I meant no disrespect to the
+Senate of the United States or to this House. Nor, sir, did I design
+insult or disrespect to the State of Massachusetts. I was aware of the
+personal responsibilities I incurred, and was willing to meet them. I
+knew, too, that I was amenable to the laws of the country, which afford
+the same protection to all, whether they be members of Congress or
+private citizens. I did not, and do not now believe, that I could be
+properly punished, not only in a court of law, but here also, at the
+pleasure and discretion of the House. I did not then, and do not now,
+believe that the spirit of American freemen would tolerate slander in
+high places, and permit a member of Congress to publish and circulate a
+libel on another, and then call upon either House to protect him against
+the personal responsibilities which he had thus incurred.
+
+But if I had committed a breach of privilege, it was the privilege of
+the Senate, and not of this House, which was violated. I was answerable
+there, and not here. They had no right, as it seems to me, to
+prosecute me in these Halls, nor have you the right in law or under
+the Constitution, as I respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over
+offences committed against them. The Constitution does not justify them
+in making such a request, nor this House in granting it. If, unhappily,
+the day should ever come when sectional or party feeling should run so
+high as to control all other considerations of public duty or justice,
+how easy it will be to use such precedents for the excuse of arbitrary
+power, in either House, to expel members of the minority who may have
+rendered themselves obnoxious to the prevailing spirit in the House to
+which they belong.
+
+Matters may go smoothly enough when one House asks the other to punish
+a member who is offensive to a majority of its own body; but how will it
+be when, upon a pretence of insulted dignity, demands are made of
+this House to expel a member who happens to run counter to its party
+predilections, or other demands which it may not be so agreeable to
+grant? It could never have been designed by the Constitution of the
+United States to expose the two Houses to such temptations to collision,
+or to extend so far the discretionary power which was given to either
+House to punish its own members for the violation of its rules and
+orders. Discretion has been said to be the law of the tyrant, and when
+exercised under the color of the law, and under the influence of party
+dictation, it may and will become a terrible and insufferable despotism.
+
+This House, however, it would seem, from the unmistakable tendency of
+its proceedings, takes a different view from that which I deliberately
+entertain in common with many others.
+
+So far as public interests or constitutional rights are involved, I have
+now exhausted my means of defence. I may, then, be allowed to take a
+more personal view of the question at issue. The further prosecution of
+this subject, in the shape it has now assumed, may not only involve my
+friends, but the House itself, in agitations which might be unhappy
+in their consequences to the country. If these consequences could be
+confined to myself individually, I think I am prepared and ready to meet
+them, here or elsewhere; and when I use this language I mean what I say.
+But others must not suffer for me. I have felt more on account of my two
+friends who have been implicated,than for myself, for they have proven
+that "there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother." I will
+not constrain gentlemen to assume a responsibility on my account, which
+possibly they would not run on their own.
+
+Sir, I cannot, on any own account, assume the responsibility, in the
+face of the American people, of commencing a line of conduct which in my
+heart of hearts I believe would result in subverting the foundations of
+this Government, and in drenching this Hall in blood. No act of mine,
+on my personal account, shall inaugurate revolution; but when you,
+Mr. Speaker, return to your own home, and hear the people of the great
+North--and they are a great people--speak of me as a bad man, you will
+do me the justice to say that a blow struck by me at this time would
+be followed by revolution--and this I know. (Applause and hisses in the
+gallery.)
+
+Mr. Brooks (resuming):--If I desired to kill the Senator, why did not I
+do it? You all admit that I had him in my power. Let me tell the member
+from New Jersey that it was expressly to avoid taking life that I used
+an ordinary cane, presented to me by a friend in Baltimore, nearly three
+months before its application to the "bare head" of the Massachusetts
+Senator. I went to work very deliberately, as I am charged--and this
+is admitted,--and speculated somewhat as to whether I should employ a
+horsewhip or a cowhide; but knowing that the Senator was my superior
+in strength, it occurred to me that he might wrest it from my hand, and
+then--for I never attempt anything I do not perform--I might have been
+compelled to do that which I would have regretted the balance of my
+natural life.
+
+The question has been asked in certain newspapers, why I did not invite
+the Senator to personal combat in the mode usually adopted. Well, sir,
+as I desire the whole truth to be known about the matter, I will for
+once notice a newspaper article on the floor of the House, and answer
+here.
+
+My answer is, that the Senator would not accept a message; and having
+formed the unalterable determination to punish him, I believed that the
+offence of "sending a hostile message," superadded to the indictment
+for assault and battery, would subject me to legal penalties more severe
+than would be imposed for a simple assault and battery. That is my
+answer.
+
+Now, Mr. Speaker, I have nearly finished what I intended to say. If
+my opponents, who have pursued me with unparalleled bitterness, are
+satisfied with the present condition of this affair, I am. I return
+my thanks to my friends, and especially to those who are from
+nonslave-owning States, who have magnanimously sustained me, and felt
+that it was a higher honor to themselves to be just in their judgment
+of a gentleman than to be a member of Congress for life. In taking my
+leave, I feel that it is proper that I should say that I believe that
+some of the votes that have been cast against me have been extorted by
+an outside pressure at home, and that their votes do not express the
+feelings or opinions of the members who gave them.
+
+To such of these as have given their votes and made their speeches
+on the constitutional principles involved, and without indulging in
+personal vilification, I owe my respect. But, sir, they have written me
+down upon the history of the country as worthy of expulsion, and in no
+unkindness I must tell them that for all future time my self-respect
+requires that I shall pass them as strangers.
+
+And now, Mr. Speaker, I announce to you and to this House, that I am no
+longer a member of the Thirty-Fourth Congress.
+
+(Mr. Brooks then walked out of the House of Representatives.)
+
+
+
+
+JUDAH P. BENJAMIN,
+
+OF LOUISIANA. (BORN 1811, DIED 1864.)
+
+ON THE PROPERTY DOCTRINE, OR THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY IN SLAVES;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 11, 1858.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT, the whole subject of slavery, so far as it is involved
+in the issue now before the country, is narrowed down at last to a
+controversy on the solitary point, whether it be competent for the
+Congress of the United States, directly or indirectly, to exclude
+slavery from the Territories of the Union. The Supreme Court of the
+United States have given a negative answer to this proposition, and
+it shall be my first effort to support that negation by argument,
+independently of the authority of the decision.
+
+It seems to me that the radical, fundamental error which underlies the
+argument in affirmation of this power, is the assumption that slavery
+is the creature of the statute law of the several States where it is
+established; that it has no existence outside of the limits of those
+States; that slaves are not property beyond those limits; and
+that property in slaves is neither recognized nor protected by
+the Constitution of the United States, nor by international law. I
+controvert all these propositions, and shall proceed at once to my
+argument.
+
+Mr. President, the thirteen colonies, which on the 4th of July, 1776,
+asserted their independence, were British colonies, governed by British
+laws. Our ancestors in their emigration to this country brought with
+them the common law of England as their birthright. They adopted its
+principles for their government so far as it was not incompatible with
+the peculiarities of their situation in a rude and unsettled country.
+Great Britain then having the sovereignty over the colonies, possessed
+undoubted power to regulate their institutions, to control their
+commerce, and to give laws to their intercourse, both with the mother
+and the other nations of the earth. If I can show, as I hope to be able
+to establish to the satisfaction of the Senate, that the nation thus
+exercising sovereign power over these thirteen colonies did establish
+slavery in them, did maintain and protect the institution, did originate
+and carry on the slave trade, did support and foster that trade, that
+it forbade the colonies permission either to emancipate or export their
+slaves, that it prohibited them from inaugurating any legislation in
+diminution or discouragement of the institution--nay, sir, more, if, at
+the date of our Revolution I can show that African slavery existed in
+England as it did on this continent, if I can show that slaves were sold
+upon the slave mart, in the Exchange and other public places of resort
+in the city of London as they were on this continent, then I shall not
+hazard too much in the assertion that slavery was the common law of the
+thirteen States of the Confederacy at the time they burst the bonds that
+united them to the mother country.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+This legislation, Mr. President, as I have said before, emanating from
+the mother country, fixed the institution upon the colonies. They could
+not resist it. All their right was limited to petition, to remonstrance,
+and to attempts at legislation at home to diminish the evil. Every
+such attempt was sternly repressed by the British Crown. In 1760, South
+Carolina passed an act prohibiting the further importation of African
+slaves. The act was rejected by the Crown; the Governor was reprimanded;
+and a circular was sent to all the Governors of all the colonies,
+warning them against presuming to countenance such legislation. In
+1765, a similar bill was twice read in the Assembly of Jamaica. The news
+reached Great Britain before its final passage. Instructions were sent
+out to the royal Governor; he called the House of Assembly before him,
+communicated his instructions, and forbade any further progress of the
+bill. In 1774, in spite of this discountenancing action of the mother
+Government, two bills passed the Legislative Assembly of Jamaica; and
+the Earl of Dartmouth, then Secretary of State, wrote to Sir Basil
+Keith, the Governor of the colony, that "these measures had created
+alarm to the merchants of Great Britain engaged in that branch of
+commerce;" and forbidding him, "on pain of removal from his Government,
+to assent to such laws."
+
+Finally, in 1775--mark the date--1775--after the revolutionary struggle
+had commenced, whilst the Continental Congress was in session, after
+armies had been levied, after Crown Point and Ticonderoga had been taken
+possession of by the insurgent colonists, and after the first blood
+shed in the Revolution had reddened the spring sod upon the green at
+Lexington, this same Earl of Dartmouth, in remonstrance from the agent
+of the colonies, replied:
+
+"We cannot allow the colonies to check or discourage in any degree a
+traffic so beneficial to the nation."
+
+I say, then, that down to the very moment when our independence was won,
+slavery, by the statute law of England, was the common law of the old
+thirteen colonies. But, sir, my task does not end here. I desire to show
+you that by her jurisprudence, that by the decisions of her judges, and
+the answers of her lawyers to questions from the Crown and from public
+bodies, this same institution was declared to be recognized by the
+common law of England; and slaves were declared to be, in their
+language, merchandise, chattels, just as much private property as any
+other merchandise or any other chattel.
+
+A short time prior to the year 1713, a contract had been formed between
+Spain and a certain company, called the Royal Guinea Company, that had
+been established in France. This contract was technically called in
+those days an _assiento_. By the treaty of Utrecht of the 11th of April,
+1713, Great Britain, through her diplomatists, obtained a transfer of
+that contract. She yielded considerations for it. The obtaining of that
+contract was greeted in England with shouts of joy. It was considered
+a triumph of diplomacy. It was followed in the month of May, 1713, by a
+new contract in form, by which the British Government undertook, for
+the term of thirty years then next to come, to transport annually
+4800 slaves to the Spanish American colonies, at a fixed price. Almost
+immediately after this new contract, a question arose in the English
+Council as to what was the true legal character of the slaves thus to be
+exported to the Spanish American colonies; and, according to the forms
+of the British constitution, the question was submitted by the Crown in
+council to the twelve judges of England. I have their answer here; it is
+in these words:
+
+"In pursuance of His Majesty's order in council, hereunto annexed, we do
+humbly certify our opinion to be that negroes are merchandise."
+
+Signed by Lord Chief-Justice Holt, Judge Pollexfen, and eight other
+judges of England.
+
+Mr. Mason. What is the date of that?
+
+Mr. Benjamin. It was immediately after the treaty of Utrecht, in 1713.
+Very soon afterwards the nascent spirit of fanaticism began to obtain
+a foothold in England; and although large numbers of negro slaves were
+owned in Great Britain, and, as I said before, were daily sold on the
+public exchange in Lon-don, questions arose as to the right of the
+owners to retain property in their slaves; and the merchants of London,
+alarmed, submitted the question to Sir Philip Yorke, who afterwards
+became Lord Hardwicke, and to Lord Talbot, who were then the solicitor
+and attorney-general of the kingdom. The question was propounded to
+them, "What are the rights of a British owner of a slave in England?"
+and this is the answer of those two legal functionaries. They certified
+that "a slave coming from the West Indies to England with or without his
+master, doth not become free; and his master's property in him is not
+thereby determined nor varied, and the master may legally compel him to
+return to the plantations."
+
+And, in 1749, the same question again came up before Sir Philip Yorke,
+then Lord Chancellor of England, under the title of Lord Hardwicke, and,
+by a decree in chancery in the case before him, he affirmed the doctrine
+which he had uttered when he was attorney-general of Great Britain.
+
+Things thus stood in England until the year 1771, when the spirit
+of fanaticism, to which I have adverted, acquiring strength, finally
+operated upon Lord Mansfield, who, by a judgment rendered in a case
+known as the celebrated Sommersett case, subverted the common law of
+England by judicial legislation, as I shall prove in an instant. I say
+it not on my own authority. I would not be so presumptuous. The Senator
+from Maine (Mr. Fessenden) need not smile at my statement. I will give
+him higher authority than anything I can dare assert. I say that in 1771
+Lord Mansfield subverted the common law of England in the Sommersett
+case, and decided, not that a slave carried to England from the West
+Indies by his master thereby became free, but that by the law of
+England, if the slave resisted the master, there was no remedy by which
+the master could exercise his control; that the colonial legislation
+which afforded the master means of controlling his property had no
+authority in England, and that England by her laws had provided no
+substitute for that authority. That was what Lord Mansfield decided.
+I say this was judicial legislation. I say it subverted the entire
+previous jurisprudence of Great Britain. I have just adverted to the
+authorities for that position. Lord Mansfield felt it. The case was
+argued before him over and over again, and he begged the parties to
+compromise. They said they would not. "Why," said he, "I have known
+six of these cases already, and in five out of the six there was a
+compromise; you had better compromise this matter"; but the parties said
+no, they would stand on the law; and then, after holding the case up
+two terms, Lord Mansfield mustered up courage to say just what I have
+asserted to be his decision; that there was no law in England affording
+the master control over his slave; and that therefore the master's
+putting him on board of a vessel in irons, being unsupported by
+authority derived from English law, and the colonial law not being in
+force in England, he would discharge the slave from custody on _habeas
+corpus_, and leave the master to his remedy as best he could find one.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. Decided so unwillingly.
+
+Mr. Benjamin. The gentleman is right--very unwillingly. He was driven
+to the decision by the paramount power which is now perverting the
+principles, and obscuring the judgment of the people of the North; and
+of which I must say there is no more striking example to be found than
+its effect on the clear and logical intellect of my friend from Maine.
+
+Mr. President, I make these charges in relation to that judgment,
+because in them I am supported by an intellect greater than Mansfield's;
+by a judge of resplendent genius and consummate learning; one who, in
+all questions of international law, on all subjects not dependent upon
+the peculiar municipal technical common law of England, has won for
+himself the proudest name in the annals of her jurisprudence--the
+gentleman knows well that I refer to Lord Stowell. As late as 1827,
+twenty years after Great Britain had abolished the slave trade, six
+years before she was brought to the point of confiscating the property
+of her colonies which she had forced them to buy, a case was brought
+before that celebrated judge; a case known to all lawyers by the name of
+the slave Grace. It was pretended in the argument that the slave Grace
+was free, because she had been carried to England, and it was said,
+under the authority of Lord Mansfield's decision in the Sommersett
+case, that, having once breathed English air, she was free; that the
+atmosphere of that favored kingdom was too pure to be breathed by a
+slave. Lord Stowell, in answering that legal argument, said that after
+painful and laborious research into historical records, he did not find
+anything touching the peculiar fitness of the English atmosphere for
+respiration during the ten centuries that slaves had lived in England.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+After that decision had been rendered, Lord Stowell, who was at that
+time in correspondence with Judge Story, sent him a copy of it, and
+wrote to him upon the subject of his judgment. No man will doubt the
+anti-slavery feelings and proclivities of Judge Story. He was asked to
+take the decision into consideration and give his opinion about it. Here
+is his answer:
+
+"I have read, with great attention, your judgment in the slave case.
+Upon the fullest consideration which I have been able to give the
+subject, I entirely concur in your views. If I had been called upon to
+pronounce a judgment in a like case, I should have certainly arrived at
+the same result."
+
+That was the opinion of Judge Story in 1827; but, sir, whilst
+contending, as I here contend, as a proposition, based in history,
+maintained by legislation, supported by judicial authority of the
+greatest weight, that slavery, as an institution, was protected by
+the common law of these colonies at the date of the Declaration of
+Independence, I go further, though not necessary to my argument, and
+declare that it was the common law of North and South America alike.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Thus, Mr. President, I say that even if we admit for the moment that
+the common law of the nations which colonized this continent, the
+institution of slavery at the time of our independence, was dying away
+by the manumissions either gratuitous or for a price of those who
+held the people as slaves, yet, so far as the continent of America was
+concerned, North and South, there did not breathe a being who did
+not know that a negro, under the common law of the continent, was
+merchandise, was property, was a slave, and that he could only extricate
+himself from that status, stamped upon him by the common law of the
+country, by positive proof of manumission. No man was bound to show
+title to his negro slave. The slave was bound to show manumission under
+which he had acquired his freedom, by the common law of every colony.
+Why, sir, can any man doubt, is there a gentleman here, even the Senator
+from Maine, who doubts that if, after the Revolution, the different
+States of this Union had not passed laws upon the subject to abolish
+slavery, to subvert this common law of the continent, every one of these
+States would be slave States yet? How came they free States? Did not
+they have this institution of slavery imprinted upon them by the power
+of the mother country? How did they get rid of it? All, all must admit
+that they had to pass positive acts of legislation to accomplish this
+purpose. Without that legislation they would still be slave States.
+What, then, becomes of the pretext that slavery only exists in those
+States where it was established by positive legislation, that it has
+no inherent vitality out of those States, and that slaves are not
+considered as property by the Constitution of the United States?
+
+When the delegates of the several colonies which had thus asserted their
+independence of the British Crown met in convention, the decision of
+Lord Mansfield in the Sommersett case was recent, was known to all. At
+the same time, a number of the northern colonies had taken incipient
+steps for the emancipation of their slaves. Here permit me to say, sir,
+that, with a prudent regard to what the Senator from Maine (Mr. Hamlin)
+yesterday called the "sensitive pocket-nerve," they all made these
+provisions prospective. Slavery was to be abolished after a certain
+future time--just enough time to give their citizens convenient
+opportunity for selling the slaves to southern planters, putting the
+money in their pockets, and then sending to us here, on this floor,
+representatives who flaunt in robes of sanctimonious holiness; who make
+parade of a cheap philanthropy, exercised at our expense; and who say
+to all men: "Look ye now, how holy, how pure we are; you are polluted by
+the touch of slavery; we are free from it."
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, sir, because the Supreme Court of the United States says--what
+is patent to every man who reads the Constitution of the United
+States--that it does guaranty property in slaves,it has been attacked
+with vituperation here, on this floor, by Senators on all sides. Some
+have abstained from any indecent, insulting remarks in relation to the
+Court. Some have confined themselves to calm and legitimate argument. To
+them I am about to reply. To the others, I shall have something to say a
+little later. What says the Senator from Maine (Mr. Fessenden)? He says:
+
+"Had the result of that election been otherwise, and had not the
+(Democratic) party triumphed on the dogma which they had thus
+introduced, we should never have heard of a doctrine so utterly at
+variance with all truth; so utterly destitute of all legal logic; so
+founded on error, and unsupported by anything like argument, as is the
+opinion of the Supreme Court."
+
+He says, further:
+
+"I should like, if I had time, to attempt to demonstrate the fallacy
+of that opinion. I have examined the view of the Supreme Court of the
+United States on the question of the power of the Constitution to carry
+slavery into free territory belonging to the United States, and I tell
+you that I believe any tolerably respectable lawyer in the United States
+can show, beyond all question, to any fair and unprejudiced mind, that
+the decision has nothing to stand upon except assumption, and bad logic
+from the assumptions made. The main proposition on which that decision
+is founded, the corner-stone of it, without which it is nothing, without
+which it fails entirely to satisfy the mind of any man, is this: that
+the Constitution of the United States recognizes property in slaves,
+and protects it as such. I deny it. It neither recognizes slaves as
+property, nor does it protect slaves as property."
+
+The Senator here, you see, says that the whole decision is based on
+that assumption, which is false. He says that the Constitution does
+not recognize slaves as property, nor protect them as property, and his
+reasoning, a little further on, is somewhat curious. He says:
+
+"On what do they found the assertion that the Constitution recognizes
+slavery as property? On the provision of the Constitution by which
+Congress is prohibited from passing a law to prevent the African
+slave trade for twenty years; and therefore they say the Constitution
+recognizes slaves as property."
+
+I should think that was a pretty fair recognition of it. On this point
+the gentleman declares:
+
+"Will not anybody see that this constitutional provision, if it works
+one way, must work the other? If, by allowing the slave trade for twenty
+years, we recognize slaves as property, when we say that at the end of
+twenty years we will cease to allow it, or may cease to do so, is not
+that denying them to be property after that period elapses?"
+
+That is the argument. Nothing but my respect for the logical intellect
+of the Senator from Maine could make me treat this argument as serious,
+and nothing but having heard it myself would make me believe that he
+ever uttered it. What, sir! The Constitution of our country says to the
+South, "you shall count as the basis of your representation five slaves
+as being three white men; you may be protected in the natural increase
+of your slaves; nay, more, as a matter of compromise you may increase
+their number if you choose, for twenty years, by importation; when these
+twenty years are out, you shall stop." The Supreme Court of the United
+States says, "well; is not this a recognition of slavery, of property
+in slaves?" "Oh, no," says the gentleman, "the rule must work both
+ways; there is a converse to the proposition." Now, sir, to an
+ordinary, uninstructed intellect, it would seem that the converse of the
+proposition was simply that at the end of twenty years you should not
+any longer increase your numbers by importation; but the gentleman says
+the converse of the proposition is that at the end of the twenty years,
+after you have, under the guarantee of the Constitution, been adding by
+importation to the previous number of your slaves, then all those that
+you had before, and all those that, under that Constitution, you have
+imported, cease to be recognized as property by the Constitution, and
+on this proposition he assails the Supreme Court of the United States--a
+proposition which he says will occur to anybody.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. Will the Senator allow me?
+
+Mr. Benjamin. I should be very glad to enter into this debate now, but I
+fear it is so late that I shall not be able to get through to-day.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. I suppose it is of no consequence.
+
+Mr. Benjamin. What says the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Collamer), who
+also went into this examination somewhat extensively. I read from his
+printed speech:
+
+"I do not say that slaves are never property. I do not say that they
+are, or are not. Within the limits of a State which declares them to be
+property, they are property, because they are within the jurisdiction of
+that government which makes the declaration; but I should wish to speak
+of it in the light of a member of the United States Senate, and in the
+language of the United States Constitution. If this be property in the
+States, what is the nature and extent of it? I insist that the Supreme
+Court has often decided, and everybody has understood, that slavery is
+a local institution, existing by force of State law; and of course that
+law can give it no possible character beyond the limits of that State."
+I shall no doubt find the idea better expressed in the opinion of Judge
+Nelson, in this same Dred Scott decision. I prefer to read his language.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+"Here is the law; and under it exists the law of slavery in the
+different States. By virtue of this very principle it cannot extend
+one inch beyond its own territorial limits. A State cannot regulate
+the relation of master and slave, of owner and property, the manner and
+title of descent, or anything else, one inch beyond its territory. Then
+you cannot, by virtue of the law of slavery, if it makes slaves property
+in a State, if you please, move that property out of the State. It ends
+whenever you pass from that State. You may pass into another State that
+has a like law; and if you do, you hold it by virtue of that law; but
+the moment you pass beyond the limits of the slaveholding States, all
+title to the property called property in slaves, there ends. Under such
+a law slaves cannot be carried as property into the Territories, or
+anywhere else beyond the States authorizing it. It is not property
+anywhere else. If the Constitution of the United States gives any other
+and further character than this to slave property, let us acknowledge it
+fairly and end all strife about it. If it does not, I ask in all candor,
+that men on the other side shall say so, and let this point be
+settled. What is the point we are to inquire into? It is this: does
+the Constitution of the United States make slaves property beyond the
+jurisdiction of the States authorizing slavery? If it only acknowledges
+them as property within that jurisdiction, it has not extended the
+property one inch beyond the State line; but if, as the Supreme Court
+seems to say, it does recognize and protect them as property further
+than State limits, and more than the State laws do, then, indeed, it
+becomes like other property. The Supreme Court rests this claim upon
+this clause of the Constitution: 'No person held to service or labor in
+one State, under the laws thereof, shall, in consequence of any law or
+regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall
+be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may
+be due.' Now the question is, does that guaranty it? Does that make
+it the same as other property? The very fact that this clause makes
+provision on the subject of persons bound to service, shows that the
+framers of the Constitution did not regard it as other property. It
+was a thing that needed some provision; other property did not. The
+insertion of such a provision shows that it was not regarded as other
+property. If a man's horse stray from Delaware into Pennsylvania, he can
+go and get it. Is there any provision in the Constitution for it? No.
+How came this to be there, if a slave is property? If it is the same as
+other property, why have any provision about it?'"
+
+It will undoubtedly have struck any person, in hearing this passage read
+from the speech of the Senator from Vermont, whom I regret not to see
+in his seat to-day, that the whole argument, ingeniously as it is put,
+rests upon this fallacy--if I may say so with due respect to him--that
+a man cannot have title in property wherever the law does not give him
+a remedy or process for the assertion of his title; or, in other words,
+his whole argument rests upon the old confusion of ideas which considers
+a man's right and his remedy to be one and the same thing. I have
+already shown to you, by the passages I have cited from the opinions of
+Lord Stowell and of Judge Story, how they regard this subject. They say
+that the slave who goes to England, or goes to Massachusetts, from a
+slave State, is still a slave, that he is still his master's property;
+but that his master has lost control over him, not by reason of the
+cessation of his property, but because those States grant no remedy to
+the master by which he can exercise his control.
+
+There are numerous illustrations upon this point--illustrations
+furnished by the copyright laws, illustrations furnished by patent laws.
+Let us take a case, one that appeals to us all. There lives now a man
+in England who from time to time sings to the enchanted ear of the
+civilized world strains of such melody that the charmed senses seem to
+abandon the grosser regions of earth, and to rise to purer and serener
+regions above. God has created that man a poet. His inspiration is his;
+his songs are his by right divine; they are his property so recognized
+by human law; yet here in these United States men steal Tennyson's works
+and sell his property for their profit; and this because, in spite of
+the violated conscience of the nation, we refuse to give him protection
+for his property. Examine your Constitution; are slaves the only species
+of property there recognized as requiring peculiar protection? Sir, the
+inventive genius of our brethren of the North is a source of vast wealth
+to them and vast benefit to the nation. I saw a short time ago in one of
+the New York journals, that the estimated value of a few of the patents
+now before us in this Capital for renewal, was $40,000,000. I cannot
+believe that the entire capital, invested in inventions of this
+character in the United States can fall short of one hundred and fifty
+or two hundred million dollars. On what protection does this vast
+property rest? Just upon that same constitutional protection which gives
+a remedy to the slave owner when his property is, also found outside of
+the limits of the State in which he lives.
+
+Without this protection, what would be the condition of the northern
+inventor? Why, sir, the Vermont inventor protected by his own law would
+come to Massachusetts, and there say to the pirate who had stolen his
+property, "Render me up my property or pay me value for its use." The
+Senator from Vermont would receive for answer, if he were the counsel of
+the Vermont inventor, "Sir, if you want protection for your property go
+to your own State; property is governed by the laws of the State within
+whose jurisdiction it is found; you have no property in your invention
+outside of the limits of your State; you cannot go an inch beyond it."
+Would not this be so? Does not every man see at once that the right
+of the inventor to his discovery, that the right of the poet to his
+inspiration, depends upon those principles of eternal justice which God
+has implanted in the heart of man, and that wherever he cannot exercise
+them it is because man, faithless to the trust that he has received from
+God, denies them the protection to which they are entitled?'
+
+Sir, follow out the illustration which the Senator from Vermont himself
+has given; take his very case of the Delaware owner of a horse riding
+him across the line into Pennsylvania. The Senator says: "Now, you
+see that slaves are not property like other property; if slaves were
+property like other property, why have you this special clause in your
+Constitution to protect a slave? You have no clause to protect the
+horse, because horses are recognized as property everywhere." Mr.
+President, the same fallacy lurks at the bottom of this argument, as of
+all the rest. Let Pennsylvania exercise her undoubted jurisdiction over
+persons and things within her own boundary; let her do as she has
+a perfect right to do--declare that hereafter, within the State of
+Pennsylvania, there shall be no property in horses, and that no man
+shall maintain a suit in her courts for the recovery of property in a
+horse; and where will your horse-owner be then? Just where the English
+poet is now; just where the slaveholder and the inventor would be if the
+Constitution, foreseeing a difference of opinion in relation to rights
+in these subject-matters, had not provided the remedy in relation to
+such property as might easily be plundered. Slaves, if you please, are
+not property like other property in this: that you can easily rob us of
+them; but as to the right in them, that man has to overthrow the
+whole history of the world, he has to overthrow every treatise on
+jurisprudence, he has to ignore the common sentiment of mankind, he has
+to repudiate the authority of all that is considered sacred with man,
+ere he can reach the conclusion that the person who owns a slave, in
+a country where slavery has been established for ages, has no other
+property in that slave than the mere title which is given by the statute
+law of the land where it is found. * * *
+
+
+
+
+ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON THE DRED SCOTT DECISION,
+
+SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, JUNE 26, 1857.
+
+
+And now as to the Dred Scott decision. That decision declares two
+propositions--first, that a negro cannot sue in the United States
+courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the
+Territories. It was made by a divided court--dividing differently on
+the different points. Judge Douglas does not discuss the merits of the
+decision, and in that respect I shall follow his example, believing I
+could no more improve on McLean and Curtis than he could on Taney.
+
+He denounces all who question the correctness of that decision, as
+offering violent resistance to it. But who resists it? Who has, in spite
+of the decision, declared Dred Scott free, and resisted the authority of
+his master over him?
+
+Judicial decisions have two uses,--first, to absolutely determine the
+case decided; and secondly, to indicate to the public how other similar
+cases will be decided when they arise. For the latter use they are
+called "precedents" and "authorities."
+
+We believe as much as Judge Douglas (perhaps more) in obedience to,
+and respect for, the judicial department of government. We think its
+decisions on constitutional questions, when fully settled, should
+control not only the particular cases decided, but the general policy
+of the country, subject to be disturbed only by amendments to the
+Constitution as provided in that instrument itself. More than this would
+be revolution. But we think the Dred Scott decision is erroneous. We
+know the court that made it has often overruled its own decisions,
+and we shall do what we can to have it to overrule this. We offer no
+resistance to it.
+
+Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents
+according to circumstances. That this should be so accords both with
+common sense and the customary understanding of the legal profession.
+
+If this important decision had been made by the unanimous concurrence
+of the judges, and without any apparent partisan bias, and in accordance
+with legal public expectation and with the steady practice of the
+departments throughout our history, and had been in no part based on
+assumed historical facts which are not really true; or, if wanting in
+some of these, it had been before the court more than once, and had
+there been affirmed and reaffirmed through a course of years, it then
+might be, perhaps would be, factious, nay, even revolutionary, not to
+acquiesce in it as a precedent.
+
+But when, as is true, we find it wanting in all these claims to the
+public confidence, it is not factious, it is not even disrespectful, to
+treat it as not having yet quite established a settled doctrine for the
+country. But Judge Douglas considers this view awful. Hear him:
+
+"The courts are the tribunals prescribed by the Constitution and created
+by the authority of the people to determine, expound, and enforce the
+law. Hence, whoever resists the final decision of the highest
+judicial tribunal aims a deadly blow at our whole republican system of
+government--a blow which, if successful, would place all our rights
+and liberties at the mercy of passion, anarchy, and violence. I repeat,
+therefore, that if resistance to the decisions of the Supreme Court of
+the United States, in a matter like the points decided in the Dred Scott
+case, clearly within their jurisdiction as defined by the Constitution,
+shall be forced upon the country as a political issue, it will become
+a distinct and naked issue between the friends and enemies of the
+Constitution--the friends and the enemies of the supremacy of the laws."
+
+I have said, in substance, that the Dred Scott decision was in part
+based on assumed historical facts which were not really true, and I
+ought not to leave the subject without giving some reasons for saying
+this; I therefore give an instance or two, which I think fully sustain
+me. Chief-Justice Taney, in delivering the opinion of the majority of
+the court, insists at great length that the negroes were no part of the
+people who made, or for whom was made, the Declaration of Independence,
+or the Constitution of the United States.
+
+On the contrary, Judge Curtis, in his dissenting opinion, shows that in
+five of the then thirteen States--to wit, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
+New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina--free negroes were voters,
+and in proportion to their numbers had the same part in making the
+Constitution that the white people had. He shows this with so much
+particularity as to leave no doubt of its truth; and as a sort of
+conclusion on that point, holds the following language:
+
+"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the
+United States, through the action in each State, of those persons who
+were qualified by its laws to act thereon in behalf of themselves and
+all other citizens of the State. In some of the States, as we have seen,
+colored persons were among those qualified by law to act on the subject.
+These colored persons were not only included in the body of 'the
+people of the United States' by whom the Constitution was ordained and
+established; but in at least five of the States they had the power to
+act, and doubtless, did act, by their suffrages, upon the question of
+its adoption."
+
+Again, Chief-Justice Taney says:
+
+"It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion, in
+relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and
+enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of
+Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed
+and adopted."
+
+And again, after quoting from the Declaration, he says:
+
+"The general words above quoted would seem to include the whole human
+family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day,
+would be so understood."
+
+In these the Chief-Justice does not directly assert, but plainly
+assumes, as a fact, that the public estimate of the black man is more
+favorable now than it was in the days of the Revolution. This assumption
+is a mistake. In some trifling particulars the condition of that race
+has been ameliorated; but as a whole, in this country, the change
+between then and now is decidedly the other way; and their ultimate
+destiny has never appeared so hopeless as in the last three or four
+years. In two of the five States--New Jersey and North Carolina--that
+then gave the free negro the right of voting, the right has since been
+taken away, and in the third--New York--it has been greatly abridged;
+while it has not been extended, so far as I know, to a single additional
+State, though the number of the States has more than doubled. In those
+days, as I understand, masters could, at their own pleasure, emancipate
+their slaves; but since then such legal restraints have been made
+upon emancipation as to amount almost to prohibition. In those days
+legislatures held the unquestioned power to abolish slavery in their
+respective States, but now it is becoming quite fashionable for State
+constitutions to withhold that power from the legislatures. In those
+days, by common consent, the spread of the black man's bondage to the
+new countries was prohibited, but now Congress decides that it will not
+continue the prohibition, and the Supreme Court decides that it could
+not if it would. In those days our Declaration of Independence was held
+sacred by all, and thought to include all; but now, to aid in making the
+bondage of the negro universal and eternal, it is assailed and sneered
+at and construed, and hawked at and torn, till, if its framers could
+rise from their graves, they could not at all recognize it. All the
+powers of earth seem rapidly combining against him. Mammon is after him,
+ambition follows, philosophy follows, and the theology of the day is
+fast joining the cry. They have him in his prison-house; they have
+searched his person, and left no prying instrument with him. One after
+another they have closed the heavy iron doors upon him; and now they
+have him, as it were, bolted in with a lock of a hundred keys, which can
+never be unlocked without the concurrence of every key--the keys in
+the hands of a hundred different men, and they scattered to a hundred
+different and distant places; and they stand musing as to what
+invention, in all the dominions of mind and matter, can be produced to
+make the impossibility of his escape more complete than it is.
+
+It is grossly incorrect to say or assume that the public estimate of the
+negro is more favorable now than it was at the origin of the government.
+
+Three years and a half ago, Judge Douglas brought forward his famous
+Nebraska bill. The country was at once in a blaze. He scorned all
+opposition, and carried it through Congress. Since then he has seen
+himself superseded in a presidential nomination by one indorsing the
+general doctrine of his measure, but at the same time standing clear
+of the odium of its untimely agitation and its gross breach of national
+faith; and he has seen that successful rival constitutionally elected,
+not by the strength of friends, but by the division of adversaries,
+being in a popular minority of nearly four hundred thousand votes.
+He has seen his chief aids in his own State, Shields and Richardson,
+politically speaking, successively tried, convicted, and executed, for
+an offense not their own, but his. And now he sees his own case standing
+next on the docket for trial.
+
+There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people at
+the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races;
+and Judge Douglas evidently is basing his chief hope upon the chances of
+his being able to appropriate the benefit of this disgust to himself.
+If he can, by much drumming and repeating, fasten the odium of that idea
+upon his adversaries, he thinks he can struggle through the storm. He
+therefore clings to this hope, as a drowning man to the last plank.
+He makes an occasion for lugging it in from the opposition to the Dred
+Scott decision. He finds the Republicans insisting that the Declaration
+of Independence includes all men, black as well as white, and forthwith
+he boldly denies that it includes negroes at all, and proceeds to argue
+gravely that all who contend it does, do so only because they want to
+vote, and eat, and sleep, and marry with negroes. He will have it that
+they cannot be consistent else. Now I protest against the counterfeit
+logic which concludes that, because I do not want a black woman for a
+slave I must necessarily want her for a wife. I need not have her for
+either. I can just leave her alone. In some respects she certainly is
+not my equal; but in her natural right to eat the bread she earns with
+her own hands without asking leave of any one else, she is my equal, and
+the equal of all others.
+
+Chief-Justice Taney, in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, admits that
+the language of the Declaration is broad enough to include the whole
+human family, but he and Judge Douglas argue that the authors of that
+instrument did not intend to include negroes, by the fact that they did
+not at once actually place them on an equality with the whites. Now this
+grave argument comes to just nothing at all, by the other fact that they
+did not at once, or ever afterward, actually place all white people on
+an equality with one another. And this is the staple argument of both
+the Chief-Justice and the Senator for doing this obvious violence to the
+plain, unmistakable language of the Declaration.
+
+I think the authors of that notable instrument intended to include all
+men, but they did not intend to declare all men equal in all respects.
+They did not mean to say all were equal in color, size, intellect,
+moral developments, or social capacity. They defined with tolerable
+distinctness in what respects they did consider all men created
+equal--equal with "certain inalienable rights, among which are life,
+liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This they said, and this they
+meant. They did not mean to assert the obvious untruth that all were
+then actually enjoying that equality, nor yet that they were about to
+confer it immediately upon them. In fact, they had no power to confer
+such a boon. They meant simply to declare the right, so that enforcement
+of it might follow as fast as circumstances should permit.
+
+They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should be
+familiar to all, and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly
+labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly
+approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its
+influence and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people
+of all colors everywhere. The assertion that "all men are created equal"
+was of no practical use in effecting our separation from Great Britain;
+and it was placed in the Declaration not for that, but for future use.
+Its authors meant it to be--as, thank God, it is now proving itself--a
+stumbling-block to all those who in after times might seek to turn a
+free people back into the hateful paths of despotism. They knew the
+proneness of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant when such
+should reappear in this fair land and commence their vocation, they
+should find left for them at least one hard nut to crack.
+
+I have now briefly expressed my view of the meaning and object of that
+part of the Declaration of Independence which declares that "all men are
+created equal."
+
+Now let us hear Judge Douglas's view of the same subject as I find it in
+the printed report of his late speech. Here it is:
+
+"No man can vindicate the character, motives, and conduct of the signers
+of the Declaration of Independence, except upon the hypothesis that
+they referred to the white race alone, and not to the African, when they
+declared all men to have been created equal; that they were speaking of
+British subjects on this continent being equal to British subjects
+born and residing in Great Britain; that they were entitled to the same
+inalienable rights, and among them were enumerated life, liberty, and
+the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration was adopted for the purpose
+of justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized world in
+withdrawing their allegiance from the British crown, and dissolving
+their connection with the mother country."
+
+My good friends, read that carefully over in some leisure hour, and
+ponder well upon it; see what a mere wreck--mangled ruin--it makes of
+our once glorious Declaration.
+
+"They were speaking of British subjects on this continent being equal to
+British subjects born and residing in Great Britain." Why, according
+to this, not only negroes but white people outside of Great Britain and
+America were not spoken of in that instrument. The English, Irish, and
+Scotch, along with white Americans, were included, to be sure, but the
+French, Germans, and other white people of the world are all gone to pot
+along with the Judge's inferior races.
+
+I had thought the Declaration promised something better than the
+condition of British subjects; but no, it only meant that we should be
+equal to them in their own oppressed and unequal condition. According to
+that, it gave no promise that, having kicked off the king and lords of
+Great Britain, we should not at once be saddled with a king and lords of
+our own.
+
+I had thought the Declaration contemplated the progressive improvement
+in the condition of all men everywhere; but no, it merely "was adopted
+for the purpose of justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized
+world, in withdrawing their allegiance from the British crown, and
+dissolving their connection with the mother country." Why, that object
+having been effected some eighty years ago, the Declaration is of
+no practical use now--mere rubbish--old wadding left to rot on the
+battle-field after the victory is won.
+
+I understand you are preparing to celebrate the "Fourth," to-morrow
+week. What for? The doings of that day had no reference to the present;
+and quite half of you are not even descendants of those who were
+referred to at that day. But I suppose you will celebrate, and will even
+go so far as to read the Declaration. Suppose, after you read it once
+in the old-fashioned way, you read it once more with Judge Douglas's
+version. It will then run thus: "We hold these truths to be
+self-evident, that all British subjects who were on this continent
+eighty-one years ago, were created equal to all British subjects born
+and then residing in Great Britain."
+
+And now I appeal to all--to Democrats as well as others--are you really
+willing that the Declaration shall thus be frittered away?--thus left
+no more, at most, than an interesting memorial of the dead past?--thus
+shorn of its vitality and practical value, and left without the germ or
+even the suggestion of the individual rights of man in it?
+
+
+
+
+ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON HIS NOMINATION TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE,
+
+AT THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION, SPRINGFIELD, ILLS., JUNE 16, 1858.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONVENTION:
+
+If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we
+could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into
+the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and
+confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the
+operation of that policy, that agitation not only has not ceased, but
+has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a
+crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against
+itself cannot stand." I believe this Government cannot endure
+permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be
+dissolved; I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect that
+it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the
+other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of
+it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it
+is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it
+forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as
+well as new, North as well as South. Have we no tendency to the latter
+condition? Let any one who doubts carefully contemplate that now almost
+complete legal combination piece of machinery, so to speak--compounded
+of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider
+not only what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted,
+but also let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if
+he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design and
+concert of action among its chief architects from the beginning.
+
+The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more than half the
+States by State constitutions, and from most of the national territory
+by Congressional prohibition. Four days later commenced the struggle
+which ended in repealing that Congressional prohibition. This opened all
+the national territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. But,
+so far, Congress only had acted, and an indorsement, by the people, real
+or apparent, was indispensable, to save the point already gained and
+give chance for more. This necessity had not been overlooked, but had
+been provided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument
+of "squatter sovereignty," otherwise called "sacred right of
+self-government";--which latter phrase though expressive of the only
+rightful basis of any government, was so perverted in this attempted use
+of it as to amount to just this: That, if any one man choose to enslave
+another, no third man shall be allowed to object. That argument was
+incorporated with the Nebraska bill itself, in the language which
+follows: "It being the true intent and meaning of this act, not to
+legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it
+therefrom; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and
+regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to
+the Constitution of the United States." Then opened the roar of loose
+declamation in favor of "squatter sovereignty," and "sacred right of
+self-government." "But," said opposition members, "let us amend the bill
+so as to expressly declare that the people of the Territory may exclude
+slavery." "Not we," said the friends of the measure; and down they voted
+the amendment.
+
+While the Nebraska bill was passing through Congress, a law-case,
+involving the question of a negro's freedom, by reason of his owner
+having voluntarily taken him first into a free State, and then into a
+Territory covered by the Congressional prohibition, and held him as a
+slave for a long time in each, was passing through the United States
+Circuit Court for the District of Missouri; and both Nebraska bill and
+lawsuit were brought to a decision in the same month of May, 1854. The
+negro's name was Dred Scott, which name now designates the decision
+finally made in the case. Before the then next Presidential election,
+the law-case came to, and was argued in, the Supreme Court of the United
+States; but the decision of it was deferred until after the election.
+Still, before the election, Senator Trumbull, on the floor of the
+Senate, requested the leading advocate of the Nebraska bill to state his
+opinion whether the people of a Territory can constitutionally exclude
+slavery from their limits; and the latter answers: "That is a question
+for the Supreme Court."
+
+The election came, Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the indorsement, such
+as it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement,
+however, fell short of a clear popular majority by nearly four hundred
+thousand votes, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable and
+satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his last annual message, as
+impressively as possible, echoed back upon the people the weight and
+authority of the indorsement. The Supreme Court met again, did not
+announce their decision, but ordered a re-argument. The Presidential
+inauguration came, and still no decision of the court; but the incoming
+President, in his inaugural address, fervently exhorted the people to
+abide by the forthcoming decision, whatever it might be. Then, in a few
+days, came the decision. The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds
+an early occasion to make a speech at this capital, indorsing the Dred
+Scott decision, and vehemently denouncing all opposition to it. The
+new President, too, seizes the early occasion of the Silliman letter
+to indorse and strongly construe that decision, and to express his
+astonishment that any different view had ever been entertained.
+
+At length a squabble springs up between the President and the author of
+the Nebraska bill, on the mere question of fact, whether the Lecompton
+constitution was, or was not, in any just sense, made by the people of
+Kansas; and in that quarrel the latter declares that all he wants is a
+fair vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery be voted
+down or voted up.' I do not understand his declaration, that he cares
+not whether slavery be voted _down_ or voted _up_, to be intended by him
+other than as an apt definition of the policy he would impress upon
+the public mind--the principle for which he declares he has suffered so
+much, and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling to that
+principle. If he has any parental feeling, well may he cling to it.
+That principle is the only shred left of his original Nebraska doctrine.
+Under the Dred Scott decision, squatter sovereignty squatted out of
+existence--tumbled down like temporary scaffolding--like the mould
+at the foundry, served through one blast, and fell back into loose
+sand,--helped to carry an election, and then was kicked to the winds.
+His late joint struggle with the Republicans against the Lecompton
+constitution involves nothing of the original Nebraska doctrine. That
+struggle was made on a point--the right of a people to make their own
+constitution--upon which he and the Republicans have never differed.
+
+The several points of the Dred Scott decision, in connection with
+Senator Douglas's "care-not" policy, constitute the piece of machinery
+in its present state of advancement. This was the third point gained.
+The working points of that machinery are: (1) That no negro slave,
+imported as such from Africa, and no descendant of such slave, can ever
+be a citizen of any State, in the sense of that term as used in the
+Constitution of the United States. This point is made in order to
+deprive the negro, in every possible event, of the benefit of that
+provision of the United States Constitution, which declares that
+"the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and
+immunities of citizens in the several States." (2) That, "subject to the
+Constitution of the United States," neither Congress nor a Territorial
+Legislature can exclude slavery from any United States Territory. This
+point is made in order that individual men may fill up the Territories
+with slaves, without danger of losing them as property, and thus to
+enhance the chances of permanency to the institution through all the
+future. (3) That whether the holding a negro in actual slavery in a free
+State makes him free, as against the holder, the United States courts
+will not decide, but will leave to be decided by the courts of any slave
+State the negro may be forced into by the master. This point is made,
+not to be pressed immediately; but, if acquiesced in for a while, and
+apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to sustain the
+logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with
+Dred Scott, in the State of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do
+with any other one or one thousand slaves, in Illinois, or in any other
+free State.
+
+Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska
+doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mould public opinion,
+at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted
+down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are, and partially,
+also, whither we are tending.
+
+It will throw additional light on the latter to go back, and run the
+mind over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things
+will now appear less dark and mysterious than they did when they were
+transpiring. The people were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only
+to the Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders
+could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche
+for the Dred Scott decision to come in afterward, and declare the
+perfect freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all. Why was
+the amendment expressly declaring the right of the people voted down?
+Plainly enough now, the adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for
+the Dred Scott decision. Why was the court decision held up? Why even
+a Senator's individual opinion withheld till after the Presidential
+election? Plainly enough now: the speaking out then would have damaged
+the "perfectly free" argument upon which the election was to be carried.
+Why the outgoing President's felicitation on the indorsement? Why the
+delay of a re-argument? Why the incoming President's advance exhortation
+in favor of the decision? These things look like the cautious patting
+and petting of a spirited horse preparatory to mounting him, when it
+is dreaded that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after
+indorsement of the decision by the President and others?
+
+We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations are the
+result of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed timbers, different
+portions of which we know have been gotten out at different times and
+places, and by different workmen--Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James,
+for instance,--and when we see these timbers joined together, and see
+that they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons
+and mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and proportions of the
+different pieces exactly adapted to their respective places, and not
+a piece too many or too few--not omitting even scaffolding,--or, if a
+single piece be lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted
+and prepared yet to bring such piece in,--in such a case, we find it
+impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James
+all understood one another from the beginning, and all worked upon a
+common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was struck.
+
+It should not be overlooked that, by the Nebraska bill, the people of a
+State, as well as Territory, were to be left "perfectly free," "subject
+only to the Constitution." Why mention a State? They were legislating
+for Territories, and not for or about States. Certainly, the people of
+a State are and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United
+States; but why is mention of this lugged into this merely Territorial
+law? Why are the people of a Territory and the people of a State therein
+lumped together, and their relation to the Constitution therein
+treated as being precisely the same? While the opinion of the court, by
+Chief-Justice Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions
+of all the concurring judges, expressly declare that the Constitution of
+the United States permits neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature
+to exclude slavery from any United States Territory, they all omit to
+declare whether or not the same Constitution permits a State, or the
+people of a State, to exclude it. Possibly, this is a mere omission; but
+who can be quite sure, if McLean or Curtis had sought to get into the
+opinion a declaration of unlimited power in the people of a State to
+exclude slavery from their limits, just as Chase and Mace sought to
+get such declaration, in behalf of the people of a territory, into the
+Nebraska bill--I ask, who can be quite sure that it would not have been
+voted down in the one case as it had been in the other? The nearest
+approach to the point of declaring the power of a State over slavery is
+made by Judge Nelson. He approaches it more than once, using the
+precise idea, and almost the language, too, of the Nebraska act. On
+one occasion, his exact language is: "Except in cases when the power
+is restrained by the Constitution of the United States, the law of the
+State is supreme over the subjects of slavery within its jurisdiction."
+In what cases the power of the States is so restrained by the United
+States Constitution is left an open question, precisely as the same
+question, as to the restraint on the power of the Territories, was
+left open in the Nebraska act. Put this and that together, and we have
+another nice little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with
+another Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution of
+the United States does not permit a State to exclude slavery from its
+limits. And this may especially be expected if the doctrine of "care not
+whether slavery be voted down or voted up," shall gain upon the public
+mind sufficiently to give promise that such a decision can be maintained
+when made.
+
+Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being alike lawful in
+all the States. Welcome or unwelcome, such decision is probably coming,
+and will soon be upon us, unless the power of the present political
+dynasty shall be met and overthrown. We shall lie down pleasantly
+dreaming that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their
+State free, and we shall awake to the reality, instead, that the Supreme
+Court has made Illinois a slave State. To meet and overthrow
+that dynasty is the work before all those who would prevent that
+consummation. That is what we have to do. How can we best do it?
+
+There are those who denounce us openly to their own friends, and yet
+whisper us softly that Senator Douglas is the aptest instrument there
+is with which to effect that object. They wish us to infer all, from
+the fact that he now has a little quarrel with the present head of the
+dynasty; and that he has regularly voted with us on a single point, upon
+which he and we have never differed. They remind us that he is a
+great man, and that the largest of us are very small ones. Let this be
+granted. "But a living dog is better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas,
+if not a dead lion, for this work, is at least a caged and toothless
+one. How can he oppose the advances of slavery? He don't care anything
+about it. His avowed mission is impressing the "public heart" to
+care nothing about it. A leading Douglas Democratic newspaper thinks
+Douglas's superior talent will be needed to resist the revival of the
+African slave-trade. Does Douglas believe an effort to revive that trade
+is approaching? He has not said so. Does he really think so? But if it
+is, how can he resist it? For years he has labored to prove it a sacred
+right of white men to take negro slaves into the new Territories. Can he
+possibly show that it is less a sacred right to buy them where they can
+be bought cheapest? And unquestionably they can be bought cheaper in
+Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in his power to reduce the
+whole question of slavery to one of a mere right of property; and as
+such, how can he oppose the foreign slave-trade? How can he refuse that
+trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free," unless he does it
+as a protection to the home production? And as the home producers will
+probably ask the protection, he will be wholly without a ground of
+opposition. Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may rightfully be
+wiser to-day than he was yesterday--that he may rightfully change when
+he finds himself wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and
+infer that he will make any particular change, of which he himself has
+given no intimation? Can we safely base our action upon any such vague
+inference? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's
+position, question his motives, or do aught that can be personally
+offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and we can come together on
+principle, so that our cause may have assistance from his great ability,
+I hope to have interposed no adventitious obstacle. But, clearly, he is
+not now with us--he does not pretend to be, he does not promise ever to
+be.
+
+Our cause, then, must be entrusted to, and conducted by its own
+undoubted friends--those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the
+work--who do care for the result. Two years ago the Republicans of the
+nation mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under
+the single impulse of resistance to a common danger. With every external
+circumstance against us, of strange, discordant, and even hostile
+elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the
+battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and
+pampered enemy. Did we brave all then, to falter now?--now, when that
+same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent! The result is not
+doubtful. We shall not fail--if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise
+counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay it; but, sooner or later, the
+victory is sure to come.
+
+
+
+
+STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+
+IN REPLY TO MR. LINCOLN;
+
+FREEPORT, ILLS., AUGUST 27, 1858.
+
+
+LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:
+
+I am glad that at last I have brought Mr. Lincoln to the conclusion
+that he had better define his position on certain political questions
+to which I called his attention at Ottawa. * * * In a few moments I
+will proceed to review the answers which he has given to these
+interrogatories; but, in order to relieve his anxiety, I will first
+respond to those which he has presented to me. Mark you, he has not
+presented interrogatories which have ever received the sanction of the
+party with which I am acting, and hence he has no other foundation for
+them than his own curiosity.
+
+First he desires to know, if the people of Kansas shall form a
+constitution by means entirely proper and unobjectionable, and ask
+admission as a State, before they have the requisite population for a
+member of Congress, whether I will vote for that admission. Well, now,
+I regret exceedingly that he did not answer that interrogatory himself
+before he put it to me, in order that we might understand, and not
+be left to infer, on which side he is. Mr. Trumbull, during the last
+session of Congress, voted from the beginning to the end against the
+admission of Oregon, although a free State, because she had not the
+requisite population for a member of Congress. Mr. Trumbull would not
+consent, under any circumstances, to let a State, free or slave, come
+into the Union until it had the requisite population. As Mr. Trumbull is
+in the field fighting for Mr. Lincoln, I would like to have Mr. Lincoln
+answer his own question and tell me whether he is fighting Trumbull on
+that issue or not. But I will answer his question. * * * Either Kansas
+must come in as a free State, with whatever population she may have, or
+the rule must be applied to all the other Territories alike. I therefore
+answer at once that, it having been decided that Kansas has people
+enough for a slave State, I hold that she has enough for a free State.
+I hope Mr. Lincoln is satisfied with my answer; and now I would like to
+get his answer to his own interrogatory--whether or not he will vote
+to admit Kansas before she has the requisite population. I want to
+know whether he will vote to admit Oregon before that Territory has the
+requisite population. Mr. Trumbull will not, and the same reason that
+commits Mr. Trumbull against the admission of Oregon commits him against
+Kansas, even if she should apply for admission as a free State. If there
+is any sincerity, any truth, in the argument of Mr. Trumbull in the
+Senate against the admission of Oregon, because she had not 93,420
+people, although her population was larger than that of Kansas, he
+stands pledged against the admission of both Oregon and Kansas until
+they have 93,420 inhabitants. I would like Mr. Lincoln to answer this
+question. I would like him to take his own medicine. If he differs
+with Mr. Trumbull, let him answer his argument against the admission of
+Oregon, instead of poking questions at me.
+
+The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln is, Can the people of
+the Territory in any lawful way, against the wishes of any citizen
+of the United States, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the
+formation of a State Constitution? I answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln
+has heard me answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that
+in my opinion the people of a Territory can, by lawful means,
+exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State
+Constitution. Mr. Lincoln knew that I had answered that question over
+and over again. He heard me argue the Nebraska bill on that principle
+all over the State in 1854, in 1855, and in 1856; and he has no excuse
+for pretending to be in doubt as to my position on that question. It
+matters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide as to the
+abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a Territory
+under the Constitution; the people have the lawful means to introduce it
+or exclude it as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist
+a day or an hour anywhere unless it is supported by local police
+regulations. Those police regulations can only be established by the
+local Legislature; and, if the people are opposed to slavery, they will
+elect representatives to that body who will by unfriendly legislation
+effectually prevent the introduction of it into their midst. If, on the
+contrary, they are for it, their legislation will favor its extension.
+Hence, no matter what the decision of the Supreme Court may be on
+that abstract question, still the right of the people to make a slave
+Territory or a free Territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska
+bill. I hope Mr. Lincoln deems my answer satisfactory on that point.
+
+In this connection, I will notice the charge which he has introduced
+in relation to Mr. Chase's amendment. I thought that I had chased that
+amendment out of Mr. Lincoln's brain at Ottawa; but it seems that it
+still haunts his imagination, and that he is not yet satisfied. I had
+supposed that he would be ashamed to press that question further. He is
+a lawyer, and has been a member of Congress, and has occupied his time
+and amused you by telling you about parliamentary proceedings. He ought
+to have known better than to try to palm off his miserable impositions
+upon this intelligent audience. The Nebraska bill provided that the
+legislative power and authority of the said Territory should extend to
+all rightful subjects of legislation, consistent with the organic act
+and the Constitution of the United States. It did not make any exception
+as to slavery, but gave all the power that it was possible for Congress
+to give, without violating the Constitution, to the Territorial
+Legislature, with no exception or limitation on the subject of slavery
+at all. The language of that bill, which I have quoted, gave the
+full power and the fuller authority over the subject of slavery,
+affirmatively and negatively, to introduce it or exclude it, so far as
+the Constitution of the United States would permit. What more could Mr.
+Chase give by his amendment? Nothing! He offered his amendment for
+the identical purpose for which Mr. Lincoln is using it, to enable
+demagogues in the country to try and deceive the people. His amendment
+was to this effect. It provided that the Legislature should have power
+to exclude slavery; and General Cass suggested: "Why not give the power
+to introduce as well as to exclude?" The answer was--they have the power
+already in the bill to do both. Chase was afraid his amendment would be
+adopted if he put the alternative proposition, and so made it fair both
+ways, and would not yield. He offered it for the purpose of having it
+rejected. He offered it, as he has himself avowed over and over again,
+simply to make capital out of it for the stump. He expected that it
+would be capital for small politicians in the country, and that they
+would make an effort to deceive the people with it; and he was not
+mistaken, for Lincoln is carrying out the plan admirably. * * *
+
+The third question which Mr. Lincoln presented is--If the Supreme Court
+of the United States shall decide that a State of this Union cannot
+exclude slavery from its own limits, will I submit to it? I am amazed
+that Mr. Lincoln should ask such a question. Mr. Lincoln's object is to
+cast an imputation upon the Supreme Court. He knows that there never was
+but one man in America, claiming any degree of intelligence or decency,
+who ever for a moment pretended such a thing. It is true that the
+_Washington Union_, in an article published on the 17th of last
+December, did put forth that doctrine, and I denounced the article on
+the floor of the Senate. * * * Lincoln's friends, Trumbull, and Seward,
+and Hale, and Wilson, and the whole Black Republican side of the Senate
+were silent. They left it to me to denounce it. And what was the
+reply made to me on that occasion? Mr. Toombs, of Georgia, got up and
+undertook to lecture me on the ground that I ought not to have deemed
+the article worthy of notice, and ought not to have replied to it; that
+there was not one man, woman, or child south of the Potomac, in any
+slave State, who did not repudiate any such pretension. Mr. Lincoln
+knows that reply was made on the spot, and yet now he asks this
+question! He might as well ask me--Suppose Mr. Lincoln should steal a
+horse, would I sanction it; and it would be as genteel in me to ask him,
+in the event he stole a horse, what ought to be done with him. He casts
+an imputation upon the Supreme Court of the United States, by supposing
+that they would violate the Constitution of the United States. I tell
+him that such a thing is not possible. It would be an act of moral
+treason that no man on the bench could ever descend to. Mr. Lincoln
+himself would never, in his partisan feelings, so far forget what was
+right as to be guilty of such an act.
+
+The fourth question of Mr. Lincoln is--Are you in favor of acquiring
+additional territory in disregard as to how such acquisition may affect
+the Union on the slavery question? This question is very ingeniously and
+cunningly put. The Black Republican crowd lays it down expressly that
+under no circumstances shall we acquire any more territory unless
+slavery is first prohibited in the country. I ask Mr. Lincoln whether he
+is in favor of that proposition? Are you opposed to the acquisition
+of any more territory, under any circumstances, unless slavery is
+prohibited in it? That he does not like to answer. When I ask him
+whether he stands up to that article in the platform of his party, he
+turns, Yankee fashion, and, without answering it, asks me whether I am
+in favor of acquiring territory without regard to how it may affect
+the Union on the slavery question. I answer that, whenever it becomes
+necessary, in our growth and progress, to acquire more territory, I am
+in favor of it without reference to the question of slavery, and when
+we have acquired it, I will leave the people free to do as they please,
+either to make it slave or free territory, as they prefer. It is idle
+to tell me or you that we have territory enough. * * * With our natural
+increase, growing with a rapidity unknown in any other part of the
+globe, with the tide of emigration that is fleeing from despotism in the
+old world to seek refuge in our own, there is a constant torrent pouring
+into this country that requires more land, more territory upon which
+to settle; and just as fast as our interest and our destiny require
+additional territory in the North, in the South, or in the islands of
+the ocean, I am for it, and, when we acquire it, will leave the people,
+according to the Nebraska bill, free to do as they please on the subject
+of slavery and every other question.
+
+I trust now that Mr. Lincoln will deem him-self answered on his four
+points. He racked his brain so much in devising these four questions
+that he exhausted himself, and had not strength enough to invent the
+others. As soon as he is able to hold a council with his advisers,
+Love-joy, Farnsworth, and Fred Douglas, he will frame and propound
+others ("Good," "good!"). You Black Republicans who say "good," I have
+no doubt, think that they are all good men. I have reason to recollect
+that some people in this country think that Fred Douglas is a very good
+man. The last time I came here to make a speech, while talking from
+a stand to you, people of Freeport, as I am doing to-day, I saw a
+carriage, and a magnificent one it was, drive up and take a position on
+the outside of the crowd; a beautiful young lady was sitting on the box
+seat, whilst Fred Douglas and her mother reclined inside, and the owner
+of the carriage acted as driver. I saw this in your own town. ("What
+of it?") All I have to say of it is this, that if you Black Republicans
+think that the negro ought to be on a social equality with your wives
+and daughters, and ride in a carriage with your wife, whilst you drive
+the team, you have a perfect right to do so. I am told that one of Fred
+Douglas' kinsmen, another rich black negro, is now travelling in this
+part of the State making speeches for his friend Lincoln as the champion
+of black men. ("What have you to say against it?") All I have to say on
+that subject is, that those of you who believe that the negro is your
+equal, and ought to be on an equality with you socially, politically,
+and legally, have a right to entertain those opinions, and of course
+will vote for Mr. Lincoln.
+
+
+
+
+WM. H. SEWARD,
+
+OF NEW YORK. (BORN 1801, DIED 1872.)
+
+ON THE IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT;
+
+ROCHESTER, OCTOBER 25, 1858.
+
+
+THE unmistakable outbreaks of zeal which occur all around me, show that
+you are earnest men--and such a man am I. Let us therefore, at least
+for a time, pass all secondary and collateral questions, whether of a
+personal or of a general nature, and consider the main subject of the
+present canvass. The Democratic party, or, to speak more accurately, the
+party which wears that attractive name--is in possession of the Federal
+Government. The Republicans propose to dislodge that party, and dismiss
+it from its high trust.
+
+The main subject, then, is, whether the Democratic party deserves to
+retain the confidence of the American people. In attempting to prove
+it unworthy, I think that I am not actuated by prejudices against that
+party, or by pre-possessions in favor of its adversary; for I have
+learned, by some experience, that virtue and patriotism, vice and
+selfishness, are found in all parties, and that they differ less in
+their motives than in the policies they pursue.
+
+Our country is a theatre, which exhibits, in full operation, two
+radically different political systems; the one resting on the basis of
+servile or slave labor, the other on voluntary labor of freemen. The
+laborers who are enslaved are all negroes, or persons more or less
+purely of African derivation. But this is only accidental. The principle
+of the system is, that labor in every society, by whomsoever performed,
+is necessarily unintellectual, grovelling and base; and that the
+laborer, equally for his own good and for the welfare of the State,
+ought to be enslaved. The white laboring man, whether native or
+foreigner, is not enslaved, only because he cannot, as yet, be reduced
+to bondage.
+
+You need not be told now that the slave system is the older of the two,
+and that once it was universal. The emancipation of our own ancestors,
+Caucasians and Europeans as they were, hardly dates beyond a period of
+five hundred years. The great melioration of human society which modern
+times exhibit, is mainly due to the incomplete substitution of the
+system of voluntary labor for the one of servile labor, which has
+already taken place. This African slave system is one which, in its
+origin and in its growth, has been altogether foreign from the habits
+of the races which colonized these States, and established civilization
+here. It was introduced on this continent as an engine of conquest, and
+for the establishment of monarchical power, by the Portuguese and the
+Spaniards, and was rapidly extended by them all over South America,
+Central America, Louisiana, and Mexico. Its legitimate fruits are seen
+in the poverty, imbecility, and anarchy which now pervade all Portuguese
+and Spanish America. The free-labor system is of German extraction, and
+it was established in our country by emigrants from Sweden, Holland,
+Germany, Great Britain and Ireland. We justly ascribe to its influences
+the strength, wealth, greatness, intelligence, and freedom, which the
+whole American people now enjoy. One of the chief elements of the value
+of human life is freedom in the pursuit of happiness. The slave system
+is not only intolerable, unjust, and inhuman, toward the laborer, whom,
+only because he is a laborer, it loads down with chains and converts
+into merchandise, but is scarcely less severe upon the freeman, to whom,
+only because he is a laborer from necessity, it denies facilities for
+employment, and whom it expels from the community because it cannot
+enslave and convert into merchandise also. It is necessarily improvident
+and ruinous, because, as a general truth, communities prosper and
+flourish, or droop and decline, in just the degree that they practise
+or neglect to practise the primary duties of justice and humanity.
+The free-labor system conforms to the divine law of equality, which is
+written in the hearts and consciences of man, and therefore is always
+and everywhere beneficent.
+
+The slave system is one of constant danger, distrust, suspicion, and
+watchfulness. It debases those whose toil alone can produce wealth and
+resources for defence, to the lowest degree of which human nature is
+capable, to guard against mutiny and insurrection, and thus wastes
+energies which otherwise might be employed in national development and
+aggrandizement.
+
+The free-labor system educates all alike, and by opening all the fields
+of industrial employment and all the departments of authority, to the
+unchecked and equal rivalry of all classes of men, at once secures
+universal contentment, and brings into the highest possible activity all
+the physical, moral, and social energies of the whole state. In states
+where the slave system prevails, the masters, directly or indirectly,
+secure all political power, and constitute a ruling aristocracy.
+In states where the free-labor system prevails, universal suffrage
+necessarily obtains, and the state inevitably becomes, sooner or later,
+a republic or democracy.
+
+Russia yet maintains slavery, and is a despotism. Most of the other
+European states have abolished slavery, and adopted the system of free
+labor. It was the antagonistic political tendencies of the two systems
+which the first Napoleon was contemplating when he predicted that Europe
+would ultimately be either all Cossack or all republican. Never did
+human sagacity utter a more pregnant truth. The two systems are at once
+perceived to be incongruous. But they are more than incongruous--they
+are incompatible. They never have permanently existed together in
+one country, and they never can. It would be easy to demonstrate this
+impossibility, from the irreconcilable contrast between their great
+principles and characteristics. But the experience of mankind has
+conclusively established it. Slavery, as I have already intimated,
+existed in every state in Europe. Free labor has supplanted it
+everywhere except in Russia and Turkey. State necessities developed in
+modern times are now obliging even those two nations to encourage and
+employ free labor; and already, despotic as they are, we find them
+engaged in abolishing slavery. In the United States, slavery came into
+collision with free labor at the close of the last century, and fell
+before it in New England, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania,
+but triumphed over it effectually, and excluded it for a period yet
+undetermined, from Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Indeed,
+so incompatible are the two systems, that every new State which is
+organized within our ever-extending domain makes its first political act
+a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at the cost
+of civil war, if necessary. The slave States, without law, at the last
+national election, successfully forbade, within their own limits, even
+the casting of votes for a candidate for President of the United States
+supposed to be favorable to the establishment of the free-labor system
+in new States.
+
+Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different States, but side by
+side within the American Union. This has happened because the Union is
+a confederation of States. But in another aspect the United States
+constitute only one nation. Increase of population, which is filling
+the States out to their very borders, together with a new and extended
+network of railroads and other avenues, and an internal commerce which
+daily becomes more intimate, is rapidly bringing the States into a
+higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation. Thus, these
+antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact, and
+collision results.
+
+Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think that it is
+accidental, unnecessary, the work of interested or fanatical agitators,
+and therefore ephemeral, mistake the case altogether. It is an
+irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces, and it
+means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become
+either entirely a slave-holding nation, or entirely a free-labor nation.
+Either the cotton- and rice-fields of South Carolina and the sugar
+plantations of Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free-labor, and
+Charleston and New Orleans become marts of legitimate merchandise alone,
+or else the rye-fields and wheat-fields of Massachusetts and New York
+must again be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and to the
+production of slaves, and Boston and New York become once more markets
+for trade in the bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend
+this great truth that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at final
+compromises between the slave and free States, and it is the existence
+of this great fact that renders all such pretended compromises, when
+made, vain and ephemeral. Startling as this saying may appear to you,
+fellow-citizens, it is by no means an original or even a modern one. Our
+forefathers knew it to be true, and unanimously acted upon it when
+they framed the Constitution of the United States. They regarded the
+existence of the servile system in so many of the States with sorrow and
+shame, which they openly confessed, and they looked upon the collision
+between them, which was then just revealing itself, and which we are now
+accustomed to deplore, with favor and hope. They knew that one or the
+other system must exclusively prevail.
+
+Unlike too many of those who in modern time invoke their authority, they
+had a choice between the two. They preferred the system of free labor,
+and they determined to organize the government, and so direct its
+activity, that that system should surely and certainly prevail. For this
+purpose, and no other, they based the whole structure of the government
+broadly on the principle that all men are created equal, and therefore
+free--little dreaming that, within the short period of one hundred
+years, their descendants would bear to be told by any orator, however
+popular, that the utterance of that principle was merely a rhetorical
+rhapsody; or by any judge, however venerated, that it was attended by
+mental reservation, which rendered it hypocritical and false. By the
+ordinance of 1787, they dedicated all of the national domain not yet
+polluted by slavery to free labor immediately, thenceforth and forever;
+while by the new Constitution and laws they invited foreign free labor
+from all lands under the sun, and interdicted the importation of African
+slave labor, at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances
+whatsoever. It is true that they necessarily and wisely modified this
+policy of freedom by leaving it to the several States, affected as they
+were by different circumstances, to abolish slavery in their own way and
+at their own pleasure, instead of confiding that duty to Congress; and
+that they secured to the slave States, while yet retaining the system
+of slavery, a three-fifths representation of slaves in the Federal
+Government, until they should find themselves able to relinquish it
+with safety. But the very nature of these modifications fortifies my
+position, that the fathers knew that the two systems could not endure
+within the Union, and expected within a short period slavery would
+disappear forever. Moreover, in order that these modifications might not
+altogether defeat their grand design of a republic maintaining universal
+equality, they provided that two thirds of the States might amend the
+Constitution.
+
+It remains to say on this point only one word, to guard against
+misapprehension. If these States are to again become universally
+slave-holding, I do not pretend to say with what violations of the
+Constitution that end shall be accomplished. On the other hand, while I
+do confidently believe and hope that my country will yet become a land
+of universal freedom, I do not expect that it will be made so otherwise
+than through the action of the several States cooperating with the
+Federal Government, and all acting in strict conformity with their
+respective constitutions.
+
+The strife and contentions concerning slavery, which gently-disposed
+persons so habitually deprecate, are nothing more than the ripening of
+the conflict which the fathers themselves not only thus regarded with
+favor, but which they may be said to have instituted.
+
+* * * I know--few, I think, know better than I--the resources and
+energies of the Democratic party, which is identical with the slave
+power. I do ample justice to its traditional popularity. I know
+further--few, I think, know better than I--the difficulties and
+disadvantages of organizing a new political force, like the Republican
+party, and the obstacles it must encounter in laboring without prestige
+and without patronage. But, understanding all this, I know that the
+Democratic party must go down, and that the Republican party must rise
+into its place. The Democratic party derived its strength, originally,
+from its adoption of the principles of equal and exact justice to
+all men. So long as it practised this principle faithfully, it was
+invulnerable. It became vulnerable when it renounced the principle,
+and since that time it has maintained itself, not by virtue of its own
+strength, or even of its traditional merits, but because there as
+yet had appeared in the political field no other party that had the
+conscience and the courage to take up, and avow, and practise the
+life-inspiring principle which the Democratic party had surrendered.
+At last, the Republican party has appeared. It avows, now, as the
+Republican party of 1800 did, in one word, its faith and its works,
+"Equal and exact justice to all men." Even when it first entered the
+field, only half organized, it struck a blow which only just failed to
+secure complete and triumphant victory. In this, its second campaign, it
+has already won advantages which render that triumph now both easy and
+certain.
+
+The secret of its assured success lies in that very characteristic
+which, in the mouth of scoffers, constitutes its great and lasting
+imbecility and reproach. It lies in the fact that it is a party of
+one idea; but that is a noble one--an idea that fills and expands all
+generous souls; the idea of equality--the equality of all men before
+human tribunals and human laws, as they all are equal before the Divine
+tribunal and Divine laws.
+
+I know, and you know, that a revolution has begun. I know, and all the
+world knows, that revolutions never go backward. Twenty Senators and a
+hundred Representatives proclaim boldly in Congress to-day sentiments
+and opinions and principles of freedom which hardly so many men, even
+in this free State, dared to utter in their own homes twenty years ago.
+While the Government of the United States, under the conduct of the
+Democratic party, has been all that time surrendering one plain and
+castle after another to slavery, the people of the United States have
+been no less steadily and perseveringly gathering together the forces
+with which to recover back again all the fields and all the castles
+which have been lost, and to confound and overthrow, by one decisive
+blow, the betrayers of the Constitution and freedom forever.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+VI. -- SECESSION.
+
+
+From the beginning of our history it has been a mooted question whether
+we are to consider the United States as a political state or as a
+congeries of political states, as a _Bundesstaat_ or as a _Staatenbund_.
+The essence of the controversy seems to be contained in the very title
+of the republic, one school laying stress on the word United, as the
+other does on the word States. The phases of the controversy have been
+beyond calculation, and one of its consequences has been a civil war of
+tremendous energy and cost in blood and treasure.
+
+Looking at the facts alone of our history, one would be most apt to
+conclude that the United States had been a political state from the
+beginning, its form being entirely revolutionary until the final
+ratification of the Articles of Confederation in 1781, then under the
+very loose and inefficient government of the Articles until 1789,
+and thereafter under the very efficient national government of the
+Constitution; that, in the final transformation of 1787-9, there were
+features which were also decidedly revolutionary; but that there was
+no time when any of the colonies had the prospect or the power of
+establishing a separate national existence of its own. The facts are
+not consistent with the theory that the States ever were independent
+political states, in any scientific sense.
+
+It cannot be said, however, that the actors in the history always had
+a clear perception of the facts as they took place. In the teeth of the
+facts, our early history presents a great variety of assertions of State
+independence by leading men, State Legislatures, or State constitutions,
+which still form the basis of the argument for State sovereignty. The
+State constitutions declared the State to be sovereign and independent,
+even though the framers knew that the existence of the State depended
+on the issue of the national struggle against the mother country. The
+treaty of 1783 with Great Britain recognized the States separately and
+by name as "free, sovereign, and independent," even while it established
+national boundaries outside of the States, covering a vast western
+territory in which no State would have ventured to forfeit its
+interest by setting up a claim to practical freedom, sovereignty, or
+independence. All our early history is full of such contradictions
+between fact and theory. They are largely obscured by the
+undiscriminating use of the word "people." As used now, it usually means
+the national people; but many apparently national phrases as to the
+"sovereignty of the people," as they were used in 1787-9, would seem
+far less national if the phraseology could show the feeling of those
+who then used them that the "people" referred to was the people of
+the State. In that case the number of the contradictions would be
+indefinitely increased; and the phraseology of the Constitution's
+preamble, "We, the people of the United States," would not be offered
+as a consciously nationalizing phrase of its framers. It is hardly to
+be doubted, from the current debates, that the conventions of
+Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York, Virginia, North
+Carolina, and South Carolina, seven of the thirteen States, imagined and
+assumed that each ratified the Constitution in 1788--90 by authority of
+the State's people alone, by the State's sovereign will; while the facts
+show that in each of these conventions a clear majority was coerced
+into ratification by a strong minority in its own State, backed by
+the unanimous ratifications of the other States. If ratification or
+rejection had really been open to voluntary choice, to sovereign will,
+the Constitution would never have had a moment's chance of life; so far
+from being ratified by nine States as a condition precedent to going
+into effect, it would have been summarily rejected by a majority of the
+States. In the language of John Adams, the Constitution was "extorted
+from the grinding necessities of a reluctant people." The theory of
+State sovereignty was successfully contradicted by national necessities.
+
+The change from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution,
+though it could not help antagonizing State sovereignty, was carefully
+managed so as to do so as little as possible. As soon as the plans
+by which the Federal party, under Hamilton's leadership, proposed to
+develop the national features of the Constitution became evident, the
+latent State feeling took fire. Its first symptom was the adoption
+of the name Republican by the new opposition party which took form in
+1792-3 under Jefferson's leadership. Up to this time the States had been
+the only means through which Americans had known any thing of republican
+government; they had had no share in the government of the mother
+country in colonial times, and no efficient national government to take
+part in under the Articles of Confederation. The claim of an exclusive
+title to the name of Republican does not seem to have been fundamentally
+an implication of monarchical tendencies against the Federalists so much
+as an implication that they were hostile to the States, the familiar
+exponents of republican government. When the Federalist majority in
+Congress forced through, in the war excitement against France in 1798,
+the Alien and Sedition laws, which practically empowered the President
+to suppress all party criticism of and opposition to the dominant party,
+the Legislatures of Kentucky and Virginia, in 1798-9, passed series of
+resolutions, prepared by Jefferson and Madison respectively, which for
+the first time asserted in plain terms the sovereignty of the
+States. The two sets of resolutions agreed in the assertion that the
+Constitution was a "compact," and that the States were the "parties"
+which had formed it. In these two propositions lies the gist of State
+sovereignty, of which all its remotest consequences are only natural
+developments. If it were true that the States, of their sovereign will,
+had formed such a compact; if it were not true that the adoption of
+the Constitution was a mere alteration of the form of a political state
+already in existence; it would follow, as the Kentucky resolutions
+asserted, that each State had the exclusive right to decide for itself
+when the compact had been broken, and the mode and measure of redress.
+It followed, also, that, if the existence and force of the Constitution
+in a State were due solely to the sovereign will of the State, the
+sovereign will of the State was competent, on occasion, to oust the
+Constitution from the jurisdiction covered by the State. In brief, the
+Union was wholly voluntary in its formation and in its continuance; and
+each State reserved the unquestionable right to secede, to abandon the
+Union, and assume an independent existence whenever due reason, in
+the exclusive judgment of the State, should arise. These latter
+consequences, not stated in the Kentucky resolutions, and apparently not
+contemplated by the Virginia resolutions, were put into complete form by
+Professor Tucker, of the University of Virginia, in 1803, in the notes
+to his edition of "Blackstone's Commentaries." Thereafter its statements
+of American constitutional law controlled the political training of the
+South.
+
+Madison held a modification of the State sovereignty theory, which has
+counted among its adherents the mass of the ability and influence
+of American authorities on constitutional law. Holding that the
+Constitution was a compact, and that the States were the parties to it,
+he held that one of the conditions of the compact was the abandonment
+of State sovereignty; that the States were sovereign until 1787-8, but
+thereafter only members of a political state, the United States. This
+seems to have been the ground taken by Webster, in his debates with
+Hayne and Calhoun. It was supported by the instances in which the
+appearance of a sovereignty in each State was yielded in the fourteen
+years before 1787; but, unfortunately for the theory, Calhoun was able
+to produce instances exactly parallel after 1787. If the fact that each
+State predicated its own sovereignty as an essential part of the steps
+preliminary to the convention of 1787 be a sound argument for State
+sovereignty before 1787, the fact that each State predicated its
+sovereignty as an essential part of the ratification of the Constitution
+must be taken as an equally sound argument for State sovereignty under
+the Constitution; and it seems difficult, on the Madison theory, to
+resist Calhoun's triumphant conclusion that, if the States went into the
+convention as sovereign States, they came out of it as sovereign States,
+with, of course, the right of secession. Calhoun himself had a sincere
+desire to avoid the exercise of the right of secession, and it was as a
+substitute for it that he evolved his doctrine of nullification,
+which has been placed in the first volume. When it failed in 1833, the
+exercise of the right of secession was the only remaining remedy for an
+asserted breach of State sovereignty.
+
+The events which led up to the success of the Republican party in
+electing Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency in 1860 are so intimately
+connected with the anti-slavery struggle that they have been placed in
+the preceding volume. They culminated in the first organized attempt to
+put the right of secession to a practical test. The election of
+Lincoln, the success of a "sectional party," and the evasion of the
+fugitive-slave law through the passage of "personal-liberty laws" by
+many of the Northern States, are the leading reasons assigned by South
+Carolina for her secession in 1860. These were intelligible reasons, and
+were the ones most commonly used to influence the popular vote. But all
+the evidence goes to show that the leaders of secession were not so
+weak in judgment as to run the hazards of war by reason of "injuries"
+so minute as these. Their apprehensions were far broader, if less
+calculated to influence a popular vote. In 1789 the proportions of
+population and wealth in the two sections were very nearly equal. The
+slave system of labor had hung as a clog upon the progress of the South,
+preventing the natural development of manufactures and commerce, and
+shutting out immigration. As the numerical disproportion between the two
+sections increased, Southern leaders ceased to attempt to control the
+House of Representatives, contenting themselves with balancing new
+Northern with new Southern States, so as to keep an equal vote in the
+Senate. Since 1845 this resource had failed. Five free States, Iowa,
+Wisconsin, California, Minnesota, and Oregon, had been admitted, with no
+new slave States; Kansas was calling almost imperatively for admission;
+and there was no hope of another slave State in future. When the
+election of 1860 demonstrated that the progress of the antislavery
+struggle had united all the free States, it was evident that it was but
+a question of time when the Republican party would control both
+branches of Congress and the Presidency, and have the power to make laws
+according to its own interpretation of the constitutional powers of the
+Federal Government.
+
+The peril to slavery was not only the probable prohibition of the
+inter-State slave-trade, though this itself would have been an event
+which negro slavery in the South could hardly have long survived. The
+more pressing danger lay in the results of such general Republican
+success on the Supreme Court. The decision of that Court in the Dred
+Scott case had fully sustained every point of the extreme Southern
+claims as to the status of slavery in the Territories; it had held that
+slaves were property in the view of the Constitution; that Congress
+was bound to protect slave-holders in this property right in the
+Territories, and, still more, bound not to prohibit slavery or allow a
+Territorial Legislature to prohibit slavery in the Territories, and
+that the Missouri compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional and void.
+The Southern Democrats entered the election of 1860 with this distinct
+decision of the highest judicial body of the country to back them. The
+Republican party had refused to admit that the decision of the Dred
+Scott case was law or binding. Given a Republican majority in both
+Houses and a Republican President, there was nothing to hinder the
+passage of a law increasing the number of Supreme Court justices to any
+desired extent, and the new appointments would certainly be of such
+a nature as to make the reversal of the Dred Scott decision an easy
+matter. The election of 1860 had brought only a Republican President;
+the majority in both Houses was to be against him until 1863 at least.
+But the drift in the North and West was too plain to be mistaken, and it
+was felt that 1860--would be the last opportunity for the Gulf States
+to secede with dignity and with the prestige of the Supreme Court's
+support.
+
+Finally, there seems to have been a strong feeling among the extreme
+secessionists, who loved the right of secession for its own sake, that
+the accelerating increase in the relative power of the North would soon
+make secession, on any grounds, impossible. Unless the right was to be
+forfeited by non-user, it must be established by practical exercise, and
+at once.
+
+Until about 1825-9 Presidential electors were chosen in most of the
+States by the Legislature. After that period the old practice was kept
+up only in South Carolina. On election day of November, 1860, the
+South Carolina Legislature was in session for the purpose of choosing
+electors, but it continued its session after this duty was performed. As
+soon as Lincoln's election was assured, the Legislature called a State
+Convention for Dec. 17th, took the preliminary steps toward putting the
+State on a war footing, and adjourned. The convention met at the State
+capital, adjourned to Charleston, and here, Dec. 20, 1860, passed
+unanimously an Ordinance of Secession. By its terms the people of South
+Carolina, in convention assembled, repealed the ordinance of May 23,
+1788, by which the Constitution had been ratified, and all Acts of the
+Legislature ratifying amendments to the Constitution, and declared the
+union between the State and other States, under the name of the United
+States of America, to be dissolved. By a similar process, similar
+ordinances were adopted by the State Conventions of Mississippi (Jan.
+9th), Florida (Jan. 10th), Alabama (Jan. 11th), Georgia (Jan. 19th),
+Louisiana (Jan. 25th), and Texas (Feb. 1st),--seven States in all.
+
+Outside of South Carolina, the struggle in the States named turned on
+the calling of the convention; and in this matter the opposition was
+unexpectedly strong. We have the testimony of Alexander H. Stephens that
+the argument most effective in overcoming the opposition to the calling
+of a convention was: "We can make better terms out of the Union than in
+it." The necessary implication was that secession was not to be final;
+that it was only to be a temporary withdrawal until terms of compromise
+and security for the fugitive-slave law and for slavery in the
+Territories could be extorted from the North and West. The argument soon
+proved to be an intentional sham.
+
+There has always been a difference between the theory of the State
+Convention at the North and at the South. At the North, barring a few
+very exceptional cases, the rule has been that no action of a State
+Convention is valid until confirmed by popular vote. At the South, in
+obedience to the strictest application of State sovereignty, the action
+of the State Convention was held to be the voice of the people of the
+State, which needed no popular ratification. There was, therefore,
+no remedy when the State Conventions, after passing the ordinances of
+secession, went on to appoint delegates to a Confederate Congress, which
+met at Montgomery, Feb. 4, 1861, adopted a provisional constitution
+Feb. 8th, and elected a President and Vice-President Feb. 9th. The
+conventions ratified the provisional constitution and adjourned, their
+real object having been completely accomplished; and the people of
+the several seceding States, by the action of their omnipotent State
+Conventions, and without their having a word to say about it, found
+themselves under a new government, totally irreconcilable with the
+jurisdiction of the United States, and necessarily hostile to it. The
+only exception was Texas, whose State Convention had been called in
+a method so utterly revolutionary that it was felt to be necessary to
+condone its defects by a popular vote.
+
+No declaration had ever been made by any authority that the erection of
+such hostile power within the national boundaries of the United
+States would be followed by war; such a declaration would hardly seem
+necessary. The recognition of the original national boundaries of
+the United States had been extorted from Great Britain by successful
+warfare. They had been extended by purchase from France and Spain in
+1803 and 1819, and again by war from Mexico in 1848. The United States
+stood ready to guarantee their integrity by war against all the rest of
+the world; was an ordinance of South Carolina, or the election of a _de
+facto_ government within Southern borders, likely to receive different
+treatment than was given British troops at Bunker Hill, or Santa Anna's
+lancers at Buena Vista? Men forgot that the national boundaries had been
+so drawn as to include Vermont before Vermont's admission and without
+Vermont's consent; that unofficial propositions to divide Rhode Island
+between Connecticut and Massachusetts, to embargo commerce with North
+Carolina, and demand her share of the Confederation debt, had in 1789-90
+been a sufficient indication that it was easier for a State to get into
+the American Union than to get out of it. It was a fact, nevertheless,
+that the national power to enforce the integrity of the Union had never
+been formally declared; and the mass of men in the South, even though
+they denied the expediency, did not deny the right of secession, or
+acknowledge the right of coercion by the Federal Government. To reach
+the original area of secession with land-forces, it was necessary for
+the Federal Government to cross the Border States, whose people in
+general were no believers in the right of coercion. The first attempt
+to do so extended the secession movement by methods which were far more
+openly revolutionary than the original secessions. North Carolina and
+Arkansas seceded in orthodox fashion as soon as President Lincoln called
+for volunteers after the capture of Fort Sumter. The State governments
+of Virginia and Tennessee concluded "military leagues" with the
+Confederacy, allowed Confederate troops to take possession of their
+States, and then submitted an ordinance of secession to the form of
+a popular vote. The State officers of Missouri were chased out of the
+State before they could do more than begin this process. In Maryland,
+the State government arrayed itself successfully against secession.
+
+In selecting the representative opinions for this period, all the
+marked shades of opinion have been respected, both the Union and the
+anti-coercion sentiment of the Border States, the extreme secession
+spirit of the Gulf States, and, from the North, the moderate and the
+extreme Republican, and the orthodox Democratic, views. The feeling of
+the so-called "peace Democrats" of the North differed so little from
+those of Toombs or Iverson that it has not seemed advisable to do more
+than refer to Vallandigham's speech in opposition to the war, under the
+next period.
+
+
+
+
+JOHN PARKER HALE,
+
+OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (BORN 1806, DIED 1873.)
+
+ON SECESSION; MODERATE REPUBLICAN OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 5, 1860.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+I was very much in hopes when the message was presented that it would be
+a document which would commend itself cordially to somebody. I was not
+so sanguine about its pleasing myself, but I was in hopes that it would
+be one thing or another. I was in hopes that the President would have
+looked in the face the crisis in which he says the country is, and that
+his message would be either one thing or another. But, sir, I have read
+it somewhat carefully. I listened to it as it was read at the desk; and,
+if I understand it--and I think I do--it is this: South Carolina has
+just cause for seceding from the Union; that is the first proposition.
+The second is, that she has no right to secede. The third is, that we
+have no right to prevent her from seceding. That is the President's
+message, substantially. He goes on to represent this as a great and
+powerful country, and that no State has a right to secede from it; but
+the power of the country, if I understand the President, consists in
+what Dickens makes the English constitution to be--a power to do nothing
+at all.
+
+Now, sir, I think it was incumbent upon the President of the United
+States to point out definitely and recommend to Congress some rule
+of action, and to tell us what he recommended us to do. But, in my
+judgment, he has entirely avoided it. He has failed to look the thing
+in the face. He has acted like the ostrich, which hides her head and
+thereby thinks to escape danger. Sir, the only way to escape danger
+is to look it in the face. I think the country did expect from the
+President some exposition of a decided policy; and I confess that,
+for one, I was rather indifferent as to what that policy was that he
+recommended; but I hoped that it would be something; that it would be
+decisive. He has utterly failed in that respect.
+
+I think we may as well look this matter right clearly in the face; and
+I am not going to be long about doing it. I think that this state of
+affairs looks to one of two things: it looks to absolute submission, not
+on the part of our Southern friends and the Southern States, but of the
+North, to the abandonment of their position,--it looks to a surrender
+of that popular sentiment which has been uttered through the constituted
+forms of the ballot-box, or it looks to open war. We need not shut our
+eyes to the fact. It means war, and it means nothing else; and the State
+which has put herself in the attitude of secession, so looks upon it.
+She has asked no council, she has considered it as a settled question,
+and she has armed herself. As I understand the aspect of affairs,
+it looks to that, and it looks to nothing else except unconditional
+submission on the part of the majority. I did not read the paper--I do
+not read many papers--but I understand that there was a remedy suggested
+in a paper printed, I think, in this city, and it was that the President
+and the Vice-President should be inaugurated (that would be a great
+concession!) and then, being inaugurated, they should quietly resign!
+Well, sir, I am not entirely certain that that would settle the
+question. I think that after the President and Vice-President-elect had
+resigned, there would be as much difficulty in settling who was to take
+their places as there was in settling it before.
+
+I do not wish, sir, to say a word that shall increase any irritation;
+that shall add any feeling of bitterness to the state of things which
+really exists in the country, and I would bear and forbear before I
+would say any thing which would add to this bitterness. But I tell you,
+sir, the plain, true way is to look this thing in the face--see where we
+are. And I avow here--I do not know whether or not I shall be sustained
+by those who usually act with me--if the issue which is presented is
+that the constitutional will of the public opinion of this country,
+expressed through the forms of the Constitution, will not be submitted
+to, and war is the alternative, let it come in any form or in any shape.
+The Union is dissolved and it cannot be held together as a Union, if
+that is the alternative upon which we go into an election. If it is
+pre-announced and determined that the voice of the majority, expressed
+through the regular and constituted forms of the Constitution, will not
+be submitted to, then, sir, this is not a Union of equals; it is a Union
+of a dictatorial oligarchy on one side, and a herd of slaves and cowards
+on the other. That is it, sir; nothing more, nothing less. * * *
+
+
+
+
+ALFRED IVERSON,
+
+OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1798, DIED 1874.)
+
+ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 5, 1860
+
+
+I do not rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of entering,at any length
+into this discussion, or to defend the President's message, which
+has been attacked by the Senator from New Hampshire.* I am not the
+mouth-piece of the President. While I do not agree with some portions
+of the message, and some of the positions that have been taken by the
+President, I do not perceive all the inconsistencies in that document
+which the Senator from New Hampshire has thought proper to present.
+
+It is true, that the President denies the constitutional right of a
+State to secede from the Union; while, at the same time, he also states
+that this Federal Government has no constitutional right to enforce or
+to coerce a State back into the Union which may take upon itself the
+responsibility of secession. I do not see any inconsistency in that.
+The President may be right when he asserts the fact that no State has a
+constitutional right to secede from the Union. I do not myself place the
+right of a State to secede from the Union upon constitutional grounds. I
+admit that the Constitution has not granted that power to a State. It is
+exceedingly doubtful even whether the right has been reserved. Certainly
+it has not been reserved in express terms. I therefore do not place
+the expected action of any of the Southern States, in the present
+contingency, upon the constitutional right of secession; and I am not
+prepared to dispute therefore, the, position which the President has
+taken upon that point.
+
+I rather agree with the President that the secession of a State is
+an act of revolution taken through that particular means or by that
+particular measure. It withdraws from the Federal compact, disclaims any
+further allegiance to it, and sets itself up as a separate government,
+an independent State. The State does it at its peril, of course, because
+it may or may not be cause of war by the remaining States composing the
+Federal Government. If they think proper to consider it such an act
+of disobedience, or if they consider that the policy of the Federal
+Government be such that it cannot submit to this dismemberment, why then
+they may or may not make war if they choose upon the seceding States. It
+will be a question of course for the Federal Government or the remaining
+States to decide for themselves, whether they will permit a State to
+go out of the Union, and remain as a separate and independent State, or
+whether they will attempt to force her back at the point of the bayonet.
+That is a question, I presume, of policy and expediency, which will be
+considered by the remaining States composing the Federal Government,
+through their organ, the Federal Government, whenever the contingency
+arises.
+
+But, sir, while a State has no power, under the Constitution, conferred
+upon it to secede from the Federal Government or from the Union, each
+State has the right of revolution, which all admit. Whenever the burdens
+of the government under which it acts become so onerous that it cannot
+bear them, or if anticipated evil shall be so great that the
+State believes it would be better off--even risking the perils of
+secession--out of the Union than in it, then that State, in my
+opinion, like all people upon earth has the right to exercise the
+great fundamental principle of self-preservation, and go out of the
+Union--though, of course, at its own peril--and bear the risk of the
+consequences. And while no State may have the constitutional right to
+secede from the Union, the President may not be wrong when he says the
+Federal Government has no power under the Constitution to compel the
+State to come back into the Union. It may be a _casus omissus_ in the
+Constitution; but I should like to know where the power exists in the
+Constitution of the United States to authorize the Federal Government
+to coerce a sovereign State. It does not exist in terms, at any rate, in
+the Constitution. I do not think there is any inconsistency, therefore,
+between the two positions of the President in the message upon these
+particular points.
+
+The only fault I have to find with the message of the President, is the
+inconsistency of another portion. He declares that, as the States have
+no power to secede, the Federal Government is in fact a consolidated
+government; that it is not a voluntary association of States. I deny it.
+It was a voluntary association of States. No State was ever forced to
+come into the Federal Union. Every State came voluntarily into it.
+It was an association, a voluntary association of States; and the
+President's position that it is not a voluntary association is, in my
+opinion, altogether wrong.
+
+But whether that be so or not, the President declares and assumes that
+this government is a consolidated government to this extent: that all
+the laws of the Federal Government are to operate directly upon each
+individual of the States, if not upon the States themselves, and must
+be enforced; and yet, at the same time, he says that the State which
+secedes is not to be coerced. He says that the laws of the United States
+must be enforced against every individual of a State.
+
+Of course, the State is composed of individuals within its limits,
+and if you enforce the laws and obligations of the Federal Government
+against each and every individual of the State, you enforce them against
+a State. While, therefore, he says that a State is not to be coerced, he
+declares, in the same breath, his determination to enforce the laws of
+the Union, and therefore to coerce the State if a State goes out. There
+is the inconsistency, according to my idea, which I do not see how the
+President or anybody else can reconcile. That the Federal Government is
+to enforce its laws over the seceding State, and yet not coerce her into
+obedience, is to me incomprehensible.
+
+But I did not rise, Mr. President, to discuss these questions in
+relation to the message; I rose in behalf of the State that I represent,
+as well as other Southern States that are engaged in this movement, to
+accept the issue which the Senator from New Hampshire has seen fit to
+tender--that is, of war. Sir, the Southern States now moving in this
+matter are not doing it without due consideration. We have looked over
+the whole field. We believe that the only security for the institution
+to which we attach so much importance is secession and a Southern
+confederacy. We are satisfied, notwithstanding the disclaimers upon the
+part of the Black Republicans to the contrary, that they intend to
+use the Federal power, when they get possession of it, to put down and
+extinguish the institution of slavery in the Southern States. I do not
+intend to enter upon the discussion of that point. That, however, is
+my opinion. It is the opinion of a large majority of those with whom I
+associate at home, and I believe of the Southern people. Believing that
+this is the intention and object, the ultimate aim and design, of the
+Republican party, the Abolitionists of the North, we do not intend to
+stay in this Union until we shall become so weak that we shall not be
+able to resist when the time comes for resistance. Our true policy is
+the one which we have made up our minds to follow. Our true policy is to
+go out of this Union now, while we have strength to resist any attempt
+on the part of the Federal Government to coerce us. * * *
+
+We intend, Mr. President, to go out peaceably if we can, forcibly if we
+must; but I do not believe, with the Senator from New Hampshire, that
+there is going to be any war. If five or eight States go out, they will
+necessarily draw all the other Southern States after them. That is a
+consequence that nothing can prevent. If five or eight States go out
+of this Union, I should like to see the man that would propose a
+declaration of war against them, or attempt to force them into obedience
+to the Federal Government at the point of the bayonet or the sword.
+
+Sir, there has been a good deal of vaporing on this subject. A great
+many threats have been thrown out. I have heard them on this floor, and
+upon the floor of the other House of Congress; but I have also perceived
+this: they come from those who would be the very last men to attempt
+to put their threats into execution. Men talk sometimes about their
+eighteen million who are to whip us; and yet we have heard of cases in
+which just such men had suffered themselves to be switched in the
+face, and trembled like sheep-stealing dogs, expecting to be shot every
+minute. These threats generally come from men who would be the last to
+execute them. Some of these Northern editors talk about whipping the
+Southern States like spaniels. Brave words; but I venture to assert none
+of those men would ever volunteer to command an army to be sent down
+South to coerce us into obedience to Federal power. * * *
+
+But, sir, I apprehend that when we go out and form our confederacy--as
+I think and hope we shall do very shortly--the Northern States, or the
+Federal Government, will see its true policy to be to let us go in peace
+and make treaties of commerce and amity with us, from which they will
+derive more advantages than from any attempt to coerce us. They cannot
+succeed in coercing us. If they allow us to form our government without
+difficulty, we shall be very willing to look upon them as a favored
+nation and give them all the advantages of commercial and amicable
+treaties. I have no doubt that both of us--certainly the Southern
+States--would live better, more happily, more prosperously, and with
+greater friendship, than we live now in this Union.
+
+Sir, disguise the fact as you will, there is an enmity between the
+Northern and Southern people that is deep and enduring, and you never
+can eradicate it--never! Look at the spectacle exhibited on this floor.
+How is it? There are the Republican Northern Senators upon that side.
+Here are the Southern Senators on this side. How much social intercourse
+is there between us? You sit upon your side, silent and gloomy; we sit
+upon ours with knit brows and portentous scowls. Yesterday I observed
+that there was not a solitary man on that side of the Chamber came over
+here even to extend the civilities and courtesies of life; nor did any
+of us go over there. Here are two hostile bodies on this floor; and it
+is but a type of the feeling that exists between the two sections. We
+are enemies as much as if we were hostile States. I believe that the
+Northern people hate the South worse than ever the English people hated
+France; and I can tell my brethren over there that there is no love lost
+upon the part of the South.
+
+In this state of feeling, divided as we are by interest, by a
+geographical feeling, by every thing that makes two people separate and
+distinct, I ask why we should remain in the same Union together? We have
+not lived in peace; we are not now living in peace. It is not expected
+or hoped that we shall ever live in peace. My doctrine is that whenever
+even man and wife find that they must quarrel, and cannot live in
+peace, they ought to separate; and these two sections--the North and
+South--manifesting, as they have done and do now, and probably will ever
+manifest, feelings of hostility, separated as they are in interests and
+objects, my own opinion is they can never live in peace; and the sooner
+they separate the better.
+
+Sir, these sentiments I have thrown out crudely I confess, and upon the
+spur of the occasion. I should not have opened my mouth but that the
+Senator from New Hampshire seemed to show a spirit of bravado, as if
+he intended to alarm and scare the Southern States into a retreat from
+their movements. He says that war is to come, and you had better take
+care, therefore. That is the purport of his language; of course those
+are not his words; but I understand him very well, and everybody else,
+I apprehend, understands him that war is threatened, and therefore the
+South had better look out. Sir, I do not believe that there will be any
+war; but if war is to come, let it come. We will meet the Senator
+from New Hampshire and all the myrmidons of Abolitionism and Black
+Republicanism everywhere, upon our own soil; and in the language of a
+distinguished member from Ohio in relation to the Mexican War, we will
+"welcome you with bloody hands to hospitable graves."
+
+
+
+
+BENJAMIN WADE,
+
+OF OHIO, (BORN 1800, DIED 1878.)
+
+ON SECESSION, AND THE STATE OF THE UNION; REPUBLICAN OPINION;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, DECEMBER 17, 1860.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+At a time like this, when there seems to be a wild and unreasoning
+excitement in many parts of the country, I certainly have very little
+faith in the efficacy of any argument that may be made; but at the
+same time, I must say, when I hear it stated by many Senators in this
+Chamber, where we all raised our hands to Heaven, and took a solemn oath
+to support the Constitution of the United States, that we are on the
+eve of a dissolution of this Union, and that the Constitution is to be
+trampled under foot--silence under such circumstances seems to me akin
+to treason itself.
+
+I have listened to the complaints on the other side patiently, and with
+an ardent desire to ascertain what was the particular difficulty under
+which they were laboring. Many of those who have supposed themselves
+aggrieved have spoken; but I confess that I am now totally unable to
+understand precisely what it is of which they complain. Why, sir, the
+party which lately elected their President, and are prospectively to
+come into power, have never held an executive office under the General
+Government, nor has any individual of them. It is most manifest,
+therefore, that the party to which I belong have as yet committed no act
+of which anybody can complain. If they have fears as to the course that
+we may hereafter pursue, they are mere apprehensions--a bare suspicion;
+arising, I fear, out of their unwarrantable prejudices, and nothing
+else.
+
+I wish to ascertain at the outset whether we are right; for I tell
+gentlemen that, if they can convince me that I am holding any political
+principle that is not warranted by the Constitution under which we live,
+or that trenches upon their rights, they need not ask me to compromise
+it. I will be ever ready to grant redress, and to right myself whenever
+I am wrong. No man need approach me with a threat that the Government
+under which I live is to be destroyed; because I hope I have now, and
+ever shall have, such a sense of justice that, when any man shows
+me that I am wrong, I shall be ready to right it without price or
+compromise.
+
+Now, sir, what is it of which gentlemen complain? When I left my home in
+the West to come to this place, all was calm, cheerful, and contented.
+I heard of no discontent. I apprehended that there was nothing to
+interrupt the harmonious course of our legislation. I did not learn
+that, since we adjourned from this place at the end of the last session,
+there had been any new fact intervening that should at all disturb the
+public mind. I do not know that there has been any encroachment upon
+the rights of any section of the country since that time; I came here,
+therefore, expecting to have a very harmonious session. It is very true,
+sir, that the great Republican party which has been organized ever since
+you repealed the Missouri Compromise, and who gave you, four years ago,
+full warning that their growing strength would probably result as it
+has resulted, have carried the late election; but I did not suppose that
+would disturb the equanimity of this body. I did suppose that every man
+who was observant of the signs of the times might well see that things
+would result as they have resulted. Nor do I understand now that
+anything growing out of that election is the cause of the present
+excitement that pervades the country.
+
+Why, Mr. President, this is a most singular state of things. Who is it
+that is complaining? They that have been in a minority? They that have
+been the subjects of an oppressive and aggressive Government? No, sir.
+Let us suppose that when the leaders of the old glorious Revolution met
+at Philadelphia eighty-four years ago to draw up a bill of indictment
+against a wicked King and his ministers, they had been at a loss what
+they should set forth as the causes of their complaint. They had
+no difficulty in setting them forth so that the great article of
+impeachment will go down to all posterity as a full justification of all
+the acts they did. But let us suppose that, instead of its being these
+old patriots who had met there to dissolve their connection with the
+British Government, and to trample their flag under foot, it had
+been the ministers of the Crown, the leading members of the British
+Parliament, of the dominant party that had ruled Great Britain for
+thirty years previous: who would not have branded every man of them as a
+traitor? It would be said: "You who have had the Government in your own
+hands: you who have been the ministers of the Crown, advising everything
+that has been done, set up here that you have been oppressed and
+aggrieved by the action of that very Government which you have directed
+yourselves." Instead of a sublime revolution, the uprising of an
+oppressed people, ready to battle against unequal power for their
+rights, it would have been an act of treason.
+
+How is it with the leaders of this modern revolution? Are they in a
+position to complain of the action of this Government for years past?
+Why, sir, they have had more than two-thirds of the Senate for many
+years past, and until very recently, and have almost that now. You--who
+complain, I ought to say--represent but a little more than one-fourth of
+the free people of these United States, and yet your counsels prevail,
+and have prevailed all along for at least ten years past. In the
+Cabinet, in the Senate of the United States, in the Supreme Court, in
+every department of the Government, your officers, or those devoted to
+you, have been in the majority, and have dictated all the policies of
+this Government. Is it not strange, sir, that they who now occupy these
+positions should come here and complain that their rights are stricken
+down by the action of the Government?
+
+But what has caused this great excitement that undoubtedly prevails in a
+portion of our country? If the newspapers are to be credited, there is
+a reign of terror in all the cities and large towns in the southern
+portion of this community that looks very much like the reign of terror
+in Paris during the French revolution. There are acts of violence that
+we read of almost every day, wherein the rights of northern men are
+stricken down, where they are sent back with indignities, where they are
+scourged, tarred, feathered, and murdered, and no inquiry made as to
+the cause. I do not suppose that the regular Government, in times of
+excitement like these, is really responsible for such acts. I know that
+these outbreaks of passion, these terrible excitements that sometimes
+pervade the community, are entirely irrepressible by the law of the
+country. I suppose that is the case now; because if these outrages
+against northern citizens were really authorized by the State
+authorities there, were they a foreign Government, everybody knows, if
+it were the strongest Government on earth, we should declare war upon
+her in one day.
+
+But what has caused this great excitement? Sir, I will tell you what I
+suppose it is. I do not (and I say it frankly) so much blame the people
+of the South; because they believe, and they are led to believe by all
+the information that ever comes before them, that we, the dominant party
+to-day, who have just seized upon the reins of this Government, are
+their mortal enemies, and stand ready to trample their institutions
+under foot. They have been told so by our enemies at the North. Their
+misfortune, or their fault, is that they have lent a too easy ear to the
+insinuations of those who are our mortal enemies, while they would not
+hear us.
+
+Now I wish to inquire, in the first place, honestly, candidly, and
+fairly, whether the Southern gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber
+that complain so much, have any reasonable grounds for that complaint--I
+mean when they are really informed as to our position.
+
+Northern Democrats have sometimes said that we had personal liberty
+bills in some few of the States of the North, which somehow trenched
+upon the rights of the South under the fugitive bill to recapture their
+runaway slaves; a position that in not more than two or three cases,
+so far as I can see, has the slightest foundation in fact; and even if
+those where it is most complained of, if the provisions of their law are
+really repugnant to that of the United States, they are utterly void,
+and the courts would declare them so the moment you brought them up.
+Thus it is that I am glad to hear the candor of those gentlemen on the
+other side, that they do not complain of these laws. The Senator from
+Georgia (Mr. Iverson) himself told us that they had never suffered any
+injury, to his knowledge and belief, from those bills, and they cared
+nothing about them. The Senator from Virginia (Mr. Mason) said the same
+thing; and, I believe, the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Brown).
+You all, then, have given up this bone of contention, this matter of
+complaint which Northern men have set forth as a grievance more than
+anybody else.
+
+Mr. Mason. Will the Senator indulge me one moment.
+
+Mr. Wade. Certainly.
+
+Mr. Mason. I know he does not intend to misrepresent me or other
+gentlemen. What I said was, that the repeal of those laws would furnish
+no cause of satisfaction to the Southern States. Our opinions of those
+laws we gave freely. We said the repeal of those laws would give no
+satisfaction.
+
+Mr. Wade. Mr. President, I do not intend to misrepresent anything. I
+understood those gentlemen to suppose that they had not been injured by
+them. I understood the Senator from Virginia to believe that they were
+enacted in a spirit of hostility to the institutions of the South, and
+to object to them not because the acts themselves had done them any
+hurt, but because they were really a stamp of degradation upon Southern
+men, or something like that--I do not quote his words. The other
+Senators that referred to it probably intended to be understood in the
+same way; but they did acquit these laws of having done them injury to
+their knowledge or belief.
+
+I do not believe that these laws were, as the Senator supposed, enacted
+with a view to exasperate the South, or to put them in a position of
+degradation. Why, sir, these laws against kidnapping are as old as the
+common law itself, as that Senator well knows. To take a freeman and
+forcibly carry him out of the jurisdiction of the State, has ever been,
+by all civilized countries, adjudged to be a great crime; and in most of
+them, wherever I have understood anything about it, they have penal
+laws to punish such an offence. I believe the State of Virginia has one
+to-day as stringent in all its provisions as almost any other of which
+you complain. I have not looked over the statute-books of the South; but
+I do not doubt that there will be found this species of legislation upon
+all your statute-books.
+
+Here let me say, because the subject occurs to me right here, the
+Senator from Virginia seemed not so much to point out any specific acts
+that Northern people had done injurious to your property as, what he
+took to be a dishonor and a degradation. I think I feel as sensitive
+upon that subject as any other man. If I know myself, I am the last man
+that would be the advocate of any law or any act that would humiliate or
+dishonor any section of this country, or any individual in it; and, on
+the other hand, let me tell these gentlemen I am exceedingly sensitive
+upon that same point, whatever they may think about it. I would
+rather sustain an injury than an insult or dishonor; and I would be
+as unwilling to inflict it upon others as I would be to submit to it
+myself. I never will do either the one or the other if I know it.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I know that charges have been made and rung in our ears, and reiterated
+over and over again, that we have been unfaithful in the execution of
+your fugitive bill. Sir, that law is exceedingly odious to any free
+people. It deprives us of all the old guarantees of liberty that the
+Anglo-Saxon race everywhere have considered sacred--more sacred than
+anything else.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Mr. President, the gentleman says, if I understood him, that these
+fugitives might be turned over to the authorities of the State from
+whence they came. That would be a very poor remedy for a free man in
+humble circumstances who was taken under the provisions of this bill in
+a summary way, to be carried--where? Where he came from? There is no law
+that requires that he should be carried there. Sir, if he is a free man
+he may be carried into the market-place anywhere in a slave State; and
+what chance has he, a poor, ignorant individual, and a stranger,
+of asserting any rights there, even if there were no prejudices or
+partialities against him? That would be mere mockery of justice and
+nothing else, and the Senator well knows it. Sir, I know that from the
+stringent, summary provisions of this bill, free men have been kidnapped
+and carried into captivity and sold into everlasting slavery. Will any
+man who has a regard to the sovereign rights of the State rise here and
+complain that a State shall not make a law to protect her own people
+against kidnapping and violent seizures from abroad? Of all men, I
+believe those who have made most of these complaints should be the
+last to rise and deny the power of a sovereign State to protect her own
+citizens against any Federal legislation whatever. These liberty bills,
+in my judgment, have been passed, not with a view of degrading the
+South, but with an honest purpose of guarding the rights of their own
+citizens from unlawful seizures and abductions. I was exceedingly glad
+to hear that the Senators on the other side had arisen in their places
+and had said that the repeal of those laws would not relieve the case
+from the difficulties under which they now labor.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Gentlemen, it will be very well for us all to take a view of all the
+phases of this controversy before we come to such conclusions as seem to
+have been arrived at in some quarters. I make the assertion here that I
+do not believe, in the history of the world, there ever was a nation or
+a people where a law repugnant to the general feeling was ever executed
+with the same faithfulness as has been your most savage and atrocious
+fugitive bill in the North. You yourselves can scarcely point out any
+case that has come before any northern tribunal in which the law has not
+been enforced to the very letter. You ought to know these facts, and you
+do know them. You all know that when a law is passed anywhere to bind
+any people, who feel, in conscience, or for any other reason, opposed
+to its execution, it is not in human nature to enforce it with the same
+certainty as a law that meets with the approbation of the great mass of
+the citizens. Every rational man understands this, and every candid man
+will admit it. Therefore it is that I do not violently impeach you for
+your unfaithfulness in the execution of many of your laws. You have in
+South Carolina a law by which you take free citizens of Massachusetts
+or any other maritime State, who visit the city of Charleston, and lock
+them up in jail under the penalty, if they cannot pay the jail-fees, of
+eternal slavery staring them in the face--a monstrous law, revolting
+to the best feelings of humanity and violently in conflict with
+the Constitution of the United States. I do not say this by way of
+recrimination; for the excitement pervading the country is now so great
+that I do not wish to add a single coal to the flame; but nevertheless I
+wish the whole truth to appear.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, Mr. President, I have shown, I think, that the dominant majority
+here have nothing to complain of in the legislation of Congress, or in
+the legislation of any of the States, or in the practice of the people
+of the North, under the fugitive slave bill, except so far as they say
+certain State legislation furnishes some evidence of hostility to their
+institutions. And here, sir, I beg to make an observation. I tell the
+Senator, and I tell all the Senators, that the Republican party of the
+Northern States, so far as I know, and of my own State in particular,
+hold the same opinions with regard to this peculiar institution of
+yours that are held by all the civilized nations of the world. We do not
+differ from the public sentiment of England, of France, of Germany, of
+Italy, and every other civilized nation on God's earth; and I tell you
+frankly that you never found, and you never will find, a free community
+that are in love with your peculiar institution. The Senator from Texas
+(Mr. Wigfall) told us the other day that cotton was king, and that by
+its influence it would govern all creation. He did not say so in words,
+but that was the substance of his remark: that cotton was king, and that
+it had its subjects in Europe who dared not rebel against it. Here let
+me say to that Senator, in passing, that it turns out that they are
+very rebellious subjects, and they are talking very disrespectfully at
+present of that king that he spoke of. They defy you to exercise your
+power over them. They tell you that they sympathize in this controversy
+with what you call the black Republicans. Therefore, I hope that, so
+far as Europe is concerned at least, we shall hear no more of this boast
+that cotton is king; and that he is going to rule all the civilized
+nations of the world, and bring them to his footstool. Sir, it will
+never be done.
+
+But, sir, I wish to inquire whether the Southern people are injured by,
+or have any just right to complain of that platform of principles that
+we put out, and on which we have elected a President and Vice-President.
+I have no concealments to make, and I shall talk to you, my Southern
+friends, precisely as I would talk upon the stump on the subject. I tell
+you that in that platform we did lay it down that we would, if we had
+the power, prohibit slavery from another inch of free territory under
+this Government. I stand on that position to-day. I have argued
+it probably to half a million people. They stand there, and have
+commissioned and enjoined me to stand there forever; and, so help me
+God, I will. I say to you frankly, gentlemen, that while we hold this
+doctrine, there is no Republican, there is no convention of Republicans,
+there is no paper that speaks for them, there is no orator that sets
+forth their doctrines, who ever pretends that they have any right in
+your States to interfere with your peculiar institution; but, on the
+other hand, our authoritative platform repudiates the idea that we have
+any right or any intention ever to invade your peculiar institution in
+your own States.
+
+Now, what do you complain of? You are going to break up this Government;
+you are going to involve us in war and blood, from a mere suspicion that
+we shall justify that which we stand everywhere pledged not to do.
+Would you be justified in the eyes of the civilized world in taking
+so monstrous a position, and predicating it on a bare, groundless
+suspicion? We do not love slavery. Did you not know that before to-day,
+before this session commenced? Have you not a perfect confidence that
+the civilized world is against you on this subject of loving slavery
+or believing that it is the best institution in the world? Why, sir,
+everything remains precisely as it was a year ago. No great catastrophe
+has occurred. There is no recent occasion to accuse us of anything.
+But all at once, when we meet here, a kind of gloom pervades the whole
+community and the Senate Chamber. Gentlemen rise and tell us that they
+are on the eve of breaking up this Government, that seven or eight
+States are going to break off their connection with the Government,
+retire from the Union, and set up a hostile government of their own, and
+they look imploringly over to us, and say to us: "You can prevent it; we
+can do nothing to prevent it; but it all lies with you." Well, sir, what
+can we do to prevent it? You have not even condescended to tell us what
+you want; but I think I see through the speeches that I have heard from
+gentlemen on the other side. If we would give up the verdict of the
+people, and take your platform, I do not know but you would be satisfied
+with it. I think the Senator from Texas rather intimated, and I think
+the Senator from Georgia more than intimated, that if we would take what
+is exactly the Charleston platform on which Mr. Breckenridge was placed,
+and give up that on which we won our victory, you would grumblingly and
+hesitatingly be satisfied.
+
+Mr. Iverson. I would prefer that the Senator would look over my remarks
+before quoting them so confidently. I made no such statement as that. I
+did not say that I would be satisfied with any such thing. I would not
+be satisfied with it.
+
+Mr. Wade. I did not say that the Senator said so; but by construction I
+gathered that from his speech. I do not know that I was right in it.
+
+Mr. Iverson. The Senator is altogether wrong in his construction.
+
+Mr. Wade. Well, sir, I have now found what the Senator said on the other
+point to which he called my attention a little while ago. Here it is:
+
+"Nor do we suppose that there will be any overt acts upon the part of
+Mr. Lincoln. For one, I do not dread these overt acts. I do not propose
+to wait for them. Why, sir, the power of this Federal Government could
+be so exercised against the institution of slavery in the Southern
+States, as that, without an overt act, the institution would not last
+ten years. We know that, sir; and seeing the storm which is approaching,
+although it may be seemingly in the distance, we are determined to seek
+our own safety and security before it shall burst upon us and overwhelm
+us with its fury, when we are not in a situation to defend ourselves."
+
+That is what the Senator said.
+
+Mr. Iverson. Yes; that is what I said.
+
+Mr. Wade. Well, then, you did not expect that Mr. Lincoln would commit
+any overt act against the Constitution--that was not it--you were not
+going to wait for that, but were going to proceed on your supposition
+that probably he might; and that is the sense of what I said before.
+
+Well, Mr. President, I have disavowed all intention on the part of the
+Republican party to harm a hair of your heads anywhere. We hold to
+no doctrine that can possibly work you an inconvenience. We have
+been faithful to the execution of all the laws in which you have any
+interest, as stands confessed on this floor by your own party, and as is
+known to me without their confessions. It is not, then, that Mr. Lincoln
+is expected to do any overt act by which you may be injured; you will
+not wait for any; but anticipating that the Government may work an
+injury, you say you will put an end to it, which means simply, that
+you intend either to rule or ruin this Government. That is what your
+complaint comes to; nothing else. We do not like your institution, you
+say. Well, we never liked it any better than we do now. You might
+as well have dissolved the Union at any other period as now, on that
+account, for we stand in relation to it precisely as we have ever
+stood; that is, repudiating it among ourselves as a matter of policy
+and morals, but nevertheless admitting that where it is out of our
+jurisdiction, we have no hold upon it, and no designs upon it.
+
+Then, sir, as there is nothing in the platform on which Mr. Lincoln was
+elected of which you complain, I ask, is there anything in the character
+of the President-elect of which you ought to complain? Has he not lived
+a blameless life? Did he ever transgress any law? Has he ever committed
+any violation of duty of which the most scrupulous can complain? Why,
+then, your suspicions that he will? I have shown that you have had the
+government all the time until, by some misfortune or maladministration,
+you brought it to the very verge of destruction, and the wisdom of the
+people had discovered that it was high time that the scepter should
+depart from you, and be placed in more competent hands; I say that this
+being so, you have no constitutional right to complain; especially when
+we disavow any intention so to make use of the victory we have won as to
+injure you at all.
+
+This brings me, sir, to the question of compromises. On the first day of
+this session, a Senator rose in his place and offered a resolution for
+the appointment of a committee to inquire into the evils that exist
+between the different sections, and to ascertain what can be done to
+settle this great difficulty. That is the proposition substantially. I
+tell the Senator that I know of no difficulty; and as to compromises, I
+had supposed that we were all agreed that the day of compromises was at
+an end. The most solemn compromises we have ever made have been
+violated without a whereas. Since I have had a seat in this body, one of
+considerable antiquity, that had stood for more than thirty years, was
+swept away from your statute-books. When I stood here in the minority
+arguing against it; when I asked you to withhold your hand; when I told
+you it was a sacred compromise between the sections, and that when it
+was removed we should be brought face to face with all that sectional
+bitterness that has intervened; when I told you that it was a sacred
+compromise which no man should touch with his finger, what was your
+reply? That it was a mere act of Congress--nothing more, nothing
+less--and that it could be swept away by the same majority that passed
+it. That was true in point of fact, and true in point of law; but it
+showed the weakness of compromises. Now, sir, I only speak for myself;
+and I say that, in view of the manner in which other compromises have
+been heretofore treated, I should hardly think any two of the Democratic
+party would look each other in the face and say "compromise" without a
+smile. (Laughter.) A compromise to be brought about by act of Congress,
+after the experience we have had, is absolutely ridiculous.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I say, then, that so far as I am concerned, I will yield to no
+compromise. I do not come here begging, either. It would be an indignity
+to the people that I represent if I were to stand here parleying as to
+the rights of the party to which I belong. We have won our right to the
+Chief Magistracy of this nation in the way that you have always won your
+predominance; and if you are as willing to do justice to others as to
+exact it from them, you would never raise an inquiry as to a committee
+for compromises. Here I beg, barely for myself, to say one thing more.
+Many of you stand in an attitude hostile to this Government; that is to
+say, you occupy an attitude where you threaten that, unless we do so and
+so, you will go out of this Union and destroy the Government. I say
+to you for myself, that, in my private capacity, I never yielded to
+anything by way of threat, and in my public capacity I have no right
+to yield to any such thing; and therefore I would not entertain a
+proposition for any compromise, for, in my judgment, this long, chronic
+controversy that has existed between us must be met, and met upon the
+principles of the Constitution and laws, and met now. I hope it may be
+adjusted to the satisfaction of all; and I know no other way to adjust
+it, except that way which is laid down by the Constitution of the United
+States. Whenever we go astray from that, we are sure to plunge ourselves
+into difficulties. The old Constitution of the United States, although
+commonly and frequently in direct opposition to what I could wish,
+nevertheless, in my judgment, is the wisest and best constitution
+that ever yet organized a free Government; and by its provisions I
+am willing, and intend, to stand or fall. Like the Senator from
+Mississippi, I ask nothing more. I ask no ingrafting upon it. I ask
+nothing to be taken away from it. Under its provisions a nation has
+grown faster than any other in the history of the world ever did before
+in prosperity, in power, and in all that makes a nation great and
+glorious. It has ministered to the advantages of this people; and now
+I am unwilling to add or take away anything till I can see much clearer
+than I can now that it wants either any addition or lopping off.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+The Senator from Texas says--it is not exactly his language--we will
+force you to an ignominious treaty up in Faneuil Hall. Well, sir, you
+may. We know you are brave; we understand your prowess; we want no fight
+with you; but, nevertheless, if you drive us to that necessity, we
+must use all the powers of this Government to maintain it intact in its
+integrity. If we are overthrown, we but share the fate of a thousand
+other Governments that have been subverted. If you are the weakest then
+you must go to the wall; and that is all there is about it. That is
+the condition in which we stand, provided a State sets herself up in
+opposition to the General Government.
+
+I say that is the way it seems to me, as a lawyer. I see no power in the
+Constitution to release a Senator from this position. Sir, if there
+was any other, if there was an absolute right of secession in the
+Constitution of the United States when we stepped up there to take our
+oath of office, why was there not an exception in that oath? Why did
+it not run "that we would support the Constitution of the United States
+unless our State shall secede before our term was out?" Sir, there is
+no such immunity. There is no way by which this can be done that I can
+conceive of, except it is standing upon the Constitution of the United
+States, demanding equal justice for all, and vindicating the old flag
+of the Union. We must maintain it, unless we are cloven down by superior
+force.
+
+Well, sir, it may happen that you can make your way out of the Union,
+and that, by levying war upon the Government, you may vindicate your
+right to independence. If you should do so, I have a policy in my mind.
+No man would regret more than myself that any portion of the people of
+these United States should think themselves impelled, by grievances or
+anything else, to depart out of this Union, and raise a foreign flag and
+a hand against the General Government. If there was any just cause
+on God's earth that I could see that was within my reach of honorable
+release from any such pretended grievance, they should have it; but
+they set forth none; I can see none. It is all a matter of prejudice,
+superinduced unfortunately, I believe, as I intimated before, more
+because you have listened to the enemies of the Republican party and
+what they said of us, while, from your intolerance, you have shut out
+all light as to what our real principles are. We have been called and
+branded in the North and in the South and everywhere else, as John Brown
+men, as men hostile to your institutions, as meditating an attack upon
+your institutions in your own States--a thing that no Republican ever
+dreamed of or ever thought of, but has protested against as often as the
+question has been up; but your people believe it. No doubt they believe
+it because of the terrible excitement and reign of terror that prevails
+there. No doubt they think so, but it arises from false information,
+or the want of information--that is all. Their prejudices have been
+appealed to until they have become uncontrolled and uncontrollable.
+
+Well, sir, if it shall be so; if that "glorious Union," as we call it,
+under which the Government has so long lived and prospered, is now about
+to come to a final end, as perhaps it may, I have been looking around to
+see what policy we should adopt; and through that gloom which has been
+mentioned on the other side, if you will have it so, I still see a
+glorious future for those who stand by the old flag of the nation.
+
+But, sir, I am for maintaining the Union of these States. I will
+sacrifice everything but honor to maintain it. That glorious old flag of
+ours, by any act of mine, shall never cease to wave over the integrity
+of this Union as it is. But if they will not have it so, in this new,
+renovated Government of which I have spoken, the 4th of July, with all
+its glorious memories, will never be repealed. The old flag of 1776
+will be in our hands, and shall float over this nation forever; and this
+capital, that some gentlemen said would be reserved for the Southern
+republic, shall still be the capital. It was laid out by Washington;
+it was consecrated by him; and the old flag that he vindicated in the
+Revolution shall still float from the Capitol.
+
+I say, sir, I stand by the Union of these States. Washington and his
+compatriots fought for that good old flag. It shall never be hauled
+down, but shall be the glory of the Government to which I belong, as
+long as my life shall continue. To maintain it, Washington and his
+compatriots fought for liberty and the rights of man. And here I will
+add that my own father, although but a humble soldier, fought in the
+same great cause, and went through hardships and privations sevenfold
+worse than death, in order to bequeath it to his children. It is my
+inheritance. It was my protector in infancy, and the pride and glory
+of my riper years; and, Mr. President, although it may be assailed by
+traitors on every side, by the grace of God, under its shadow I will
+die.
+
+
+
+
+JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN,
+
+OF KENTUCKY. (BORN 1787, DIED 1863.)
+
+ON THE CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE;
+
+UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 18, 1860.
+
+
+I am gratified, Mr. President, to see in the various propositions which
+have been made, such a universal anxiety to save the country from
+the dangerous dissensions which now prevail; and I have, under a very
+serious view and without the least ambitious feeling whatever connected
+with it, prepared a series of constitutional amendments, which I desire
+to offer to the Senate, hoping that they may form, in part at least,
+some basis for measures that may settle the controverted questions which
+now so much agitate our country. Certainly, sir, I do not propose
+now any elaborate discussion of the subject. Before presenting these
+resolutions, however, to the Senate, I desire to make a few remarks
+explanatory of them, that the Senate may understand their general scope.
+
+The questions of an alarming character are those which have grown out
+of the controversy between the northern and southern sections of our
+country in relation to the rights of the slave-holding States in the
+Territories of the United States, and in relation to the rights of
+the citizens of the latter in their slaves. I have endeavored by these
+resolutions to meet all these questions and causes of discontent, and
+by amendments to the Constitution of the United States, so that the
+settlement, if we happily agree on any, may be permanent, and leave no
+cause for future controversy. These resolutions propose, then, in the
+first place, in substance, the restoration of the Missouri Compromise,
+extending the line throughout the Territories of the United States
+to the eastern border of California, recognizing slavery in all the
+territory south of that line, and prohibiting slavery in all the
+territory north of it; with a provision, however, that when any of those
+Territories, north or south, are formed into States, they shall then be
+at liberty to exclude or admit slavery as they please; and that, in the
+one case or the other, it shall be no objection to their admission into
+the Union. In this way, sir, I propose to settle the question, both as
+to territory and slavery, so far as it regards the Territories of the
+United States.
+
+I propose, sir, also, that the Constitution be so amended as to declare
+that Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery in the District
+of Columbia so long as slavery exists in the States of Maryland and
+Virginia; and that they shall have no power to abolish slavery in any of
+the places under their special jurisdiction within the Southern States.
+
+These are the constitutional amendments which I propose, and embrace the
+whole of them in regard to the questions of territory and slavery. There
+are other propositions in relation to grievances, and in relation to
+controversies, which I suppose are within the jurisdiction of Congress,
+and may be removed by the action of Congress. I propose, in regard
+to legislative action, that the fugitive slave law, as it is commonly
+called, shall be declared by the Senate to be a constitutional act, in
+strict pursuance of the Constitution. I propose to declare that it
+has been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to be
+constitutional, and that the Southern States are entitled to a faithful
+and complete execution of that law, and that no amendment shall be made
+hereafter to it which will impair its efficiency. But, thinking that it
+would not impair its efficiency, I have proposed amendments to it in two
+particulars. I have understood from gentlemen of the North that there
+is objection to the provision giving a different fee where the
+commissioner decides to deliver the slave to the claimant, from that
+which is given where he decides to discharge the alleged slave; the law
+declares that in the latter case he shall have but five dollars, while
+in the other he shall have ten dollars--twice the amount in one case
+than in the other. The reason for this was very obvious. In case he
+delivers the servant to his claimant he is required to draw out a
+lengthy certificate, stating the principle and substantial grounds on
+which his decision rests, and to return him either to the marshal or to
+the claimant to remove him to the State from which he escaped. It was
+for that reason that a larger fee was given to the commissioner, where
+he had the largest service to perform. But, sir, the act being viewed
+unfavorably and with great prejudice, in a certain portion of our
+country, this was regarded as very obnoxious, because it seemed to give
+an inducement to the commissioner to return the slave to the master, as
+he thereby obtained the larger fee of ten dollars instead of the smaller
+one of five dollars. I have said, let the fee be the same in both cases.
+
+I have understood, furthermore, sir, that inasmuch as the fifth section
+of that law was worded somewhat vaguely, its general terms had admitted
+of the construction in the Northern States that all the citizens were
+required, upon the summons of the marshal, to go with him to hunt up,
+as they express it, and arrest the slave; and this is regarded as
+obnoxious. They have said, "in the Southern States you make no such
+requisition on the citizen"; nor do we, sir. The section, construed
+according to the intention of the framers of it, I suppose, only
+intended that the marshal should have the same right in the execution
+of process for the arrest of a slave that he has in all other cases of
+process that he is required to execute--to call on the _posse comitatus_
+for assistance where he is resisted in the execution of his duty, or
+where, having executed his duty by the arrest, an attempt is made to
+rescue the slave. I propose such an amendment as will obviate this
+difficulty and limit the right of the master and the duty of the citizen
+to cases where, as in regard to all other process, persons may be called
+upon to assist in resisting opposition to the execution of the laws.
+
+I have provided further, sir, that the amendment to the Constitution
+which I here propose, and certain other provisions of the Constitution
+itself, shall be unalterable, thereby forming a permanent and
+unchangeable basis for peace and tranquillity among the people. Among
+the provisions in the present Constitution, which I have by amendment
+proposed to render unalterable, is that provision in the first article
+of the Constitution which provides the rule for representation,
+including in the computation three-fifths of the slaves. That is to
+be rendered unchangeable. Another is the provision for the delivery of
+fugitive slaves. That is to be rendered unchangeable.
+
+And with these provisions, Mr. President, it seems to me we have a solid
+foundation upon which we may rest our hopes for the restoration of peace
+and good-will among all the States of this Union, and all the people.
+I propose,sir, to enter into no particular discussion. I have explained
+the general scope and object of my proposition. I have provided further,
+which I ought to mention, that, there having been some difficulties
+experienced in the courts of the United States in the South in carrying
+into execution the laws prohibiting the African slave trade, all
+additions and amendments which may be necessary to those laws to render
+them effectual should be immediately adopted by Congress, and especially
+the provision of those laws which prohibit the importation of African
+slaves into the United States. I have further provided it as a
+recommendation to all the States of this Union, that whereas laws have
+been passed of an unconstitutional character, (and all laws are of
+that character which either conflict with the constitutional acts
+of Congress, or which in their operation hinder or delay the proper
+execution of the acts of Congress,) which laws are null and void, and
+yet, though null and void, they have been the source of mischief and
+discontent in the country, under the extraordinary circumstances in
+which we are placed; I have supposed that it would not be improper or
+unbecoming in Congress to recommend to the States, both North and South,
+the repeal of all such acts of theirs as were intended to control, or
+intended to obstruct the operation of the acts of Congress, or which in
+their operation and in their application have been made use of for the
+purpose of such hindrance and opposition, and that they will repeal
+these laws or make such explanations or corrections of them as to
+prevent their being used for any such mischievous purpose.
+
+I have endeavored to look with impartiality from one end of our country
+to the other; I have endeavored to search up what appeared to me to be
+the causes of discontent pervading the land; and, as far as I am capable
+of doing so, I have endeavored to propose a remedy for them. I am far
+from believing that, in the shape in which I present these measures,
+they will meet with the acceptance of the Senate. It will be
+sufficiently gratifying if, with all the amendments that the superior
+knowledge of the Senate may make to them, they shall, to any effectual
+extent, quiet the country.
+
+Mr. President, great dangers surround us. The Union of these States
+is dear to the people of the United States. The long experience of its
+blessings, the mighty hopes of the future, have made it dear to the
+hearts of the American people. Whatever politicians may say, whatever
+of dissension may, in the heat of party politics, be created among
+our people, when you come down to the question of the existence of the
+Constitution, that is a question beyond all politics; that is a question
+of life and death. The Constitution and the Union are the life of this
+great people--yes, sir, the life of life. We all desire to preserve
+them, North and South; that is the universal desire. But some of the
+Southern States, smarting under what they conceive to be aggressions of
+their Northern brethren and of the Northern States, are not contented to
+continue this Union, and are taking steps, formidable steps, towards a
+dissolution of the Union, and towards the anarchy and the bloodshed, I
+fear, that are to follow. I say, sir, we are in the presence of great
+events. We must elevate ourselves to the level of the great occasion. No
+party warfare about mere party questions or party measures ought now
+to engage our attention. They are left behind; they are as dust in the
+balance. The life, the existence of our country, of our Union, is
+the mighty question; and we must elevate ourselves to all those
+considerations which belong to this high subject.
+
+I hope, therefore, gentlemen will be disposed to bring the sincerest
+spirit of conciliation, the sincerest spirit and desire to adjust all
+these difficulties, and to think nothing of any little concessions of
+opinions that they may make, if thereby the Constitution and the country
+can be preserved.
+
+The great difficulty here, sir--I know it; I recognize it as the
+difficult question, particularly with the gentlemen from the North--is
+the admission of this line of division for the territory, and the
+recognition of slavery on the one side, and the prohibition of it on the
+other. The recognition of slavery on the southern side of that line is
+the great difficulty, the great question with them. Now, I beseech you
+to think, and you, Mr. President, and all, to think whether, for such
+a comparative trifle as that, the Union of this country is to be
+sacrificed. Have we realized to ourselves the momentous consequences of
+such an event? When has the world seen such an event? This is a mighty
+empire. Its existence spreads its influence throughout the civilized
+world. Its overthrow will be the greatest shock that civilization and
+free government have received; more extensive in its consequences; more
+fatal to mankind and to the great principles upon which the liberty of
+mankind depends, than the French revolution with all its blood, and with
+all its war and violence. And all for what? Upon questions concerning
+this line of division between slavery and freedom? Why, Mr. President,
+suppose this day all the Southern States, being refused this right;
+being refused this partition; being denied this privilege, were to
+separate from the Northern States, and do it peacefully, and then were
+to come to you peacefully and say, "let there be no war between us;
+let us divide fairly the Territories of the United States"; could the
+northern section of the country refuse so just a demand? What would you
+then give them? What would be the fair proportion? If you allowed them
+their fair relative proportion, would you not give them as much as is
+now proposed to be assigned on the southern side of that line, and would
+they not be at liberty to carry their slaves there, if they pleased? You
+would give them the whole of that; and then what would be its fate?
+
+Is it upon the general principle of humanity, then, that you (addressing
+Republican Senators) wish to put an end to slavery, or is it to be urged
+by you as a mere topic and point of party controversy to sustain party
+power? Surely I give you credit for looking at it upon broader and
+more generous principles. Then, in the worst event, after you have
+encountered disunion, that greatest of all political calamities to the
+people of this country, and the disunionists come, the separating States
+come, and demand or take their portion of the Territories, they can
+take, and will be entitled to take, all that will now lie on the
+southern side of the line which I have proposed. Then they will have
+a right to permit slavery to exist in it; and what do you gain for the
+cause of anti-slavery? Nothing whatever. Suppose you should refuse their
+demand, and claim the whole for yourselves, that would be a flagrant
+injustice which you would not be willing that I should suppose would
+occur. But if you did, what would be the consequence? A State north and
+a State south, and all the States, north and south, would be attempting
+to grasp at and seize this territory, and to get all of it that they
+could. That would be the struggle, and you would have war; and not
+only disunion, but all these fatal consequences would follow from your
+refusal now to permit slavery to exist, to recognize it as existing,
+on the southern side of the proposed line, while you give to the people
+there the right to exclude it when they come to form a State government,
+if such should be their will and pleasure.
+
+Now, gentlemen, in view of this subject, in view of the mighty
+consequences, in view of the great events which are present before you,
+and of the mighty consequences which are just now to take effect, is
+it not better to settle the question by a division upon the line of the
+Missouri Compromise? For thirty years we lived quietly and peacefully
+under it. Our people, North and South, were accustomed to look at it
+as a proper and just line. Can we not do so again? We did it then to
+preserve the peace of the country. Now you see this Union in the most
+imminent danger. I declare to you that it is my solemn conviction that
+unless something be done, and something equivalent to this proposition,
+we shall be a separated and divided people in six months from this time.
+That is my firm conviction. There is no man here who deplores it more
+than I do; but it is my sad and melancholy conviction that that will be
+the consequence. I wish you to realize fully the danger. I wish you
+to realize fully the consequences which are to follow. You can give
+increased stability to this Union; you can give it an existence, a
+glorious existence, for great and glorious centuries to come, by now
+setting it upon a permanent basis, recognizing what the South considers
+as its rights; and this is the greatest of them all; it is that you
+should divide the territory by this line, and allow the people south of
+it to have slavery when they are admitted into the Union as States, and
+to have it during the existence of the territorial government. That is
+all. Is it not the cheapest price at which such a blessing as this Union
+was ever purchased? You think, perhaps, or some of you, that there is no
+danger, that it will but thunder and pass away. Do not entertain such a
+fatal delusion. I tell you it is not so. I tell you that as sure as we
+stand here disunion will progress. I fear it may swallow up even old
+Kentucky in its vortex--as true a State to the Union as yet exists in
+the whole Confederacy--unless something be done; but that you will have
+disunion, that anarchy and war will follow it, that all this will take
+place in six months, I believe as confidently as I believe in your
+presence. I want to satisfy you of the fact.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+The present exasperation; the present feeling of disunion, is the
+result of a long-continued controversy on the subject of slavery and
+of territory. I shall not attempt to trace that controversy; it is
+unnecessary to the occasion, and might be harmful. In relation to such
+controversies, I will say, though, that all the wrong is never on one
+side, or all the right on the other. Right and wrong, in this world,
+and in all such controversies, are mingled together. I forbear now any
+discussion or any reference to the right or wrong of the controversy,
+the mere party controversy; but in the progress of party, we now come
+to a point where party ceases to deserve consideration, and the
+preservation of the Union demands our highest and our greatest
+exertions. To preserve the Constitution of the country is the highest
+duty of the Senate, the highest duty of Congress--to preserve it and to
+perpetuate it, that we may hand down the glories which we have received
+to our children and to our posterity, and to generations far beyond us.
+We are, Senators, in positions where history is to take notice of the
+course we pursue.
+
+History is to record us. Is it to record that when the destruction of
+the Union was imminent; when we saw it tottering to its fall; when we
+saw brothers arming their hands for hostility with one another, we stood
+quarrelling about points of party politics; about questions which we
+attempted to sanctify and to consecrate by appealing to our conscience
+as the source of them? Are we to allow such fearful catastrophes to
+occur while we stand trifling away our time? While we stand thus,
+showing our inferiority to the great and mighty dead, showing our
+inferiority to the high positions which we occupy, the country may be
+destroyed and ruined; and to the amazement of all the world, the great
+Republic may fall prostrate and in ruins, carrying with it the very hope
+of that liberty which we have heretofore enjoyed; carrying with it, in
+place of the peace we have enjoyed, nothing but revolution and havoc and
+anarchy. Shall it be said that we have allowed all these evils to come
+upon our country, while we were engaged in the petty and small disputes
+and debates to which I have referred? Can it be that our name is to rest
+in history with this everlasting stigma and blot upon it?
+
+Sir, I wish to God it was in my power to preserve this Union by
+renouncing or agreeing to give up every conscientious and other opinion.
+I might not be able to discard it from my mind; I am under no obligation
+to do that. I may retain the opinion, but if I can do so great a good as
+to preserve my country and give it peace, and its institutions and its
+Union stability, I will forego any action upon my opinions. Well, now,
+my friends (addressing the Republican Senators), that is all that is
+asked of you. Consider it well, and I do not distrust the result. As
+to the rest of this body, the gentlemen from the South, I would say to
+them, can you ask more than this? Are you bent on revolution, bent on
+disunion. God forbid it. I cannot believe that such madness possesses
+the American people. This gives reasonable satisfaction. I can speak
+with confidence only of my own State. Old Kentucky will be satisfied
+with it, and she will stand by the Union and die by the Union if this
+satisfaction be given. Nothing shall seduce her. The clamor of no
+revolution, the seductions and temptations of no revolution, will
+tempt her to move one step. She has stood always by the side of the
+Constitution; she has always been devoted to it, and is this day. Give
+her this satisfaction, and I believe all the States of the South that
+are not desirous of disunion as a better thing than the Union and the
+Constitution, will be satisfied and will adhere to the Union, and
+we shall go on again in our great career of national prosperity and
+national glory.
+
+But, sir, it is not necessary for me to speak to you of the consequences
+that will follow disunion. Who of us is not proud of the greatness we
+have achieved? Disunion and separation destroy that greatness. Once
+disunited, we are no longer great. The nations of the earth who
+have looked upon you as a formidable Power, and rising to untold and
+immeasurable greatness in the future, will scoff at you. Your flag, that
+now claims the respect of the world, that protects American property
+in every port and harbor of the world, that protects the rights of
+your citizens everywhere, what will become of it? What becomes of its
+glorious influence? It is gone; and with it the protection of American
+citizens and property. To say nothing of the national honor which
+it displayed to all the world, the protection of your rights, the
+protection of your property abroad is gone with that national flag,
+and we are hereafter to conjure and contrive different flags for our
+different republics according to the feverish fancies of revolutionary
+patriots and disturbers of the peace of the world. No, sir; I want to
+follow no such flag. I want to preserve the union of my country. We have
+it in our power to do so, and we are responsible if we do not do it.
+
+I do not despair of the Republic. When I see before me Senators of so
+much intelligence and so much patriotism, who have been so honored by
+their country, sent here as the guardians of that very union which is
+now in question, sent here as the guardians of our national rights, and
+as guardians of that national flag, I cannot despair; I cannot despond.
+I cannot but believe that they will find some means of reconciling and
+adjusting the rights of all parties, by concessions, if necessary, so
+as to preserve and give more stability to the country and to its
+institutions.
+
+
+
+
+ROBERT TOOMBS,
+
+OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1810--DIED 1885.)
+
+ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY 7, 1861.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT AND SENATORS:
+
+The success of the Abolitionists and their allies, under the name of the
+Republican party, has produced its logical results already. They have
+for long years been sowing dragons' teeth, and have finally got a crop
+of armed men. The Union, sir, is dissolved. That is an accomplished fact
+in the path of this discussion that men may as well heed. One of your
+confederates has already, wisely, bravely, boldly, confronted public
+danger, and she is only ahead of many of her sisters because of her
+greater facility for speedy action. The greater majority of those sister
+States, under like circumstances, consider her cause as their cause; and
+I charge you in their name to-day, "Touch not Saguntum." It is not only
+their cause, but it is a cause which receives the sympathy and will
+receive the support of tens and hundreds of thousands of honest
+patriotic men in the non-slave-holding States, who have hither-to
+maintained constitutional rights, and who respect their oaths, abide by
+compacts, and love justice. And while this Congress, this Senate, and
+this House of Representatives, are debating the constitutionality and
+the expediency of seceding from the Union, and while the perfidious
+authors of this mischief are showering down denunciations upon a large
+portion of the patriotic men of this country, those brave men are coolly
+and calmly voting what you call revolution--ay, sir, doing better than
+that: arming to defend it. They appealed to the Constitution,
+they appealed to justice, they appealed to fraternity, until the
+Constitution, justice, and fraternity were no longer listened to in the
+legislative halls of their country, and then, sir, they prepared for the
+arbitrament of the sword; and now you see the glittering bayonet, and
+you hear the tramp of armed men from your Capitol to the Rio Grande. It
+is a sight that gladdens the eyes and cheers the heart of other millions
+ready to second them.
+
+Inasmuch, sir, as I have labored earnestly, honestly, sincerely, with
+these men to avert this necessity so long as I deemed it possible, and
+inasmuch as I heartily approve their present conduct of resistance, I
+deem it my duty to state their case to the Senate, to the country, and
+to the civilized world.
+
+Senators, my countrymen have demanded no new government; they have
+demanded no new constitution. Look to their records at home and here
+from the beginning of this national strife until its consummation in
+the disruption of the empire, and they have not demanded a single thing
+except that you shall abide by the Constitution of the United States;
+that constitutional rights shall be respected, and that justice shall be
+done. Sirs, they have stood by your Constitution; they have stood by
+all its requirements; they have performed all its duties unselfishly,
+uncalculatingly, disinterestedly, until a party sprang up in this
+country which endangered their social system--a party which they
+arraign, and which they charge before the American people and all
+mankind, with having made proclamation of outlawry against four thousand
+millions of their property in the Territories of the United States; with
+having put them under the ban of the empire in all the States in which
+their institutions exist, outside the protection of Federal laws; with
+having aided and abetted insurrection from within and invasion from
+without, with the view of subverting those institutions, and desolating
+their homes and their firesides. For these causes they have taken up
+arms. I shall proceed to vindicate the justice of their demands, the
+patriotism of their conduct. I will show the injustice which they suffer
+and the rightfulness of their resistance.
+
+I shall not spend much time on the question that seems to give my
+honorable friend (Mr. Crittenden) so much concern--the constitutional
+right of a State to secede from this Union. Perhaps he will find out
+after a while that it is a fact accomplished. You have got it in
+the South pretty much both ways. South Carolina has given it to you
+regularly, according to the approved plan. You are getting it just below
+there (in Georgia), I believe, irregularly, outside of the law, without
+regular action. You can take it either way. You will find armed men to
+defend both. I have stated that the discontented States of this
+Union have demanded nothing but clear, distinct, unequivocal,
+well-acknowledged constitutional rights; rights affirmed by the highest
+judicial tribunals of their country; rights older than the Constitution;
+rights which are planted upon the immutable principles of natural
+justice; rights which have been affirmed by the good and the wise of all
+countries, and of all centuries. We demand no power to injure any man.
+We demand no right to injure our confederate States. We demand no right
+to interfere with their institutions, either by word or deed. We have
+no right to disturb their peace, their tranquillity, their security. We
+have demanded of them simply, solely--nothing else--to give us equality,
+security, and tranquillity. Give us these, and peace restores itself.
+Refuse them, and take what you can get.
+
+I will now read my own demands, acting under my own convictions, and the
+universal judgment of my countrymen. They are considered the demands of
+an extremist. To hold to a constitutional right now makes one considered
+as an extremist--I believe that is the appellation these traitors and
+villains, North and South, employ. I accept their reproach rather than
+their principles. Accepting their designation of treason and rebellion,
+there stands before them as good a traitor, and as good a rebel as ever
+descended from revolutionary loins.
+
+What do the rebels demand? First, "that the people of the United States
+shall have an equal right to emigrate and settle in the present or any
+future acquired territories, with whatever property they may possess
+(including slaves), and be securely protected in its peaceable enjoyment
+until such Territory may be admitted as a State into the Union, with or
+without slavery, as she may determine, on an equality with all existing
+States." That is our territorial demand. We have fought for this
+Territory when blood was its price. We have paid for it when gold
+was its price. We have not proposed to exclude you, though you have
+contributed very little of blood or money. I refer especially to New
+England. We demand only to go into those Territories upon terms of
+equality with you, as equals in this great Confederacy, to enjoy the
+common property of the whole Union, and receive the protection of the
+common government, until the Territory is capable of coming into the
+Union as a sovereign State, when it may fix its own institutions to suit
+itself.
+
+The second proposition is, "that property in slaves shall be entitled to
+the same protection from the Government of the United States, in all of
+its departments, everywhere, which the Constitution confers the power
+upon it to extend to any other property, provided nothing herein
+contained shall be construed to limit or restrain the right now
+belonging to every State to prohibit, abolish, or establish and protect
+slavery within its limits." We demand of the common government to use
+its granted powers to protect our property as well as yours. For this
+protection we pay as much as you do. This very property is subject to
+taxation. It has been taxed by you and sold by you for taxes. The title
+to thousands and tens of thousands of slaves is derived from the United
+States. We claim that the Government, while the Constitution recognizes
+our property for the purposes of taxation, shall give it the same
+protection that it gives yours. Ought it not to be so? You say no. Every
+one of you upon the committee said no. Your Senators say no. Your House
+of Representatives says no. Throughout the length and breadth of your
+conspiracy against the Constitution, there is but one shout of no! This
+recognition of this right is the price of my allegiance. Withhold it,
+and you do not get my obedience. This is the philosophy of the armed
+men who have sprung up in this country. Do you ask me to support a
+government that will tax my property; that will plunder me; that
+will demand my blood, and will not protect me? I would rather see the
+population of my native State laid six feet beneath her sod than they
+should support for one hour such a government. Protection is the price
+of obedience everywhere, in all countries. It is the only thing that
+makes government respectable. Deny it and you cannot have free subjects
+or citizens; you may have slaves.
+
+We demand, in the next place, "that persons committing crimes against
+slave property in one State, and fleeing to another, shall be delivered
+up in the same manner as persons committing crimes against other
+property, and that the laws of the State from which such persons flee
+shall be the test of criminality." That is another one of the demands of
+an extremist and rebel. The Constitution of the United States, article
+four, section two, says:
+
+"A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who
+shall flee from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand
+of the executive authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered
+up to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime." But the
+non-slave-holding States, treacherous to their oaths and compacts, have
+steadily refused, if the criminal only stole a negro, and that negro was
+a slave, to deliver him up. It was refused twice on the requisition of
+my own State as long as twenty-two years ago. It was refused by Kent and
+by Fairfield, Governors of Maine, and representing, I believe, each
+of the then Federal parties. We appealed then to fraternity, but we
+submitted; and this constitutional right has been practically a dead
+letter from that day to this. The next case came up between us and the
+State of New York, when the present senior Senator (Mr. Seward) was
+the Governor of that State; and he refused it. Why? He said it was not
+against the laws of New York to steal a negro, and therefore he would
+not comply with the demand. He made a similar refusal to Virginia. Yet
+these are our confederates; these are our sister States! There is
+the bargain; there is the compact. You have sworn to it. Both these
+Governors swore to it. The Senator from New York swore to it. The
+Governor of Ohio swore to it when he was inaugurated. You cannot bind
+them by oaths.
+
+Yet they talk to us of treason; and I suppose they expect to whip
+freemen into loving such brethren! They will have a good time in doing
+it!
+
+It is natural we should want this provision of the Constitution carried
+out. The Constitution says slaves are property; the Supreme Court says
+so; the Constitution says so. The theft of slaves is a crime; they are
+a subject-matter of felonious asportation. By the text and letter of the
+Constitution you agreed to give them up. You have sworn to do it, and
+you have broken your oaths. Of course, those who have done so look out
+for pretexts. Nobody expected them do otherwise. I do not think I
+ever saw a perjurer, however bald and naked, who could not invent some
+pretext to palliate his crime, or who could not, for fifteen shillings,
+hire an Old Bailey lawyer to invent some for him. Yet this requirement
+of the Constitution is another one of the extreme demands of an
+extremist and a rebel.
+
+The next stipulation is that fugitive slaves shall be surrendered under
+the provisions of the fugitive-slave act of 1850, without being entitled
+either to a writ of _habeas corpus_, or trial by jury, or other similar
+obstructions of legislation, in the State to which he may flee. Here is
+the Constitution:
+
+"No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws
+thereof, escaping into an-other, shall, in consequence of any law or
+regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall
+be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may
+be due."
+
+This language is plain, and everybody understood it the same way for the
+first forty years of your government. In 1793, in Washington's time, an
+act was passed to carry out this provision. It was adopted unanimously
+in the Senate of the United States, and nearly so in the House of
+Representatives. Nobody then had invented pretexts to show that the
+Constitution did not mean a negro slave. It was clear; it was plain.
+Not only the Federal courts, but all the local courts in all the States,
+decide that this was a constitutional obligation. How is it now? The
+North sought to evade it; following the instincts of their natural
+character, they commenced with the fraudulent fiction that fugitives
+were entitled to _habeas corpus_, entitled to trial by jury in the State
+to which they fled. They pretended to believe that our fugitive slaves
+were entitled to more rights than their white citizens; perhaps they
+were right, they know one another better than I do. You may charge
+a white man with treason, or felony, or other crime, and you do not
+require any trial by jury before he is given up; there is nothing to
+determine but that he is legally charged with a crime and that he
+fled, and then he is to be delivered up upon demand. White people
+are delivered up every day in this way; but not slaves. Slaves, black
+people, you say, are entitled to trial by jury; and in this way schemes
+have been invented to defeat your plain constitutional obligations. * * *
+
+The next demand made on behalf of the South is, "that Congress shall
+pass effective laws for the punishment of all persons in any of the
+States who shall in any manner aid and abet invasion or insurrection in
+any other State, or commit any other act against the laws of nations,
+tending to disturb the tranquillity of the people or government of any
+other State." That is a very plain principle. The Constitution of the
+United States now requires, and gives Congress express power, to
+define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas,
+and offences against the laws of nations. When the honorable and
+distinguished Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) last year introduced
+a bill for the purpose of punishing people thus offending under that
+clause of the Constitution, Mr. Lincoln, in his speech at New York,
+which I have before me, declared that it was a "sedition bill "; his
+press and party hooted at it. So far from recognizing the bill as
+intended to carry out the Constitution of the United States, it received
+their jeers and jibes. The Black Republicans of Massachusetts elected
+the admirer and eulogist of John Brown's courage as their governor, and
+we may suppose he will throw no impediments in the way of John Brown's
+successors. The epithet applied to the bill of the Senator from Illinois
+is quoted from a deliberate speech delivered by Lincoln in New York,
+for which, it was stated in the journals, according to some resolution
+passed by an association of his own party, he was paid a couple of
+hundred dollars. The speech should therefore have been deliberate.
+Lincoln denounced that bill. He places the stamp of his condemnation
+upon a measure intended to promote the peace and security of confederate
+States. He is, therefore, an enemy of the human race, and deserves the
+execration of all mankind.
+
+We demand these five propositions. Are they not right? Are they not
+just? Take them in detail, and show that they are not warranted by the
+Constitution, by the safety of our people, by the principles of eternal
+justice. We will pause and consider them; but mark me, we will not let
+you decide the question for us. * * *
+
+Senators, the Constitution is a compact. It contains all our obligations
+and the duties of the Federal Government. I am content and have ever
+been content to sustain it. While I doubt its perfection, while I do
+not believe it was a good compact, and while I never saw the day that I
+would have voted for it as a proposition _de novo_, yet I am bound to it
+by oath and by that common prudence which would induce men to abide by
+established forms rather than to rush into unknown dangers. I have given
+to it, and intend to give to it, unfaltering support and allegiance,
+but I choose to put that allegiance on the true ground, not on the false
+idea that anybody's blood was shed for it. I say that the Constitution
+is the whole compact. All the obligations, all the chains that fetter
+the limbs of my people, are nominated in the bond, and they wisely
+excluded any conclusion against them, by declaring that "the powers not
+granted by the Constitution to the United States, or forbidden by it to
+the States, belonged to the States respectively or the people." Now I
+will try it by that standard; I will subject it to that test. The law
+of nature, the law of justice, would say--and it is so expounded by the
+publicists--that equal rights in the common property shall be enjoyed.
+Even in a monarchy the king cannot prevent the subjects from enjoying
+equality in the disposition of the public property. Even in a despotic
+government this principle is recognized. It was the blood and the
+money of the whole people (says the learned Grotius, and say all the
+publicists) which acquired the public property, and therefore it is
+not the property of the sovereign. This right of equality being, then,
+according to justice and natural equity, a right belonging to all
+States, when did we give it up? You say Congress has a right to pass
+rules and regulations concerning the Territory and other property of the
+United States. Very well. Does that exclude those whose blood and money
+paid for it? Does "dispose of" mean to rob the rightful owners? You must
+show a better title than that, or a better sword than we have.
+
+But, you say, try the right. I agree to it. But how? By our judgment?
+No, not until the last resort. What then; by yours? No, not until the
+same time. How then try it? The South has always said, by the Supreme
+Court. But that is in our favor, and Lincoln says he "will not stand that
+judgment." Then each must judge for himself of the mode and manner
+of redress. But you deny us that privilege, and finally reduce us to
+accepting your judgment. The Senator from Kentucky comes to your aid,
+and says he can find no constitutional right of secession. Perhaps not;
+but the Constitution is not the place to look for State rights. If that
+right belongs to independent States, and they did not cede it to the
+Federal Government, it is reserved to the States, or to the people. Ask
+your new commentator where he gets the right to judge for us. Is it in
+the bond?
+
+The Northern doctrine was, many years ago, that the Supreme Court was
+the judge. That was their doctrine in 1800. They denounced Madison
+for the report of 1799, on the Virginia resolutions; they denounced
+Jefferson for framing the Kentucky resolutions, because they were
+presumed to impugn the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United
+States; and they declared that that court was made, by the Constitution,
+the ultimate and supreme arbiter. That was the universal judgment--the
+declaration of every free State in this Union, in answer to the Virginia
+resolutions of 1798, or of all who did answer, even including the State
+of Delaware, then under Federal control.
+
+The Supreme Court have decided that, by the Constitution, we have a
+right to go to the Territories and be protected there with our property.
+You say, we cannot decide the compact for ourselves. Well, can the
+Supreme Court decide it for us? Mr. Lincoln says he does not care what
+the Supreme Court decides, he will turn us out anyhow. He says this in
+his debate with the honorable member from Illinois [Mr. Douglas]. I have
+it before me. He said he would vote against the decision of the Supreme
+Court. Then you did not accept that arbiter. You will not take my
+construction; you will not take the Supreme Court as an arbiter; you
+will not take the practice of the government; you will not take the
+treaties under Jefferson and Madison; you will not take the opinion of
+Madison upon the very question of prohibition in 1820. What, then, will
+you take? You will take nothing but your own judgment; that is, you will
+not only judge for yourselves, not only discard the court, discard our
+construction, discard the practice of the government, but you will drive
+us out, simply because you will it. Come and do it! You have sapped the
+foundations of society; you have destroyed almost all hope of peace. In
+a compact where there is no common arbiter, where the parties finally
+decide for themselves, the sword alone at last becomes the real, if not
+the constitutional, arbiter. Your party says that you will not take the
+decision of the Supreme Court. You said so at Chicago; you said so in
+committee; every man of you in both Houses says so. What are you going
+to do? You say we shall submit to your construction. We shall do it,
+if you can make us; but not otherwise, or in any other manner. That is
+settled. You may call it secession, or you may call it revolution; but
+there is a big fact standing before you, ready to oppose you--that fact
+is, freemen with arms in their hands. The cry of the Union will not
+disperse them; we have passed that point; they demand equal rights; you
+had better heed the demand. * * *
+
+
+
+
+SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX,
+
+OF OHIO. (BORN, 1824-DIED, 1889.)
+
+ON SECESSION; DOUGLAS DEMOCRATIC OPINION;
+
+IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 14, 1861.
+
+
+MR. CHAIRMAN:
+
+I speak from and for the capital of the greatest of the States of the
+great West. That potential section is beginning to be appalled at the
+colossal strides of revolution. It has immense interests at stake in
+this Union, as well from its position as its power and patriotism. We
+have had infidelity to the Union before, but never in such a fearful
+shape. We had it in the East during the late war with England. Even so
+late as the admission of Texas, Massachusetts resolved herself out of
+the Union. That resolution has never been repealed, and one would infer,
+from much of her conduct, that she did not regard herself as bound by
+our covenant. Since 1856, in the North, we have had infidelity to the
+Union, more insidious infractions of the Constitution than by
+open rebellion. Now, sir, as a consequence, in part, of these very
+infractions, we have rebellion itself, open and daring, in terrific
+proportions, with dangers so formidable as to seem almost remediless. *
+* *'
+
+I would not exaggerate the fearful consequences of dissolution. It is
+the breaking up of a federative Union, but it is not like the breaking
+up of society. It is not anarchy. A link may fall from the chain, and
+the link may still be perfect, though the chain have lost its length and
+its strength. In the uniformity of commercial regulations, in matters
+of war and peace, postal arrangements, foreign relations, coinage,
+copyrights, tariff, and other Federal and national affairs, this great
+government may be broken; but in most of the essential liberties and
+rights which government is the agent to establish and protect, the
+seceding State has no revolution, and the remaining States can have
+none. This arises from that refinement of our polity which makes the
+States the basis of our instituted labor. Greece was broken by the
+Persian power, but her municipal institutions remained. Hungary lost
+her national crown, but her home institutions remain. South Carolina may
+preserve her constituted domestic authority, but she must be content to
+glimmer obscurely remote rather than shine and revolve in a constellated
+band. She even goes out by the ordinance of a so-called sovereign
+convention, content to lose by her isolation that youthful, vehement,
+exultant, progressive life, which is our NATIONALITY! She foregoes
+the hopes, the boasts, the flag, the music, all the emotions, all the
+traits, and all the energies which, when combined in our United States,
+have won our victories in war and our miracles of national advancement.
+Her Governor, Colonel Pickens, in his inaugural, regretfully "looks
+back upon the inheritance South Carolina had in the common glories
+and triumphant power of this wonderful confederacy, and fails to find
+language to express the feelings of the human heart as he turns from the
+contemplation." The ties of brotherhood, interest, lineage, and history
+are all to be severed. No longer are we to salute a South Carolinian
+with the "_idem sententiam de republica_," which makes unity and
+nationality. What a prestige and glory are here dimmed and lost in the
+contaminated reason of man!
+
+Can we realize it? Is it a masquerade, to last for a night, or a reality
+to be dealt with, with the world's rough passionate handling? It is sad
+and bad enough; but let us not over-tax our anxieties about it as yet.
+It is not the sanguinary regime of the French revolution; not the rule
+of assignats and guillotine; not the cry of "_Vivent les Rouges! A mort
+les gendarmes!_" but as yet, I hope I may say, the peaceful attempt
+to withdraw from the burdens and benefits of the Republic. Thus it is
+unlike every other revolution. Still it is revolution. It may, according
+as it is managed, involve consequences more terrific than any revolution
+since government began.
+
+If the Federal Government is to be maintained, its strength must not
+be frittered away by conceding the theory of secession. To concede
+secession as a right, is to make its pathway one of roses and not of
+thorns. I would not make its pathway so easy. If the government has any
+strength for its own preservation, the people demand it should be put
+forth in its civil and moral forces. Dealing, however, with a sensitive
+public sentiment, in which this strength reposes, it must not be rudely
+exercised. It should be the iron hand in the glove of velvet. Firmness
+should be allied with kindness. Power should assert its own prerogative,
+but in the name of law and love. If these elements are not thus blended
+in our policy, as the Executive proposes, our government will prove
+either a garment of shreds or a coat of mail. We want neither. * * *
+
+Before we enter upon a career of force, let us exhaust every effort
+at peace. Let us seek to excite love in others by the signs of love in
+ourselves. Let there be no needless provocation and strife. Let every
+reasonable attempt at compromise be considered. Otherwise we have a
+terrible alternative. War, in this age and in this country, sir, should
+be the _ultima ratio_. Indeed, it may well be questioned whether there
+is any reason in it for war. What a war! Endless in its hate, without
+truce and without mercy. If it ended ever, it would only be after a
+fearful struggle; and then with a heritage of hate which would forever
+forbid harmony. * * *
+
+Small States and great States; new States and old States; slave States
+and free States; Atlantic States and Pacific States; gold and silver
+States; iron and copper States; grain States and lumber States; river
+States and lake States;--all having varied interests and advantages,
+would seek superiority in armed strength. Pride, animosity, and glory
+would inspire every movement. God shield our country from such a
+fulfilment of the prophecy of the revered founders of the Union! Our
+struggle would be no short, sharp struggle. Law, and even religion
+herself, would become false to their divine purpose. Their voice would
+no longer be the voice of God, but of his enemy. Poverty, ignorance,
+oppression, and its hand-maid, cowardice, breaking out into merciless
+cruelty; slaves false; freemen slaves, and society itself poisoned
+at the cradle and dishonored at the grave;--its life, now so full
+of blessings, would be gone with the life of a fraternal and united
+Statehood. What sacrifice is too great to prevent such a calamity? Is
+such a picture overdrawn? Already its outlines appear. What means the
+inaugural of Governor Pickens, when he says: "From the position we may
+occupy toward the Northern States, as well as from our own internal
+structure of society, the government may, from necessity, become
+strongly military in its organization"? What mean the minute-men
+of Governor Wise? What the Southern boast that they have a rifle or
+shot-gun to each family?
+
+What means the Pittsburgh mob? What this alacrity to save Forts Moultrie
+and Pinckney? What means the boast of the Southern men of being the
+best-armed people in the world, not counting the two hundred thousand
+stand of United States arms stored in Southern arsenals? Already Georgia
+has her arsenals, with eighty thousand muskets. What mean these lavish
+grants of money by Southern Legislatures to buy more arms? What mean
+these rumors of arms and force on the Mississippi? These few facts have
+already verified the prophecy of Madison as to a disunited Republic.
+
+Mr. Speaker, he alone is just to his country, he alone has a mind
+unwarped by section, and a memory unparalyzed by fear, who warns against
+precipitancy. He who could hurry this nation to the rash wager of
+battle is not fit to hold the seat of legislation. What can justify the
+breaking up of our institutions into belligerent fractions? Better this
+marble Capitol were levelled to the dust; better were this Congress
+struck dead in its deliberations; better an immolation of every ambition
+and passion which here have met to shake the foundations of society
+than the hazard of these consequences! * * * I appeal to Southern men,who
+contemplate a step so fraught with hazard and strife, to pause. Clouds
+are about us! There is lightning in their frown! Cannot we direct it
+harmlessly to the earth? The morning and evening prayer of the people I
+speak for in such weakness rises in strength to that Supreme Ruler
+who, in noticing the fall of a sparrow, cannot disregard the fall of a
+nation, that our States may continue to be as they have been--one; one
+in the unreserve of a mingled national being; one as the thought of God
+is one!
+
+
+
+
+JEFFERSON DAVIS,
+
+OF MISSISSIPPI. (BORN 1808, DIED 1889.)
+
+ON WITHDRAWAL FROM THE UNION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY 21, 1861.
+
+
+I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that
+I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn
+ordinance of her people in convention assembled, has declared her
+separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course
+my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however,
+that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my
+associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does
+not invite me to go into argument, and my physical condition would not
+permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become
+me to say something on the part of the State I here represent, on an
+occasion so solemn as this.
+
+It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for
+many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty,
+the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not
+believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi
+was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing
+necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of
+my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by
+her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think that she
+has justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her
+people before that act was taken, counselled them then that if the state
+of things which they apprehended should exist when the convention met,
+they should take the action which they have now adopted.
+
+I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with
+the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to
+disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the
+law. Such is not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often
+confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a
+remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the
+agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has
+violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge
+for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals
+to the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States
+themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to
+convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then,
+and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its
+practical application.
+
+A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often
+arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of
+nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his
+deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some
+remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound
+South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the
+doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be
+within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to
+be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for
+their judgment.
+
+Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be
+justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a
+time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better
+comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable
+rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying
+that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it
+has made to any agent whomsoever.
+
+I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi,
+believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by
+their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the
+important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the
+Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that
+the name of the great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth,
+has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase
+"to execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied
+to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of
+the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to
+be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United
+States. They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion
+of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which
+cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn
+from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the
+purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has
+withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States
+to be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding
+herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is, in
+which her safety requires that she should provide for the maintenance of
+her rights out of the Union, surrenders all the benefits (and they are
+known to be many), deprives herself of the advantages (they are known
+to be great), severs all the ties of affection (and they are close and
+enduring) which have bound her to the Union; and thus divesting herself
+of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be
+exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within
+her limits.
+
+I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the
+bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife and
+to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in
+Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of
+egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the
+case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing
+the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct
+is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated
+line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from
+the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar or
+one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory
+of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other
+States.
+
+It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief
+that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers
+bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present
+decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created
+free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social
+institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been
+invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That
+Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and
+purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their
+independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man
+was born--to use the language of Mr. Jefferson--booted and spurred to
+ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equal--meaning the
+men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule;
+that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by
+which power and place descended to families, but that all stations were
+equally within the grasp of each member of the body-politic. These were
+the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for
+which they made their declaration; these were the end to which their
+enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how
+happened it that among the items of arraignment made against George III.
+was that he endeavored to do just what the North had been endeavoring
+of late to do--to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the
+Declaration announced that the negroes were free and equal, how was the
+Prince to be arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And
+how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the
+colonies to sever their connection with the mother country? When our
+Constitution was formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for
+there we find provision made for that very class of persons as property;
+they were not put upon the footing of equality with white men--not even
+upon that of paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was
+concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste, only to be
+represented in the numerical proportion of three-fifths.
+
+Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we
+recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when
+you deny them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a
+Government which, thus perverted, threatens to be destructive of our
+rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our
+independence, and take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to
+others, not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own
+pecuniary benefit; but from the high and solemn motive of defending and
+protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to
+transmit unshorn to our children.
+
+I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my
+constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you,
+Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever
+sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now
+say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure,
+is the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you
+represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say
+I hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must
+part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have
+been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster
+on every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will
+invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the
+lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting
+our trust in God, and in our own firm hearts and strong arms, we will
+vindicate the right as best we may.
+
+In the course of my service here, associated at different times with
+a great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I
+have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of
+offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile
+remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed,
+or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in
+this hour of our parting to offer you my apology for any pain which,
+in heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the
+remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of
+making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.
+
+Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the
+occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains for me to bid you a
+final adieu.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+***** This file should be named 15393-8.txt or 15393-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/3/9/15393/
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/15393-8.zip b/15393-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f9f85c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-8.zip
diff --git a/15393-h.zip b/15393-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3c79ba1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h.zip
diff --git a/15393-h/15393-h.htm b/15393-h/15393-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4866479
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/15393-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,7192 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
+
+<!DOCTYPE html
+   PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+   "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" >
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en">
+  <head>
+    <title>
+      American Eloquence, Volume 3.
+    </title>
+    <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve">
+    
+    body { margin:5%; background:#faebd0; text-align:justify}
+    P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; }
+    H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; }
+    hr  { width: 50%; text-align: center;}
+    .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; }
+    blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;}
+    .mynote    {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;}
+    .toc       { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;}
+    .toc2      { margin-left: 20%;}
+    div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; }
+    .figleft   {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;}
+    .figright  {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;}
+    .pagenum   {display:inline; font-size: 70%; font-style:normal;
+               margin: 0; padding: 0; position: absolute; right: 1%;
+               text-align: right;}
+    pre     { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;}
+    
+</style>
+  </head>
+  <body>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+
+Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4)
+       Studies In American Political History (1897)
+
+Author: Various
+
+Release Date: March 17, 2005 [EBook #15393]
+Last Updated: November 15, 2012
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+    <p>
+      <br />
+    </p>
+    <h1>
+      AMERICAN ELOQUENCE
+    </h1>
+    <h2>
+      STUDIES IN AMERICAN POLITICAL HISTORY
+    </h2>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <h3>
+      Edited with Introduction by Alexander Johnston
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      <br />
+    </p>
+    <h3>
+      Reedited by James Albert Woodburn
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <h4>
+      Volume III. (of 4)
+    </h4>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <h3>
+      V. &mdash;THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE (Continued from Vol. II.) <br /> <br />
+      VI.&mdash;SECESSION.
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img alt="cover (76K)" src="images/cover.jpg" width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br /> <a name="linkimage-0001" id="linkimage-0001">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/seward.jpg" alt="Frontispiece " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0002" id="linkimage-0002">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/titlepage3.jpg" alt="Titlepage " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <blockquote>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <big><b>CONTENTS</b></big>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_INTR"> INTRODUCTION TO THE REVISED VOLUME. </a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0002"> <big><b>V. &mdash;THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE
+        (Cont.)</b></big> </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0003"> SALMON PORTLAND CHASE, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0004"> EDWARD EVERETT, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0005"> STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0006"> CHARLES SUMNER, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0007"> PRESTON S. BROOKS, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0008"> JUDAH P. BENJAMIN, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0009"> ABRAHAM LINCOLN, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0010"> ABRAHAM LINCOLN, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0011"> STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0012"> WILLIAM. H. SEWARD, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0013"> <big><b>VI. &mdash; SECESSION.</b></big> </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0014"> JOHN PARKER HALE, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0015"> ALFRED IVERSON, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0016"> BENJAMIN WADE, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0017"> JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0018"> ROBERT TOOMBS, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0019"> SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link2H_4_0020"> JEFFERSON DAVIS, </a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <big><b>ILLUSTRATIONS</b></big>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0001"> Frontispiece </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0002"> Titlepage </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0003"> Almon Portland Chase </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0004"> Edward Everett </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0005"> Stephen Douglas </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0006"> William H. Steward </a>
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#linkimage-0007"> Jefferson Davis </a>
+      </p>
+    </blockquote>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <blockquote>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <big><b>PORTRAITS</b></big>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> WILLIAM H. SEWARD &mdash; Frontispiece From a photograph.<br />
+        <br /> SALMON P. CHASE &mdash; From a daguerreotype, engraved by F. E.
+        JONES.<br /> <br /> EDWARD EVERETT &mdash; From a painting by R. M.
+        STAIGG.<br /> <br /> STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS &mdash; From a steel engraving.<br />
+        <br /> JEFFERSON DAVIS &mdash; From a photograph.
+      </p>
+    </blockquote>
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br />
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      <br /> <br /> <a name="link2H_INTR" id="link2H_INTR">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      INTRODUCTION TO THE REVISED VOLUME.
+    </h2>
+    <p>
+      The third volume of the American Eloquence is devoted to the continuation
+      of the slavery controversy and to the progress of the secession movement
+      which culminated in civil war.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To the speeches of the former edition of the volume have been added:
+      Everett on the Nebraska bill; Benjamin on the Property Doctrine and
+      Slavery in the Territories; Lincoln on the Dred Scott Decision; Wade on
+      Secession and the State of the Union; Crittenden on the Crittenden
+      Compromise; and Jefferson Davis's notable speech in which he took leave of
+      the United State Senate, in January, 1861.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Judged by its political consequences no piece of legislation in American
+      history is of greater historical importance than the Kansas-Nebraska bill.
+      By that act the Missouri Compromise was repealed and the final conflict
+      entered upon with the slave power. In addition to the speeches of Douglas
+      and Chase, representing the best word on the opposing sides of the famous
+      Nebraska controversy, the new volume includes the notable contribution by
+      Edward Everett to the Congressional debates on that subject. Besides being
+      an orator of high rank and of literary renown, Everett represented a
+      distinct body of political opinion. As a conservative Whig he voiced the
+      sentiment of the great body of the followers of Webster and Clay who had
+      helped to establish the Compromise of 1850 and who wished to leave that
+      settlement undisturbed. The student of the Congressional struggles of 1854
+      will be led by a speech like that of Everett to appreciate that moderate
+      and conservative spirit toward slavery which would not persist in any
+      anti-slavery action having a tendency to disturb the harmony of the Union.
+      That this conservative opinion looked upon the repeal of the Missouri
+      Compromise as an act of aggression in the interest of slavery is indicated
+      by Everett's speech, and this gives the speech its historic significance.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Judah P. Benjamin may be said to have been the ablest legal defender of
+      slavery in public life during the decade of 1850-60. His speech on the
+      right of property in slaves and the right of slavery to national
+      protection in the territories was probably the ablest on that side of the
+      controversy. Lincoln's speech on the Dred Scott Decision has been
+      substituted for one by John C. Breckinridge on the same subject; this will
+      serve to bring into his true proportions this great leader of the combined
+      anti-slavery forces. No voice, in the beginnings of secession and
+      disunion, could better reflect the positive and uncompromising
+      Republicanism of the Northwest than that of Wade. The speech from him
+      which we have appropriated is in many ways worthy of the attention of the
+      historical student.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We may look to Crittenden as the best expositor of the Crittenden
+      Compromise, the leading attempt at compromise and conciliation in the
+      memorable session of Congress of 1860-61. Crittenden's subject and
+      personality add historical prominence to his speech. The Crittenden
+      Compromise would probably have been accepted by Southern leaders like
+      Davis and Toombs if it had been acceptable to the Republican leaders of
+      the North. The failure of that Compromise made disunion and war
+      inevitable. Jefferson Davis' memorable farewell to the Senate, following
+      the assured failure of compromise, seems a fitting close to the period of
+      our history which brings us to the eve of the Civil War.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The introduction of Professor Johnston on "Secession" is retained as
+      originally prepared. A study of the speeches, with this introduction and
+      the appended notes, will give a fair idea of the political issues dividing
+      the country in the important years immediately preceding the war.
+      Limitations of space prevent the publication of the full speeches from the
+      exhaustive Congressional debates, but in several instances where it has
+      seemed especially desirable omissions from the former volume have been
+      supplied with the purpose of more fully representing the subjects and the
+      speakers. To the reader who is interested in historical politics in
+      America these productions of great political leaders need no
+      recommendation from the editor.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      J. A. W. <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      V. &mdash;THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE (Continued from Vol. II.)
+    </h2>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0003" id="linkimage-0003">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/chase.jpg" alt="Almon Portland Chase " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0003" id="link2H_4_0003">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      SALMON PORTLAND CHASE,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF OHIO. (BORN 1808, DIED 1873.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL; SENATE, FEBRUARY 3, 1854.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The bill for the organization of the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas
+      being under consideration&mdash;Mr. CHASE submitted the following
+      amendment:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Strike out from section 14 the words "was superseded by the principles of
+      the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and; so
+      that the clause will read:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "That the Constitution, and all laws of the United States which are not
+      locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and effect within the said
+      Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except the
+      eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into
+      the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which is hereby declared inoperative."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. CHASE said:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I had occasion, a few days ago to expose the utter
+      groundlessness of the personal charges made by the Senator from Illinois
+      (Mr. Douglas) against myself and the other signers of the Independent
+      Democratic Appeal. I now move to strike from this bill a statement which I
+      will to-day demonstrate to be without any foundation in fact or history. I
+      intend afterward to move to strike out the whole clause annulling the
+      Missouri prohibition.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I enter into this debate, Mr. President, in no spirit of personal
+      unkindness. The issue is too grave and too momentous for the indulgence of
+      such feelings. I see the great question before me, and that question only.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, these crowded galleries, these thronged lobbies, this full attendance
+      of the Senate, prove the deep, transcendent interest of the theme.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      A few days only have elapsed since the Congress of the United States
+      assembled in this Capitol. Then no agitation seemed to disturb the
+      political elements. Two of the great political parties of the country, in
+      their national conventions, had announced that slavery agitation was at an
+      end, and that henceforth that subject was not to be discussed in Congress
+      or out of Congress. The President, in his annual message, had referred to
+      this state of opinion, and had declared his fixed purpose to maintain, as
+      far as any responsibility attached to him, the quiet of the country. Let
+      me read a brief extract from that message:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "It is no part of my purpose to give prominence to any subject which may
+      properly be regarded as set at rest by the deliberate judgment of the
+      people. But while the present is bright with promise, and the future full
+      of demand and inducement for the exercise of active intelligence, the past
+      can never be without useful lessons of admonition and instruction. If its
+      dangers serve not as beacons, they will evidently fail to fulfil the
+      object of a wise design. When the grave shall have closed over all those
+      who are now endeavoring to meet the obligations of duty, the year 1850
+      will be recurred to as a period filled with anxious apprehension. A
+      successful war had just terminated. Peace brought with it a vast
+      augmentation of territory. Disturbing questions arose, bearing upon the
+      domestic institutions of one portion of the Confederacy, and involving the
+      constitutional rights of the States. But, notwithstanding differences of
+      opinion and sentiment, which then existed in relation to details and
+      specific provisions, the acquiescence of distinguished citizens, whose
+      devotion to the Union can never be doubted, had given renewed vigor to our
+      institutions, and restored a sense of repose and security to the public
+      mind throughout the Confederacy. That this repose is to suffer no shock
+      during my official term, if I have power to avert it, those who placed me
+      here may be assured."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The agreement of the two old political parties, thus referred to by the
+      Chief Magistrate of the country, was complete, and a large majority of the
+      American people seemed to acquiesce in the legislation of which he spoke.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      A few of us, indeed, doubted the accuracy of these statements, and the
+      permanency of this repose. We never believed that the acts of 1850 would
+      prove to be a permanent adjustment of the slavery question. We believed no
+      permanent adjustment of that question possible except by a return to that
+      original policy of the fathers of the Republic, by which slavery was
+      restricted within State limits, and freedom, without exception or
+      limitation, was intended to be secured to every person outside of State
+      limits and under the exclusive jurisdiction of the General Government.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, we only represented a small, though vigorous and growing, party
+      in the country. Our number was small in Congress. By some we were regarded
+      as visionaries&mdash;by some as factionists; while almost all agreed in
+      pronouncing us mistaken.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And so, sir, the country was at peace. As the eye swept the entire
+      circumference of the horizon and upward to mid-heaven not a cloud
+      appeared; to common observation there was no mist or stain upon the
+      clearness of the sky.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But suddenly all is changed. Rattling thunder breaks from the cloudless
+      firmament. The storm bursts forth in fury. Warring winds rush into
+      conflict.
+    </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+     "<i>Eurus, Notusque ruunt, creberque procellis Africus</i>."
+</pre>
+    <p>
+      Yes, sir, "<i>creber procellis Africus</i>"&mdash;the South wind thick
+      with storm. And now we find ourselves in the midst of an agitation, the
+      end and issue of which no man can foresee.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, who is responsible for this renewal of strife and controversy?
+      Not we, for we have introduced no question of territorial slavery into
+      Congress&mdash;not we who are denounced as agitators and factionists. No,
+      sir: the quietists and the finalists have become agitators; they who told
+      us that all agitation was quieted, and that the resolutions of the
+      political conventions put a final period to the discussion of slavery.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This will not escape the observation of the country. It is Slavery that
+      renews the strife. It is Slavery that again wants room. It is Slavery,
+      with its insatiate demands for more slave territory and more slave States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And what does Slavery ask for now? Why, sir, it demands that a
+      time-honored and sacred compact shall be rescinded&mdash;a compact which
+      has endured through a whole generation&mdash;a compact which has been
+      universally regarded as inviolable, North and South&mdash;a compact, the
+      constitutionality of which few have doubted, and by which all have
+      consented to abide.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It will not answer to violate such a compact without a pretext. Some
+      plausible ground must be discovered or invented for such an act; and such
+      a ground is supposed to be found in the doctrine which was advanced the
+      other day by the Senator from Illinois, that the compromise acts of 1850
+      "superseded "the prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30', in the act
+      preparatory for the admission of Missouri. Ay,sir, "superseded" is the
+      phrase&mdash;"superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850,
+      commonly called the compromise measures."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It is against this statement, untrue in fact, and without foundation in
+      history, that the amendment which I have proposed is directed.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, this is a novel idea. At the time when these measures were before
+      Congress in 1850, when the questions involved in them were discussed from
+      day to day, from week to week, and from month to month, in this Senate
+      chamber, who ever heard that the Missouri prohibition was to be
+      superseded? What man, at what time, in what speech, ever suggested the
+      idea that the acts of that year were to affect the Missouri compromise?
+      The Senator from Illinois the other day invoked the authority of Henry
+      Clay&mdash;that departed statesman, in respect to whom, whatever may be
+      the differences of political opinion, none question that, among the great
+      men of this country, he stood proudly eminent. Did he, in the report made
+      by him as the chairman of the Committee of Thirteen, or in any speech in
+      support of the compromise acts, or in any conversation in the committee,
+      or out of the committee, ever even hint at this doctrine of supersedure?
+      Did any supporter or any opponent of the compromise acts ever vindicate or
+      condemn them on the ground that the Missouri prohibition would be affected
+      by them? Well, sir, the compromise acts were passed. They were denounced
+      North, and they were denounced South. Did any defender of them at the
+      South ever justify his support of them upon the ground that the South had
+      obtained through them the repeal of the Missouri prohibition? Did any
+      objector to them at the North ever even suggest as a ground of
+      condemnation that that prohibition was swept away by them? No, sir! No
+      man, North or South, during the whole of the discussion of those acts
+      here, or in that other discussion which followed their enactment
+      throughout the country, ever intimated any such opinion.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, let us come to the last session of Congress. A Nebraska bill
+      passed the House and came to the Senate, and was reported from the
+      Committee on Territories by the Senator from Illinois, as its chairman.
+      Was there any provision in it which even squinted toward this notion of
+      repeal by supersedure? Why, sir, Southern gentlemen opposed it on the very
+      ground that it left the Territory under the operation of the Missouri
+      prohibition. The Senator from Illinois made a speech in defence of it. Did
+      he invoke Southern support upon the ground that it superseded the Missouri
+      prohibition? Not at all. Was it opposed or vindicated by anybody on any
+      such ground? Every Senator knows the contrary. The Senator from Missouri
+      (Mr. Atchison), now the President of this body, made a speech upon the
+      bill, in which he distinctly declared that the Missouri prohibition was
+      not repealed, and could not be repealed.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I will send this speech to the Secretary, and ask him to read the
+      paragraphs marked. The Secretary read as follows:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I will now state to the Senate the views which induced me to oppose this
+      proposition in the early part of this session.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I had two objections to it. One was that the Indian title in that
+      Territory had not been extinguished, or, at least, a very small portion of
+      it had been. Another was the Missouri compromise, or, as it is commonly
+      called, the slavery restriction. It was my opinion at that time&mdash;and
+      I am not now very clear on that subject&mdash;that the law of Congress,
+      when the State of Missouri was admitted into the Union, excluding slavery
+      from the Territory of Louisiana north of 36° 30', would be enforced in
+      that Territory unless it was specially rescinded, and whether that law was
+      in accordance with the Constitution of the United States or not, it would
+      do its work, and that work would be to preclude slave-holders from going
+      into that Territory. But when I came to look into that question, I found
+      that there was no prospect, no hope, of a repeal of the Missouri
+      compromise excluding slavery from that Territory. Now, sir, I am free to
+      admit, that at this moment, at this hour, and for all time to come, I
+      should oppose the organization or the settlement of that Territory unless
+      my constituents, and the constituents of the whole South&mdash;of the
+      slave States of the Union,&mdash;could go into it upon the same footing,
+      with equal rights and equal privileges, carrying that species of property
+      with them as other people of this Union. Yes, sir, I acknowledge that that
+      would have governed me, but I have no hope that the restriction will ever
+      be repealed.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I have always been of opinion that the first great error committed in the
+      political history of this country was the ordinance of 1787, rendering the
+      Northwest Territory free territory. The next great error was the Missouri
+      compromise. But they are both irremediable. There is no remedy for them.
+      We must submit to them. I am prepared to do it. It is evident that the
+      Missouri compromise cannot be re-pealed. So far as that question is
+      concerned, we might as well agree to the admission of this Territory now
+      as next year, or five or ten years hence."&mdash;<i>Congressional Globe</i>,
+      Second Session, 32d Cong., vol. xxvi., page 1113.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      That, sir, is the speech of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison),
+      whose authority, I think, must go for something upon this question. What
+      does he say? "When I came to look into that question"&mdash;of the
+      possible repeal of the Missouri prohibition&mdash;that was the question he
+      was looking into&mdash;"I found that there was no prospect, no hope, of a
+      repeal of the Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that Territory."
+      And yet, sir, at that very moment, according to this new doctrine of the
+      Senator from Illinois, it had been repealed three years!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, the Senator from Missouri said further, that if he thought it
+      possible to oppose this restriction successfully, he never would consent
+      to the organization of the territory until it was rescinded. But, said he,
+      "I acknowledge that I have no hope that the restriction will ever be
+      repealed." Then he made some complaint, as other Southern gentlemen have
+      frequently done, of the ordinance of 1787, and the Missouri prohibition;
+      but went on to say: "They are both irremediable; there is no remedy for
+      them; we must submit to them; I am prepared to do it; it is evident that
+      the Missouri compromise cannot be repealed."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, when was this said? It was on the morning of the 4th of March,
+      just before the close of the last session, when that Nebraska bill,
+      reported by the Senator from Illinois, which proposed no repeal, and
+      suggested no supersedure, was under discussion. I think, sir, that all
+      this shows pretty clearly that up to the very close of the last session of
+      Congress nobody had ever thought of a repeal by supersedure. Then what
+      took place at the commencement of the present session? The Senator from
+      Iowa, early in December, introduced a bill for the organization of the
+      Territory of Nebraska. I believe it was the same bill which was under
+      discussion here at the last session, line for line, word for word. If I am
+      wrong, the Senator will correct me.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Did the Senator from Iowa, then, entertain the idea that the Missouri
+      prohibition had been superseded? No, sir, neither he nor any other man
+      here, so far as could be judged from any discussion, or statement, or
+      remark, had received this notion.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, on the 4th day of January, the Committee on Territories, through
+      their chairman, the Senator from Illinois, made a report on the
+      territorial organization of Nebraska; and that report was accompanied by a
+      bill. Now, sir, on that 4th day of January, just thirty days ago, did the
+      Committee on Territories entertain the opinion that the compromise acts of
+      1850 superseded the Missouri prohibition? If they did, they were very
+      careful to keep it to themselves. We will judge the committee by their own
+      report. What do they say in that? In the first place they describe the
+      character of the controversy, in respect to the Territories acquired from
+      Mexico. They say that some believed that a Mexican law prohibiting slavery
+      was in force there, while others claimed that the Mexican law became
+      inoperative at the moment of acquisition, and that slave-holders could
+      take their slaves into the Territory and hold them there under the
+      provisions of the Constitution. The Territorial Compromise acts, as the
+      committee tell us, steered clear of these questions. They simply provided
+      that the States organized out of these Territories might come in with or
+      without slavery, as they should elect, but did not affect the question
+      whether slaves could or could not be introduced before the organization of
+      State governments. That question was left entirely to judicial decision.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, sir, what did the committee propose to do with the Nebraska
+      Territory? In respect to that, as in respect to the Mexican Territory,
+      differences of opinion exist in relation to the introduction of slaves.
+      There are Southern gentlemen who contend that notwithstanding the Missouri
+      prohibition, they can take their slaves into the territory covered by it,
+      and hold them there by virtue of the Constitution. On the other hand the
+      great majority of the American people, North and South, believe the
+      Missouri prohibition to be constitutional and effectual. Now, what did the
+      committee pro-pose? Did they propose to repeal the prohibition? Did they
+      suggest that it had been superseded? Did they advance any idea of that
+      kind? No, sir. This is their language:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Under this section, as in the case of the Mexican law in New Mexico and
+      Utah, it is a disputed point whether slavery is prohibited in the Nebraska
+      country by valid enactment. The decision of this question involves the
+      constitutional power of Congress to pass laws prescribing and regulating
+      the domestic institutions of the various Territories of the Union. In the
+      opinion of those eminent statesmen who hold that Congress is invested with
+      no rightful authority to legislate upon the subject of slavery in the
+      Territories, the eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of
+      Missouri is null and void, while the prevailing sentiment in a large
+      portion of the Union sustains the doctrine that the Constitution of the
+      United States secures to every citizen an inalienable right to move into
+      any of the Territories with his property, of whatever kind and
+      description, and to hold and enjoy the same under the sanction of law.
+      Your committee do not feel themselves called upon to enter into the
+      discussion of these controverted questions. They involve the same grave
+      issues which produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the fearful
+      struggle of 1850."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This language will bear repetition:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Your committee do not feel themselves called upon to enter into the
+      discussion of these controverted questions. They involve the same grave
+      issues which produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the fearful
+      struggle of 1850."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And they go on to say:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Congress deemed it wise and prudent to refrain from deciding the matters
+      in controversy then, either by affirming or repealing the Mexican laws, or
+      by an act declaratory of the true intent of the Constitution and the
+      extent of the protection afforded by it to slave property in the
+      Territories; so your committee are not prepared now to recommend a
+      departure from the course pursued on that memorable occasion, either by
+      affirming or repealing the eighth section of the Missouri act, or by any
+      act declaratory of the meaning of the Constitution in respect to the legal
+      points in dispute."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, here are very remarkable facts. The Committee on
+      Territories declared that it was not wise, that it was not prudent, that
+      it was not right, to renew the old controversy, and to arouse agitation.
+      They declared that they would abstain from any recommendation of a repeal
+      of the prohibition, or of any provision declaratory of the construction of
+      the Constitution in respect to the legal points in dispute.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I am not one of those who suppose that the question between
+      Mexican law and the slave-holding claims was avoided in the Utah and New
+      Mexico Act; nor do I think that the introduction into the Nebraska bill of
+      the provisions of those acts in respect to slavery would leave the
+      question between the Missouri prohibition and the same slave-holding
+      claims entirely unaffected.' I am of a very different opinion. But I am
+      dealing now with the report of the Senator from Illinois, as chairman of
+      the committee, and I show, beyond all controversy, that that report gave
+      no countenance whatever to the doctrine of repeal by supersedure.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, sir, the bill reported by the committee was printed in the
+      Washington Sentinel on Saturday, January 7th. It contained twenty
+      sections; no more, no less. It contained no provisions in respect to
+      slavery, except those in the Utah and New Mexico bills. It left those
+      provisions to speak for themselves. This was in harmony with the report of
+      the committee. On the 10th of January&mdash;on Tuesday&mdash;the act
+      appeared again in the Sentinel; but it had grown longer during the
+      interval. It appeared now with twenty-one sections. There was a statement
+      in the paper that the twenty-first section had been omitted by a clerical
+      error.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, it is a singular fact that this twenty-first section is entirely
+      out of harmony with the committee's report. It undertakes to determine the
+      effect of the provision in the Utah and New Mexico bills. It declares,
+      among other things, that all questions pertaining to slavery in the
+      Territories, and in the new States to be formed therefrom, are to be left
+      to the decision of the people residing therein, through their appropriate
+      representatives. This provision, in effect, repealed the Missouri
+      prohibition, which the committee, in their report, declared ought not to
+      be done. Is it possible, sir, that this was a mere clerical error? May it
+      not be that this twenty-first section was the fruit of some Sunday work,
+      between Saturday the 7th, and Tuesday the 10th?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, the addition of this section, it seems, did not help the bill.
+      It did not, I suppose, meet the approbation of Southern gentlemen, who
+      contended that they have a right to take their slaves into the
+      Territories, notwithstanding any prohibition, either by Congress or by a
+      Territorial Legislature. I dare say it was found that the votes of these
+      gentlemen could not be had for the bill with that clause in it. It was not
+      enough that the committee had abandoned their report, and added this
+      twenty-first section, in direct contravention of its reasonings and
+      principles. The twenty-first section itself must be abandoned, and the
+      repeal of the Missouri prohibition placed in a shape which would not deny
+      the slave-holding claim.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Dixon), on the 16th of January, submitted
+      an amendment which came square up to repeal, and to the claim. That
+      amendment, probably, produced some fluttering and some consultation. It
+      met the views of Southern Senators, and probably determined the shape
+      which the bill has finally assumed. Of the various mutations which it has
+      undergone, I can hardly be mistaken in attributing the last to the
+      amendment of the Senator from Kentucky. That there is no effect without a
+      cause, is among our earliest lessons in physical philosophy, and I know of
+      no causes which will account for the remarkable changes which the bill
+      underwent after the 16th of January, other than that amendment, and the
+      determination of Southern Senators to support it, and to vote against any
+      provision recognizing the right of any Territorial Legislature to prohibit
+      the introduction of slavery.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It was just seven days, Mr. President, after the Senator from Kentucky had
+      offered his amendment, that a fresh amendment was reported from the
+      Committee on Territories, in the shape of a new bill, enlarged to forty
+      sections. This new bill cuts off from the proposed Territory half a degree
+      of latitude on the south, and divides the residue into two Territories&mdash;the
+      southern Territory of Kansas, and the northern Territory of Nebraska. It
+      applies to each all the provisions of the Utah and New Mexico bills; it
+      rejects entirely the twenty-first clerical-error section, and abrogates
+      the Missouri prohibition by the very singular provision, which I will
+      read:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "The Constitution and all laws of the United States which are not locally
+      inapplicable shall have the same force and effect within the said
+      Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except the
+      eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into
+      the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded by the principles
+      of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and
+      is therefore declared inoperative."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Doubtless, Mr. President, this provision operates as a repeal of the
+      prohibition. The Senator from Kentucky was right when he said it was in
+      effect the equivalent of his amendment. Those who are willing to break up
+      and destroy the old compact of 1820 can vote for this bill with full
+      assurance that such will be its effect. But I appeal to them not to vote
+      for this supersedure clause. I ask them not to incorporate into the
+      legislation of the country a declaration which every one knows to be
+      wholly untrue.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have said that this doctrine of supersedure is new. I have now proved
+      that it is a plant of but ten days' growth. It was never seen or heard of
+      until the 23d day of January, 1854. It was upon that day that this tree of
+      Upas was planted; we already see its poison fruits. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The truth is, that the compromise acts of 1850 were not intended to
+      introduce any principles of territorial organization applicable to any
+      other Territory except that covered by them. The professed object of the
+      friends of the compromise acts was to compose the whole slavery agitation.
+      There were various matters of complaint. The non-surrender of fugitives
+      from service was one. The existence of slavery and the slave-trade here in
+      this District and elsewhere, under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress,
+      was another. The apprehended introduction of slavery into the Territories
+      furnished other grounds of controversy. The slave States complained of the
+      free States, and the free States complained of the slave States. It was
+      supposed by some that this whole agitation might be stayed, and finally
+      put at rest by skilfully adjusted legislation. So, sir, we had the omnibus
+      bill, and its appendages the fugitive-slave bill and the District
+      slave-trade suppression bill. To please the North&mdash;to please the free
+      States&mdash;California was to be admitted, and the slave depots here in
+      the District were to be broken up. To please the slave States, a stringent
+      fugitive-slave act was to be passed, and slavery was to have a chance to
+      get into the new Territories. The support of the Senators and
+      Representatives from Texas was to be gained by a liberal adjustment of
+      boundary, and by the assumption of a large portion of their State debt.
+      The general result contemplated was a complete and final adjustment of all
+      questions relating to slavery. The acts passed. A number of the friends of
+      the acts signed a compact pledging themselves to support no man for any
+      office who would in any way renew the agitation. The country was required
+      to acquiesce in the settlement as an absolute finality. No man concerned
+      in carrying those measures through Congress, and least of all the
+      distinguished man whose efforts mainly contributed to their success, ever
+      imagined that in the Territorial acts, which formed a part of the series,
+      they were planting the germs of a new agitation. Indeed, I have proved
+      that one of these acts contained an express stipulation which precludes
+      the revival of the agitation in the form in which it is now thrust upon
+      the country, without manifest disregard of the provisions of those acts
+      themselves.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have thus proved beyond controversy that the averment of the bill, which
+      my amendment proposes to strike out, is untrue. Senators, will you unite
+      in a statement which you know to be contradicted by the history of the
+      country? Will you incorporate into a public statute an affirmation which
+      is contradicted by every event which attended or followed the adoption of
+      the compromise acts? Will you here, acting under your high responsibility
+      as Senators of the States, assert as a fact, by a solemn vote, that which
+      the personal recollection of every Senator who was here during the
+      discussion of those compromise acts disproves? I will not believe it until
+      I see it. If you wish to break up the time-honored compact embodied in the
+      Missouri compromise, transferred into the joint resolution for the
+      annexation of Texas, preserved and affirmed by these compromise acts
+      themselves, do it openly&mdash;do it boldly. Repeal the Missouri
+      prohibition. Repeal it by a direct vote. Do not repeal it by indirection.
+      Do not "declare" it "inoperative," "because superseded by the principles
+      of the legislation of 1850."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, three great eras have marked the history of this country in
+      respect to slavery. The first may be characterized as the Era of
+      ENFRANCHISEMENT. It commenced with the earliest struggles for national
+      independence. The spirit which inspired it animated the hearts and
+      prompted the efforts of Washington, of Jefferson, of Patrick Henry, of
+      Wythe, of Adams, of Jay, of Hamilton, of Morris&mdash;in short, of all the
+      great men of our early history. All these hoped for, all these labored
+      for, all these believed in, the final deliverance of the country from the
+      curse of slavery. That spirit burned in the Declaration of Independence,
+      and inspired the provisions of the Constitution, and the Ordinance of
+      1787. Under its influence, when in full vigor, State after State provided
+      for the emancipation of the slaves within their limits, prior to the
+      adoption of the Constitution. Under its feebler influence at a later
+      period, and during the administration of Mr. Jefferson, the importation of
+      slaves was prohibited into Mississippi and Louisiana, in the faint hope
+      that those Territories might finally become free States. Gradually that
+      spirit ceased to influence our public councils, and lost its control over
+      the American heart and the American policy. Another era succeeded, but by
+      such imperceptible gradations that the lines which separate the two cannot
+      be traced with absolute precision. The facts of the two eras meet and
+      mingle as the currents of confluent streams mix so imperceptibly that the
+      observer cannot fix the spot where the meeting waters blend.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This second era was the Era of CONSERVATISM. Its great maxim was to
+      preserve the existing condition. Men said: Let things remain as they are;
+      let slavery stand where it is; exclude it where it is not; refrain from
+      disturbing the public quiet by agitation; adjust all difficulties that
+      arise, not by the application of principles, but by compromises.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It was during this period that the Senator tells us that slavery was
+      maintained in Illinois, both while a Territory and after it became a
+      State, in despite of the provisions of the ordinance. It is true, sir,
+      that the slaves held in the Illinois country, under the French law, were
+      not regarded as absolutely emancipated by the provisions of the ordinance.
+      But full effect was given to the ordinance in excluding the introduction
+      of slaves, and thus the Territory was preserved from eventually becoming a
+      slave State. The few slave-holders in the Territory of Indiana, which then
+      included Illinois, succeeded in obtaining such an ascendency in its
+      affairs, that repeated applications were made not merely by conventions of
+      delegates, but by the Territorial Legislature itself, for a suspension of
+      the clause in the ordinance prohibiting slavery. These applications were
+      reported upon by John Randolph, of Virginia, in the House, and by Mr.
+      Franklin in the Senate. Both the reports were against suspension. The
+      grounds stated by Randolph are specially worthy of being considered now.
+      They are thus stated in the report:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "That the committee deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair a
+      provision wisely calculated to promote the happiness and prosperity of the
+      Northwestern country, and to give strength and security to that extensive
+      frontier. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and benevolent
+      restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants of Indiana will, at no very
+      distant day, find ample remuneration for a temporary privation of labor
+      and of emigration."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, these reports, made in 1803 and 1807, and the action of Congress upon
+      them, in conformity with their recommendation, saved Illinois, and perhaps
+      Indiana, from becoming slave States. When the people of Illinois formed
+      their State constitution, they incorporated into it a section providing
+      that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall hereafter be
+      introduced into this State. The constitution made provision for the
+      continued service of the few persons who were originally held as slaves,
+      and then bound to service under the Territorial laws, and for the freedom
+      of their children, and thus secured the final extinction of slavery. The
+      Senator thinks that this result is not attributable to the ordinance. I
+      differ from him. But for the ordinance, I have no doubt slavery would have
+      been introduced into Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio. It is something to the
+      credit of the Era of Conservatism, uniting its influences with those of
+      the expiring Era of Enfranchisement, that it maintained the ordinance of
+      1787 in the Northwest.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Era of CONSERVATISM passed, also by imperceptible gradations, into the
+      Era of SLAVERY PROPAGANDISM. Under the influences of this new spirit we
+      opened the whole territory acquired from Mexico, except California, to the
+      ingress of slavery. Every foot of it was covered by a Mexican prohibition;
+      and yet, by the legislation of 1850, we consented to expose it to the
+      introduction of slaves. Some, I believe, have actually been carried into
+      Utah and New Mexico. They may be few, perhaps, but a few are enough to
+      affect materially the probable character of their future governments.
+      Under the evil influences of the same spirit, we are now called upon to
+      reverse the original policy of the Republic; to support even a solemn
+      compact of the conservative period, and open Nebraska to slavery.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, I believe that we are upon the verge of another era. That era will be
+      the Era of REACTION. The introduction of this question here, and its
+      discussion, will greatly hasten its advent. We, who insist upon the
+      denationalization of slavery, and upon the absolute divorce of the General
+      Government from all connection with it, will stand with the men who
+      favored the compromise acts, and who yet wish to adhere to them, in their
+      letter and in their spirit, against the repeal of the Missouri
+      prohibition. But you may pass it here. You may send it to the other House.
+      It may become a law. But its effect will be to satisfy all thinking men
+      that no compromises with slavery will endure, except so long as they serve
+      the interests of slavery; and that there is no safe and honorable ground
+      for non-slaveholders to stand upon, except that of restricting slavery
+      within State limits, and excluding it absolutely from the whole sphere of
+      Federal jurisdiction. The old questions between political parties are at
+      rest. No great question so thoroughly possesses the public mind as this of
+      slavery. This discussion will hasten the inevitable reorganization of
+      parties upon the new issues which our circumstances suggest. It will light
+      up a fire in the country which may, perhaps, consume those who kindle it.
+      * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0004" id="linkimage-0004">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/everett.jpg" alt="Edward Everett " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0004" id="link2H_4_0004">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      EDWARD EVERETT,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF MASSACHUSETTS.
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      (BORN 1794, DIED 1865.) ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL; SENATE OF THE UNITED
+      STATES, FEBRUARY 8, 1854
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I will not take up the time of the Senate by going over the somewhat
+      embarrassing and perplexed history of the bill, from its first entry into
+      the Senate until the present time. I will take it as it now stands, as it
+      is printed on our tables, and with the amendment which was offered by the
+      Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) yesterday, and which, iI suppose, is
+      now printed, and on our tables; and I will state, as briefly as I can, the
+      difficulties which I have found in giving my support to this bill, either
+      as it stands, or as it will stand when the amendment shall be adopted. My
+      chief objections are to the provisions on the subject of slavery, and
+      especially to the exception which is contained in the 14th section, in the
+      following words:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Except the 8th section of the act preparatory to the admission of
+      Missouri into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded by
+      the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise
+      measures, and is hereby declared inoperative."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      On the day before yesterday the chairman of the Committee on Territories
+      proposed to change the words "superseded by" to "inconsistent with," as
+      expressing more distinctly all that he meant to convey by that impression.
+      Yesterday, however, he brought in an amendment drawn up with great skill
+      and care, on notice given the day before, which is to strike out the words
+      "which was superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850,
+      commonly called the compromise measures, and is hereby declared
+      inoperative," and to insert in lieu of them the following:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Which being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by
+      Congress with slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by the
+      legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, is hereby
+      declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and meaning of
+      this act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to
+      exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to
+      form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject
+      only to the Constitution of the United States."
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, I think, in the first place, that the language of this proposed
+      enactment, being obscure, is of somewhat doubtful import, and for that
+      reason, unsatisfactory. I should have preferred a little more directness.
+      What is the condition of an enactment which is declared by a subsequent
+      act of Congress to be "inoperative and void?" Does it remain in force? I
+      take it, not. That would be a contradiction in terms, to say that an
+      enactment which had been declared by act of Congress inoperative and void
+      is still in force. Then, if it is not in force, if it is not only
+      inoperative and void, as it is to be declared, but is not in force, it is
+      of course repealed. If it is to be repealed, why not say so? I think it
+      would have been more direct and more parliamentary to say "shall be and is
+      hereby repealed." Then we should know precisely, so far as legal and
+      technical terms go, what the amount of this new legislative provision is.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      If the form is somewhat objectionable, I think the substance is still more
+      so. The amendment is to strike out the words "which was superseded by,"
+      and to insert a provision that the act of 1820 is inconsistent with the
+      principle of congressional non-intervention, and is therefore inoperative
+      and void. I do not quite understand how much is conveyed in this language.
+      The Missouri restriction of 1820, it is said, is inconsistent with the
+      principle of the legislation of 1850. If anything more is meant by "the
+      principle" of the legislation of 1850, than the measures which were
+      adopted at that time in reference to the territories of New Mexico and
+      Utah&mdash;for I may assume that those are the legislative measures
+      referred to&mdash;if anything more is meant than that a certain measure
+      was adopted, and enacted in reference to those territories, I take issue
+      on that point. I do not know that it could be proved that, even in
+      reference to those territories, a principle was enacted at all. A certain
+      measure, or, if you please, a course of measures, was enacted in reference
+      to the Territories of New Mexico and Utah; but I do not know that you can
+      call this enacting a principle. It is certainly not enacting a principle
+      which is to carry with it a rule for other Territories lying in other
+      parts of the country, and in a different legal position. As to the
+      principle of non-intervention on the part of Congress in the question of
+      slavery, I do not find that, either as principle or as measure, it was
+      enacted in those territorial bills of 1850. I do not, unless I have
+      greatly misread them, find that there is anything at all which comes up to
+      that. Every legislative act of those territorial governments must come
+      before Congress for allowance or disallowance, and under those bills
+      without repealing them, without departing from them in the slightest
+      degree, it would be competent for Congress to-morrow to pass any law on
+      that subject.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      How then can it be said that the principle of non-intervention on the part
+      of Congress in the subject of slavery was enacted and established by the
+      compromise measures of 1850? But, whether that be so or not, how can you
+      find, in a simple measure applying in terms to these individual
+      Territories, and to them alone, a rule which is to govern all other
+      Territories with a retrospective and with a prospective action? Is it not
+      a mere begging of the question to say that those compromise measures,
+      adopted in this specific case, amount to such a general rule?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, let us try it in a parallel case. In the earlier land legislation of
+      the United States, it was customary, without exception, when a Territory
+      became a State, to require that there should be a stipulation in their
+      State constitution that the public lands sold within their borders should
+      be exempted from taxation for five years after the sale. This, I believe,
+      continued to be the uniform practice down to the year 1820, when the State
+      of Missouri was admitted. She was admitted under the stipulation. If I
+      mistake not, the next State which was admitted into the Union&mdash;but it
+      is not important whether it was the next or not&mdash;came in without that
+      stipulation, and they were left free to tax the public lands the moment
+      when they were sold. Here was a principle; as much a principle as it is
+      contended was established in the Utah and New Mexico territorial bill; but
+      did any one suppose that it acted upon the other Territories? I believe
+      the whole system is now abolished under the operation of general laws, and
+      the influence of that example may have led to the change. But, until it
+      was made by legislation, the mere fact that public lands sold in Arkansas
+      were immediately subject to taxation, could not alter the law in regard to
+      the public lands sold in Missouri, or in any other to where they were they
+      were exempt.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There is a case equally analogous to the very matter we are now
+      considering&mdash;the prohibition or permission of slavery. The ordinance
+      of 1787 prohibited slavery in the territory northwest of the Ohio. In 1790
+      Congress passed an act accepting the cession which the State of North
+      Carolina had made of the western part of her territory, with the proviso,
+      that in reference to the territory thus ceded Congress should pass no laws
+      "tending to the emancipation of the slaves." Here was a precisely parallel
+      case. Here was a territory in which, in 1787, slavery was prohibited. Here
+      was a territory ceded by North Carolina, which became the territory of the
+      United States south of the Ohio, in reference to which it was stipulated
+      with North Carolina, that Congress should pass no laws tending to the
+      emancipation of slaves. But I believe it never occurred to any one that
+      the legislation of 1790 acted back upon the ordinance of 1787, or
+      furnished a rule by which any effect could be produced upon the state of
+      things existing under that ordinance, in the territory to which it
+      applied.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I certainly intend to do the distinguished chairman of the committee no
+      injustice; and I am not sure that I fully comprehend his argument in this
+      respect; but I think his report sustains the view which I now take of the
+      subject: that is, that the legislation of 1850 did not establish a
+      principle which was designed to have any such effect as he intimates. That
+      report states how matters stood in those new Mexican territories. It was
+      alleged on the one hand that by the Mexican <i>lex loci</i> slavery was
+      prohibited. On the other hand that was denied, and it was maintained that
+      the Constitution of the United States secures to every citizen the right
+      to go there and take with him any property recognized as such by any of
+      the States of the Union. The report considers that a similar state of
+      things now exists in Nebraska&mdash;that the validity of the eighth
+      section of the Missouri Act, by which slavery is prohibited in that
+      Territory, is doubtful, and that it is maintained by many distinguished
+      statesmen that Congress has no power to legislate on the subject. Then, in
+      this state of the controversy, the report maintains that the legislation
+      of Congress in 1850 did not undertake to decide these questions. Surely,
+      if they did not undertake to decide them, they could not settle the
+      principle which is at stake in them; and, unless they did decide them, the
+      measures then adopted must be considered as specific measures, relating
+      only to those case and not establishing a principle of general operation.
+      This seems to me to be as direct and conclusive as anything can be.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      At all events, these are not impressions which are put forth by me under
+      the exigencies of the present debate or of the present occasion. I have
+      never entertained any other opinion. I was called upon for a particular
+      purpose, of a literary nature, to which I will presently allude more
+      distinctly, shortly after the close of the session of 1850, to draw up a
+      narrative of the events that had taken place relative to the passage of
+      the compromise measures of that year. I had not, I own, the best sources
+      of information. I was not a member of Congress, and had not heard the
+      debates, which is almost indispensable to come to a thorough understanding
+      of questions of this nature; but I inquired of those who had heard them, I
+      read the reports, and I had an opportunity of personal intercourse with
+      some who had taken a prominent part in all those measures. I never formed
+      the idea&mdash;I never received the intimation until I got it from this
+      report of the committee&mdash;that those measures were intended to have
+      any effect beyond the Territories of Utah and New Mexico, for which they
+      were enacted. I cannot but think that if it was intended that they should
+      have any larger application, if it was intended that they should furnish
+      the rule which is now supposed, it would have been a fact as notorious as
+      the light of day.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      And now, sir, having alluded to the speech of Mr. Webster, of the 7th
+      March, 1850, allow me to dwell upon it for a moment. I was in a position
+      the next year&mdash;having been requested by that great and lamented man
+      to superintend the publication of his works&mdash;to know very
+      particularly the comparative estimate which he placed upon his own
+      parliamentary efforts. He told me more than once that he thought his
+      second speech on Foot's resolution was that in which he had best succeeded
+      as a senatorial effort, and as a specimen of parliamentary dialectics; but
+      he added, with an emotion which even he was unable to suppress, "The
+      speech of the 7th of March, 1850, much as I have been reviled for it, when
+      I am dead, will be allowed to be of the greatest importance to the
+      country." Sir, he took the greatest interest in that speech. He wished it
+      to go forth with a specific title; and, after considerable deliberation,
+      it was called, by his own direction, "A Speech for the Constitution and
+      the Union." He inscribed it to the people of Massachusetts, in a
+      dedication of the most emphatic tenderness, and he prefixed to it that
+      motto&mdash;which you all remember&mdash;from Livy, the most appropriate
+      and felicitous quotation, perhaps, that was ever made: "True things rather
+      than pleasant things"&mdash;<i>Vera progratis:</i> and with that he sent
+      it forth to the world.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In that speech his gigantic intellect brought together all that it could
+      gather from the law of nature, from the Constitution of the United States,
+      from our past legislation, and from the physical features of the region,
+      to strengthen him in that plan of conciliation and peace, in which he
+      feared that he might not carry along with him the public sentiment of the
+      whole of that, portion of the country which he particularly represented
+      here. At its close, when he dilated upon the disastrous effects of
+      separation, he rose to a strain of impassioned eloquence which had never
+      been surpassed within these walls. Every topic, every argument, every
+      fact, was brought to bear upon the point; and he felt that all his vast
+      popularity was at stake on the issue. Let me commend to the attention of
+      Senators, and let me ask them to consider what weight is due to the
+      authority of such a man, speaking under such circumstances, and on such an
+      occasion, when he tells you that the condition of every foot of land in
+      the country, for slavery or non-slavery, is fixed by some irrepealable
+      law. And you are now about to repeal the principal law which ascertained
+      and fixed that condition. And, sir, if the Senate will take any heed of
+      the opinion of one so humble as myself, I will say that I believe Mr.
+      Webster, in that speech, went to the very verge of the public sentiment in
+      the non-slaveholding States, and that to have gone a hair's-breadth
+      further, would have been a step too bold even for his great weight of
+      character.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      I conclude, therefore, sir, that the compromise measures of 1850 ended
+      where they began, with the Territories of Utah and New Mexico, to which
+      they specifically referred; at any rate, that they established no
+      principle which was to govern in other cases; that they had no prospective
+      action to the organization of territories in all future time; and
+      certainly no retrospective action upon lands subject to the restriction of
+      1820, and to the positive enactment that you now propose to declare
+      inoperative and void.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I trust that nothing which I have now said will be taken in derogation of
+      the compromises of 1850. I adhere to them; I stand by them. I do so for
+      many reasons. One is respect for the memory of the great men who were the
+      authors of them&mdash;lights and ornaments of the country, but now taken
+      from its service. I would not so soon, if it were in my power, undo their
+      work, if for no other reason. But beside this, I am one of those&mdash;I
+      am not ashamed to avow it&mdash;who believed at that time, and who still
+      believe, that at that period the union of these States was in great
+      danger, and that the adoption of the compromise measures of 1850
+      contributed materially to avert that danger; and therefore, sir, I say, as
+      well out of respect to the memory of the great men who were the authors of
+      them, as to the healing effect of the measures themselves, I would adhere
+      to them. They are not perfect. I suppose that nobody, either North or
+      South, thinks them perfect. They contain some provisions not satisfactory
+      to the South, and other provisions contrary to the public sentiment of the
+      North; but I believed at the time they were the wisest, the best, the most
+      effective measures which, under the circumstances, could be adopted. But
+      you do not strengthen them, you do not show your respect for them, by
+      giving them an application which they were never intended to bear.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      A single word, sir, in respect to this supposed principle of
+      non-intervention on the part of Congress in the subject of slavery in the
+      territories. I confess I am surprised to find this brought forward, and
+      stated with so much confidence, as an established principle of the
+      Government. I know that distinguished gentlemen hold the opinion. The very
+      distinguished Senator from Michigan (Mr. Cass) holds it, and has
+      propounded it; and I pay all due respect and deference to his authority,
+      which I conceive to be very high. But I was not aware that any such
+      principle was considered a settled principle of the territorial policy of
+      this country. Why, sir, from the first enactment in 1789, down to the bill
+      before us, there is no such principle in our legislation. As far as I can
+      see it would be perfectly competent even now for Congress to pass any law
+      that they pleased on the subject in the Territories under this bill. But
+      however that may be, even by this bill, there is not a law which the
+      Territories can pass admitting or excluding slavery, which it is of in the
+      power of this Congress to disallow the next day. This is not a mere <i>brutum
+      fulmen</i>. It is not an unexpected power. Your statute-book shows case
+      after case. I believe, in reference to a single Territory, that there have
+      been fifteen or twenty cases where territorial legislation has been
+      disallowed by Congress. How, then, can it be said that this principle of
+      non-intervention in the government of the Territories is now to be
+      recognized as an established principle in the public policy of the
+      Congress of the United States?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Do gentlemen recollect the terms, almost of disdain, with which this
+      supposed established principle of our constitutional policy is treated in
+      that last valedictory speech of Mr. Calhoun, which, unable to pronounce it
+      himself, he was obliged to give to the Senate through the medium of his
+      friend, the Senator from Virginia. He reminded the Senate that the
+      occupants of a Territory were not even called the people&mdash;but simply
+      the inhabitants&mdash;till they were allowed by Congress to call a
+      convention and form a State constitution.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      A word more, sir, and I have done. With reference to the great question of
+      slavery&mdash;that terrible question&mdash;the only one on which the North
+      and South of this great Republic differ irreconcilably&mdash;I have not,
+      on this occasion, a word to say. My humble career is drawing near its
+      close, and I shall end it as I began, with using no other words on that
+      subject than those of moderation, conciliation, and harmony between the
+      two great sections of the country. I blame no one who differs from me in
+      this respect. I allot to others, what I claim for myself, the credit of
+      honesty and purity of motive. But for my own part, the rule of my life, as
+      far as circumstances have enabled me to act up to it, has been, to say
+      nothing that would tend to kindle unkind feeling on this subject. I have
+      never known men on this, or any other subject, to be convinced by harsh
+      epithets or denunciation.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I believe the union of these States is the greatest possible blessing&mdash;that
+      it comprises within itself all other blessings, political, national, and
+      social; and I trust that my eyes may close long before the day shall come&mdash;if
+      it ever shall come&mdash;when that Union shall be at an end. Sir, I share
+      the opinions and the sentiments of the part of the country where I was
+      born and educated, where my ashes will be laid, and where my children will
+      succeed me. But in relation to my fellow-citizens in other parts of the
+      country, I will treat their constitutional and their legal rights with
+      respect, and their characters and their feelings with tenderness. I
+      believe them to be as good Christians, as good patriots, as good men, as
+      we are, and I claim that we, in our turn, are as good as they.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I rejoiced to hear my friend from Kentucky, (Mr. Dixon), if he will allow
+      me to call him so&mdash;I concur most heartily in the sentiment&mdash;utter
+      the opinion that a wise and gracious Providence, in his own good time,
+      will find the ways and the channels to remove from the land what I
+      consider this great evil, but I do not expect that what has been done in
+      three centuries and a half is to be undone in a day or a year, or a few
+      years; and I believe that, in the mean time, the desired end will be
+      retarded rather than promoted by passionate sectional agitation. I
+      believe, further, that the fate of the great and interesting continent in
+      the elder world, Africa, is closely intertwined and wrapped up with the
+      fortunes of her children in all the parts of the earth to which they have
+      been dispersed, and that at some future time, which is already in fact
+      beginning, they will go back to the land of their fathers, the voluntary
+      missionaries of Civilization and Christianity; and finally, sir, I doubt
+      not that in His own good time the Ruler of all will vindicate the most
+      glorious of His prerogatives, "From seeming evil still educing good."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0005" id="linkimage-0005">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/douglas.jpg" alt="Stephen Douglas " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0005" id="link2H_4_0005">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL; SENATE, MARCH 3, 1854.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It has been urged in debate that there is no necessity for these
+      Territorial organizations; and I have been called upon to point out any
+      public and national considerations which require action at this time.
+      Senators seem to forget that our immense and valuable possessions on the
+      Pacific are separated from the States and organized Territories on this
+      side of the Rocky Mountains by a vast wilderness, filled by hostile
+      savages&mdash;that nearly a hundred thousand emigrants pass through this
+      barbarous wilderness every year, on their way to California and Oregon&mdash;that
+      these emigrants are American citizens, our own constituents, who are
+      entitled to the protection of law and government, and that they are left
+      to make their way, as best they may, without the protection or aid of law
+      or government. The United States mails for New Mexico and Utah, and
+      official communications between this Government and the authorities of
+      those Territories, are required to be carried over these wild plains, and
+      through the gorges of the mountains, where you have made no provisions for
+      roads, bridges, or ferries to facilitate travel, or forts or other means
+      of safety to protect life. As often as I have brought forward and urged
+      the adoption of measures to remedy these evils, and afford security
+      against the damages to which our people are constantly exposed, they have
+      been promptly voted down as not being of sufficient importance to command
+      the favorable consideration of Congress. Now, when I propose to organize
+      the Territories, and allow the people to do for themselves what you have
+      so often refused to do for them, I am told that there are not white
+      inhabitants enough permanently settled in the country to require and
+      sustain a government. True; there is not a very large population there,
+      for the very reason that your Indian code and intercourse laws exclude the
+      settlers, and forbid their remaining there to cultivate the soil. You
+      refuse to throw the country open to settlers, and then object to the
+      organization of the Territories, upon the ground that there is not a
+      sufficient number of inhabitants. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I will now proceed to the consideration of the great principle involved in
+      the bill, without omitting, however, to notice some of those extraneous
+      matters which have been brought into this discussion with the view of
+      producing another anti-slavery agitation. We have been told by nearly
+      every Senator who has spoken in opposition to this bill, that at the time
+      of its introduction the people were in a state of profound quiet and
+      repose, that the anti-slavery agitation had entirely ceased, and that the
+      whole country was acquiescing cheerfully and cordially in the compromise
+      measures of 1850 as a final adjustment of this vexed question. Sir, it is
+      truly refreshing to hear Senators, who contested every inch of ground in
+      opposition to those measures, when they were under discussion, who
+      predicted all manner of evils and calamities from their adoption, and who
+      raised the cry of appeal, and even resistance, to their execution, after
+      they had become the laws of the land&mdash;I say it is really refreshing
+      to hear these same Senators now bear their united testimony to the wisdom
+      of those measures, and to the patriotic motives which induced us to pass
+      them in defiance of their threats and resistance, and to their beneficial
+      effects in restoring peace, harmony, and fraternity to a distracted
+      country. These are precious confessions from the lips of those who stand
+      pledged never to assent to the propriety of those measures, and to make
+      war upon them, so long as they shall remain upon the statute-book. I well
+      understand that these confessions are now made, not with the view of
+      yielding their assent to the propriety of carrying those enactments into
+      faithful execution, but for the purpose of having a pretext for charging
+      upon me, as the author of this bill, the responsibility of an agitation
+      which they are striving to produce. They say that I, and not they, have
+      revived the agitation. What have I done to render me obnoxious to this
+      charge? They say that I wrote and introduced this Nebraska bill. That is
+      true; but I was not a volunteer in the transaction. The Senate, by a
+      unanimous vote, appointed me chairman of the Territorial Committee, and
+      associated five intelligent and patriotic Senators with me, and thus made
+      it our duty to take charge of all Territorial business. In like manner,
+      and with the concurrence of these complaining Senators, the Senate
+      referred to us a distinct proposition to organize this Nebraska Territory,
+      and required us to report specifically upon the question. I repeat, then,
+      we were not volunteers in this business. The duty was imposed upon us by
+      the Senate. We were not unmindful of the delicacy and responsibility of
+      the position. We were aware that, from 1820 to 1850, the abolition
+      doctrine of Congressional interference with slavery in the Territories and
+      new States had so far prevailed as to keep up an incessant slavery
+      agitation in Congress, and throughout the country, whenever any new
+      Territory was to be acquired or organized. We were also aware that, in
+      1850, the right of the people to decide this question for themselves,
+      subject only to the Constitution, was submitted for the doctrine of
+      Congressional intervention. This first question, therefore, which the
+      committee were called upon to decide, and indeed the only question of any
+      material importance in framing this bill, was this: Shall we adhere to and
+      carry out the principle recognized by the compromise measures of 1850, or
+      shall we go back to the old exploded doctrine of Congressional
+      interference, as established in 1820, in a large portion of the country,
+      and which it was the object of the Wilmot proviso to give a universal
+      application, not only to all the territory which we then possessed, but
+      all which we might hereafter acquire? There are no alternatives. We were
+      compelled to frame the bill upon the one or the other of these two
+      principles. The doctrine of 1820 or the doctrine of 1850 must prevail. In
+      the discharge of the duty imposed upon us by the Senate, the committee
+      could not hesitate upon this point, whether we consulted our own
+      individual opinions and principles, or those which were known to be
+      entertained and boldly avowed by a large majority of the Senate. The two
+      great political parties of the country stood solemnly pledged before the
+      world to adhere to the compromise measures of 1850, "in principle and
+      substance." A large majority of the Senate&mdash;indeed, every member of
+      the body, I believe, except the two avowed Abolitionists (Mr. Chase and
+      Mr. Sumner)&mdash;profess to belong to one or the other of these parties,
+      and hence were supposed to be under a high moral obligation to carry out
+      "the principle and substance" of those measures in all new Territorial
+      organizations. The report of the committee was in accordance with this
+      obligation. I am arraigned, therefore, for having endeavored to represent
+      the opinions and principles of the Senate truly&mdash;for having performed
+      my duty in conformity with parliamentary law&mdash;for having been
+      faithful to the trust imposed in me by the Senate. Let the vote this night
+      determine whether I have thus faithfully represented your opinions. When a
+      majority of the Senate shall have passed the bill&mdash;when the majority
+      of the States shall have endorsed it through their representatives upon
+      this floor&mdash;when a majority of the South and a majority of the North
+      shall have sanctioned it&mdash;when a majority of the Whig party and a
+      majority of the Democratic party shall have voted for it&mdash;when each
+      of these propositions shall be demonstrated by the vote this night on the
+      final passage of the bill, I shall be willing to submit the question to
+      the country, whether, as the organ of the committee, I performed my duty
+      in the report and bill which have called down upon my head so much
+      denunciation and abuse.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, the opponents of this measure have had much to say about
+      the mutations and modifications which this bill has undergone since it was
+      first introduced by myself, and about the alleged departure of the bill,
+      in its present form, from the principle laid down in the original report
+      of the committee as a rule of action in all future Territorial
+      organizations. Fortunately there is no necessity, even if your patience
+      would tolerate such a course of argument at this late hour of the night,
+      for me to examine these speeches in detail, and reply to each charge
+      separately. Each speaker seems to have followed faithfully in the
+      footsteps of his leader in the path marked out by the Abolition
+      confederates in their manifesto, which I took occasion to expose on a
+      former occasion. You have seen them on their winding way, meandering the
+      narrow and crooked path in Indian file, each treading close upon the heels
+      of the other, and neither venturing to take a step to the right or left,
+      or to occupy one inch of ground which did not bear the footprint of the
+      Abolition champion. To answer one, therefore, is to answer the whole. The
+      statement to which they seem to attach the most importance, and which they
+      have repeated oftener, perhaps, than any other, is, that, pending the
+      compromise measures of 1850, no man in or out of Congress ever dreamed of
+      abrogating the Missouri compromise; that from that period down to the
+      present session nobody supposed that its validity had been impaired, or
+      any thing done which endered it obligatory upon us to make it inoperative
+      hereafter; that at the time of submitting the report and bill to the
+      Senate, on the fourth of January last, neither I nor any member of the
+      committee ever thought of such a thing; and that we could never be brought
+      to the point of abrogating the eighth section of the Missouri act until
+      after the Senator from Kentucky introduced his amendment to my bill.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, before I proceed to expose the many misrepresentations
+      contained in this complicated charge, I must call the attention of the
+      Senate to the false issue which these gentlemen are endeavoring to impose
+      upon the country, for the purpose of diverting public attention from the
+      real issue contained in the bill. They wish to have the people believe
+      that the abrogation of what they call the Missouri compromise was the main
+      object and aim of the bill, and that the only question involved is,
+      whether the prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30' shall be repealed or
+      not? That which is a mere incident they choose to consider the principle.
+      They make war on the means by which we propose to accomplish an object,
+      instead of openly resisting the object itself. The principle which we
+      propose to carry into effect by the bill is this: That Congress shall
+      neither legislate slavery into any Territories or State, nor out of the
+      same; but the people shall be left free to regulate their domestic
+      concerns in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United
+      States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In order to carry this principle into practical operation, it becomes
+      necessary to remove whatever legal obstacles might be found in the way of
+      its free exercise. It is only for the purpose of carrying out this great
+      fundamental principle of self-government that the bill renders the eighth
+      section of the Missouri act inoperative and void.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, let me ask, will these Senators who have arraigned me, or any one of
+      them, have the assurance to rise in his place and declare that this great
+      principle was never thought of or advocated as applicable to Territorial
+      bills, in 1850; that from that session until the present, nobody ever
+      thought of incorporating this principle in all new Territorial
+      organizations; that the Committee on Territories did not recommend it in
+      their report; and that it required the amendment of the Senator from
+      Kentucky to bring us up to that point? Will any one of my accusers dare to
+      make this issue, and let it be tried by the record? I will begin with the
+      compromises of 1850, Any Senator who will take the trouble to examine our
+      journals, will find that on the 25th of March of that year I reported from
+      the Committee on Territories two bills including the following measures;
+      the admission of California, a Territorial government for New Mexico, and
+      the adjustment of the Texas boundary. These bills proposed to leave the
+      people of Utah and New Mexico free to decide the slavery question for
+      themselves, in the precise language of the Nebraska bill now under
+      discussion. A few weeks afterward the committee of thirteen took those two
+      bills and put a wafer between them, and reported them back to the Senate
+      as one bill, with some slight amendments. One of these amendments was,
+      that the Territorial Legislatures should not legislate upon the subject of
+      African slavery. I objected to that provision upon the ground that it
+      subverted the great principle of self-government upon which the bill had
+      been originally framed by the Territorial Committee. On the first trial,
+      the Senate refused to strike it out, but subsequently did so, after full
+      debate, in order to establish that principle as the rule of action in
+      Territorial organizations. * * * But my accusers attempt to raise up a
+      false issue, and thereby divert public attention from the real one, by the
+      cry that the Missouri compromise is to be repealed or violated by the
+      passage of this bill. Well, if the eighth section of the Missouri act,
+      which attempted to fix the destinies of future generations in those
+      Territories for all time to come, in utter disregard of the rights and
+      wishes of the people when they should be received into the Union as
+      States, be inconsistent with the great principles of self-government and
+      the Constitution of the United States. it ought to be abrogated. The
+      legislation of 1850 abrogated the Missouri compromise, so far as the
+      country embraced within the limits of Utah and New Mexico was covered by
+      the slavery restriction. It is true, that those acts did not in terms and
+      by name repeal the act of 1820, as originally adopted, or as extended by
+      the resolutions annexing Texas in 1845, any more than the report of the
+      Committee on Territories proposed to repeal the same acts this session.
+      But the acts of 1850 did authorize the people of those Territories to
+      exercise "all rightful powers of legislation consistent with the
+      Constitution," not excepting the question of slavery; and did provide
+      that, when those Territories should be admitted into the Union, they
+      should be received with or without slavery as the people thereof might
+      determine at the date of their admission. These provisions were in direct
+      conflict with a clause in the former enactment, declaring that slavery
+      should be forever prohibited in any portion of said Territories, and hence
+      rendered such clause inoperative and void to the extent of such conflict.
+      This was an inevitable consequence, resulting from the provisions in those
+      acts, which gave the people the right to decide the slavery question for
+      themselves, in conformity with the Constitution. It was not necessary to
+      go further and declare that certain previous enactments, which were
+      incompatible with the exercise of the powers conferred in the bills, are
+      hereby repealed. The very act of granting those powers and rights has the
+      legal effect of removing all obstructions to the exercise of them by the
+      people, as prescribed in those Territorial bills. Following that example,
+      the Committee on Territories did not consider it necessary to declare the
+      eighth section of the Missouri act repealed. We were content to organize
+      Nebraska in the precise language of the Utah and New Mexico bills. Our
+      object was to leave the people entirely free to form and regulate their
+      domestic institutions and internal concerns in their own way, under the
+      Constitution; and we deemed it wise to accomplish that object in the exact
+      terms in which the same thing had been done in Utah and New Mexico by the
+      acts of 1850. This was the principle upon which the committee voted; and
+      our bill was supposed, and is now believed, to have been in accordance
+      with it. When doubts were raised whether the bill did fully carry out the
+      principle laid down in the report, amendments were made from time to time,
+      in order to avoid all misconstruction, and make the true intent of the act
+      more explicit. The last of these amendments was adopted yesterday, on the
+      motion of the distinguished Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Badger), in
+      regard to the revival of any laws or regulations which may have existed
+      prior to 1820. That amendment was not intended to change the legal effect
+      of the bill. Its object was to repel the slander which had been propagated
+      by the enemies of the measure in the North&mdash;that the Southern
+      supporters of the bill desired to legislate slavery into these
+      Territories. The South denies the right of Congress either to legislate
+      slavery into any Territory or State, or out of any Territory or State.
+      Non-intervention by Congress with slavery in the States or Territories is
+      the doctrine of the bill, and all the amendments which have been agreed to
+      have been made with the view of removing all doubt and cavil as to the
+      true meaning and object of the measure. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, sir, what is this Missouri compromise, of which we have heard so
+      much of late? It has been read so often that it is not necessary to occupy
+      the time of the Senate in reading it again. It was an act of Congress,
+      passed on the 6th of March, 1820, to authorize the people of Missouri to
+      form a constitution and a State government, preparatory to the admission
+      of such State into the Union. The first section provided that Missouri
+      should be received into the Union "on an equal footing with the original
+      States in all respects whatsoever." The last and eighth section provided
+      that slavery should be "forever prohibited" in all the territory which had
+      been acquired from France north of 36° 30', and not included within the
+      limits of the State of Missouri. There is nothing in the terms of the law
+      that purports to be a compact, or indicates that it was any thing more
+      than an ordinary act of legislation. To prove that it was more than it
+      purports to be on its face, gentlemen must produce other evidence, and
+      prove that there was such an understanding as to create a moral obligation
+      in the nature of a compact. Have they shown it?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, if this was a compact, let us see how it was entered into. The bill
+      originated in the House of Representatives, and passed that body without a
+      Southern vote in its favor. It is proper to remark, however, that it did
+      not at that time contain the eighth section, prohibiting slavery in the
+      Territories; but in lieu of it, contained a provision prohibiting slavery
+      in the proposed State of Missouri. In the Senate, the clause prohibiting
+      slavery in the State was stricken out, and the eighth section added to the
+      end of the bill, by the terms of which slavery was to be forever
+      prohibited in the territory not embraced in the State of Missouri north of
+      36° 30'. The vote on adding this section stood in the Senate, 34 in the
+      affirmative, and 10 in the negative. Of the Northern Senators, 20 voted
+      for it, and 2 against it. On the question of ordering the bill to a third
+      reading as amended, which was the test vote on its passage, the vote stood
+      24 yeas and 20 nays. Of the Northern Senators, 4 only voted in the
+      affirmative, and 18 in the negative. Thus it will be seen that if it was
+      intended to be a compact, the North never agreed to it. The Northern
+      Senators voted to insert the prohibition of slavery in the Territories;
+      and then, in the proportion of more than four to one, voted against the
+      passage of the bill. The North, therefore, never signed the compact, never
+      consented to it, never agreed to be bound by it. This fact becomes very
+      important in vindicating the character of the North for repudiating this
+      alleged compromise a few months afterward. The act was approved and became
+      a law on the 6th of March, 1820. In the summer of that year, the people of
+      Missouri formed a constitution and State government preparatory to
+      admission into the Union in conformity with the act. At the next session
+      of Congress the Senate passed a joint resolution declaring Missouri to be
+      one of the States of the Union, on an equal footing with the original
+      States. This resolution was sent to the House of Representatives, where it
+      was rejected by Northern votes, and thus Missouri was voted out of the
+      Union, instead of being received into the Union under the act of the 6th
+      of March, 1820, now known as the Missouri compromise. Now, sir, what
+      becomes of our plighted faith, if the act of the 6th of March, 1820, was a
+      solemn compact, as we are now told? They have all rung the changes upon
+      it, that it was a sacred and irrevocable compact, binding in honor, in
+      conscience, and morals, which could not be violated or repudiated without
+      perfidy and dishonor! * * * Sir, if this was a compact, what must be
+      thought of those who violated it almost immediately after it was formed? I
+      say it is a calumny upon the North to say that it was a compact. I should
+      feel a flush of shame upon my cheek, as a Northern man, if I were to say
+      that it was a compact, and that the section of the country to which I
+      belong received the consideration, and then repudiated the obligation in
+      eleven months after it was entered into. I deny that it was a compact, in
+      any sense of the term. But if it was, the record proves that faith was not
+      observed&mdash;that the contract was never carried into effect&mdash;that
+      after the North had procured the passage of the act prohibiting slavery in
+      the Territories, with a majority in the House large enough to prevent its
+      repeal, Missouri was refused admission into the Union as a slave-holding
+      State, in conformity with the act of March 6, 1820. If the proposition be
+      correct, as contended for by the opponents of this bill&mdash;that there
+      was a solemn compact between the North and the South that, in
+      consideration of the prohibition of slavery in the Territories, Missouri
+      was to be admitted into the Union, in conformity with the act of 1820&mdash;that
+      compact was repudiated by the North, and rescinded by the joint action of
+      the two parties within twelve months from its date. Missouri was never
+      admitted under the act of the 6th of March, 1820. She was refused
+      admission under that act. She was voted out of the Union by Northern
+      votes, notwithstanding the stipulation that she should be received; and,
+      in consequence of these facts, a new compromise was rendered necessary, by
+      the terms of which Missouri was to be admitted into the Union
+      conditionally&mdash;admitted on a condition not embraced in the act of
+      1820, and, in addition, to a full compliance with all the provisions of
+      said act. If, then, the act of 1820, by the eighth section of which
+      slavery was prohibited in Missouri, was a compact, it is clear to the
+      comprehension of every fair-minded man that the refusal of the North to
+      admit Missouri, in compliance with its stipulations, and without further
+      conditions, imposes upon us a high, moral obligation to remove the
+      prohibition of slavery in the Territories, since it has been shown to have
+      been procured upon a condition never performed. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I did not wish to refer to these things. I did not
+      understand them fully in all their bearings at the time I made my first
+      speech on this subject; and, so far as I was familiar with them, I made as
+      little reference to them as was consistent with my duty; because it was a
+      mortifying reflection to me, as a Northern man, that we had not been able,
+      in consequence of the abolition excitement at the time, to avoid the
+      appearance of bad faith in the observance of legislation, which has been
+      denominated a compromise. There were a few men then, as there are now, who
+      had the moral courage to perform their duty to the country and the
+      Constitution, regardless of consequences personal to themselves. There
+      were ten Northern men who dared to perform their duty by voting to admit
+      Missouri into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and
+      with no other restriction than that imposed by the Constitution. I am
+      aware that they were abused and denounced as we are now&mdash;that they
+      were branded as dough-faces&mdash;traitors to freedom, and to the section
+      of country whence they came. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I think I have shown that if the act of 1820, called the Missouri
+      compromise, was a compact, it was violated and repudiated by a solemn vote
+      of the House of Representatives in 1821, within eleven months after it was
+      adopted. It was repudiated by the North by a majority vote, and that
+      repudiation was so complete and successful as to compel Missouri to make a
+      new compromise, and she was brought into the Union under the new
+      compromise of 1821, and not under the act of 1820. This reminds me of
+      another point made in nearly all the speeches against this bill, and, if I
+      recollect right, was alluded to in the abolition manifesto; to which, I
+      regret to say, I had occasion to refer so often. I refer to the
+      significant hint that Mr. Clay was dead before any one dared to bring
+      forward a proposition to undo the greatest work of his hands. The Senator
+      from New York (Mr. Seward) has seized upon this insinuation and
+      elaborated, perhaps, more fully than his compeers; and now the Abolition
+      press, suddenly, and, as if by miraculous conversion, teems with eulogies
+      upon Mr. Clay and his Missouri compromise of 1820.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, Mr. President, does not each of these Senators know that Mr. Clay was
+      not the author of the act of 1820? Do they not know that he disclaimed it
+      in 1850 in this body? Do they not know that the Missouri restriction did
+      not originate in the House, of which he was a member? Do they not know
+      that Mr. Clay never came into the Missouri controversy as a compromiser
+      until after the compromise of 1820 was repudiated, and it became necessary
+      to make another? I dislike to be compelled to repeat what I have
+      conclusively proven, that the compromise which Mr. Clay effected was the
+      act of 1821, under which Missouri came into the Union, and not the act of
+      1820. Mr. Clay made that compromise after you had repudiated the first
+      one. How, then, dare you call upon the spirit of that great and gallant
+      statesman to sanction your charge of bad faith against the South on this
+      question? * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, Mr. President, as I have been doing justice to Mr. Clay on this
+      question, perhaps I may as well do justice to another great man, who was
+      associated with him in carrying through the great measures of 1850, which
+      mortified the Senator from New York so much, because they defeated his
+      purpose of carrying on the agitation. I allude to Mr. Webster. The
+      authority of his great name has been quoted for the purpose of proving
+      that he regarded the Missouri act as a compact, an irrepealable compact.
+      Evidently the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Everett)
+      supposed he was doing Mr. Webster entire justice when he quoted the
+      passage which he read from Mr. Webster's speech of the 7th of March, 1850,
+      when he said that he stood upon the position that every part of the
+      American continent was fixed for freedom or for slavery by irrepealable
+      law. The Senator says that by the expression "irrepealable law," Mr.
+      Webster meant to include the compromise of 1820. Now, I will show that
+      that was not Mr. Webster's meaning&mdash;that he was never guilty of the
+      mistake of saying that the Missouri act of 1820 was an irrepealable law.
+      Mr. Webster said in that speech that every foot of territory in the United
+      States was fixed as to its character for freedom or slavery by an
+      irrepealable law. He then inquired if it was not so in regard to Texas? He
+      went on to prove that it was; because, he said, there was a compact in
+      express terms between Texas and the United States. He said the parties
+      were capable of contracting and that there was a valuable consideration;
+      and hence, he contended, that in that case there was a contract binding in
+      honor and morals and law; and that it was irrepealable without a breach of
+      faith.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      He went on to say:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Now, as to California and New Mexico, I hold slavery to be excluded from
+      these Territories by a law even superior to that which admits and
+      sanctions it in Texas&mdash;I mean the law of nature&mdash;of physical
+      geography&mdash;the law of the formation of the earth."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      That was the irrepealable law which he said prohibited slavery in the
+      Territories of Utah and New Mexico. He went on to speak of the prohibition
+      of slavery in Oregon, and he said it was an "entirely useless and, in that
+      connection, senseless proviso."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      He went further, and said:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "That the whole territory of the States of the United States, or in the
+      newly-acquired territory of the United States, has a fixed and settled
+      character, now fixed and settled by law, which cannot be repealed in the
+      case of Texas without a violation of public faith, and cannot be repealed
+      by any human power in regard to California or New Mexico; that, under one
+      or other of these laws, every foot of territory in the States or in the
+      Territories has now received a fixed and decided character."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      What irrepealable laws? One or the other of those which he had stated. One
+      was the Texas compact; the other, the law of nature and physical
+      geography; and he contended that one or the other fixed the character of
+      the whole American continent for freedom or for slavery. He never alluded
+      to the Missouri compromise, unless it was by the allusion to the Wilmot
+      proviso in the Oregon bill, and therein said it was a useless and, in that
+      connection, senseless thing. Why was it a useless and senseless thing?
+      Because it was reenacting the law of God; because slavery had already been
+      prohibited by physical geography. Sir, that was the meaning of Mr.
+      Webster's speech. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I have occupied a good deal of time in exposing the cant of
+      these gentlemen about the sanctity of the Missouri compromise, and the
+      dishonor attached to the violation of plighted faith. I have exposed these
+      matters in order to show that the object of these men is to withdraw from
+      public attention the real principle involved in the bill. They well know
+      that the abrogation of the Missouri compromise is the incident and not the
+      principle of the bill. They well understand that the report of the
+      committee and the bill propose to establish the principle in all
+      Territorial organizations, that the question of slavery shall be referred
+      to the people to regulate for themselves, and that such legislation should
+      be had as was necessary to remove all legal obstructions to the free
+      exercise of this right by the people. The eighth section of the Missouri
+      act standing in the way of this great principle must be rendered
+      inoperative and void, whether expressly repealed or not, in order to give
+      the people the power of regulating their own domestic institutions in
+      their own way, subject only to the Constitution.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, if these gentlemen have entire confidence in the correctness of
+      their own position, why do they not meet the issue boldly and fairly, and
+      controvert the soundness of this great principle of popular sovereignty in
+      obedience to the Constitution? They know full well that this was the
+      principle upon which the colonies separated from the crown of Great
+      Britain, the principle upon which the battles of the Revolution were
+      fought, and the principle upon which our republican system was founded.
+      They cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Revolution grew out of the
+      assertion of the right on the part of the imperial Government to interfere
+      with the internal affairs and domestic concerns of the colonies. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Declaration of Independence had its origin in the violation of that
+      great fundamental principle which secured to the colonies the right to
+      regulate their own domestic affairs in their own way; and the Revolution
+      resulted in the triumph of that principle, and the recognition of the
+      right asserted by it. Abolitionism proposes to destroy the right and
+      extinguish the principle for which our forefathers waged a seven years'
+      bloody war, and upon which our whole system of free government is founded.
+      They not only deny the application of this principle to the Territories,
+      but insist upon fastening the prohibition upon all the States to be formed
+      out of those Territories. Therefore, the doctrine of the Abolitionists&mdash;the
+      doctrine of the opponents of the Nebraska and Kansas bill, and the
+      advocates of the Missouri restriction&mdash;demands Congressional
+      interference with slavery not only in the Territories, but in all the new
+      States to be formed therefrom. It is the same doctrine, when applied to
+      the Territories and new States of this Union, which the British Government
+      attempted to enforce by the sword upon the American colonies. It is this
+      fundamental principle of self-government which constitutes the
+      distinguishing feature of the Nebraska bill. The opponents of the
+      principle are consistent in opposing the bill. I do not blame them for
+      their opposition. I only ask them to meet the issue fairly and openly, by
+      acknowledging that they are opposed to the principle which it is the
+      object of the bill to carry into operation. It seems that there is no
+      power on earth, no intellectual power, no mechanical power, that can bring
+      them to a fair discussion of the true issue. If they hope to delude the
+      people and escape detection for any considerable length of time under the
+      catch-words "Missouri compromise" and "faith of compacts," they will find
+      that the people of this country have more penetration and intelligence
+      than they have given them credit for.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, there is an important fact connected with this slavery
+      regulation, which should never be lost sight of. It has always arisen from
+      one and the same cause. Whenever that cause has been removed, the
+      agitation has ceased; and whenever the cause has been renewed, the
+      agitation has sprung into existence. That cause is, and ever has been, the
+      attempt on the part of Congress to interfere with the question of slavery
+      in the Territories and new States formed therefrom. Is it not wise then to
+      confine our action within the sphere of our legitimate duties, and leave
+      this vexed question to take care of itself in each State and Territory,
+      according to the wishes of the people thereof, in conformity to the forms,
+      and in subjection to the provisions, of the Constitution?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The opponents of the bill tell us that agitation is no part of their
+      policy; that their great desire is peace and harmony; and they complain
+      bitterly that I should have disturbed the repose of the country by the
+      introduction of this measure! Let me ask these professed friends of peace,
+      and avowed enemies of agitation, how the issue could have been avoided.
+      They tell me that I should have let the question alone; that is, that I
+      should have left Nebraska unorganized, the people unprotected, and the
+      Indian barrier in existence, until the swelling tide of emigration should
+      burst through, and accomplish by violence what it is the part of wisdom
+      and statesmanship to direct and regulate by law. How long could you have
+      postponed action with safety? How long could you maintain that Indian
+      barrier, and restrain the onward march of civilization, Christianity, and
+      free government by a barbarian wall? Do you suppose that you could keep
+      that vast country a howling wilderness in all time to come, roamed over by
+      hostile savages, cutting off all safe communication between our Atlantic
+      and Pacific possessions? I tell you that the time for action has come, and
+      cannot be postponed. It is a case in which the "let-alone" policy would
+      precipitate a crisis which must inevitably result in violence, anarchy,
+      and strife.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      You cannot fix bounds to the onward march of this great and growing
+      country. You cannot fetter the limbs of the young giant. He will burst all
+      your chains. He will expand, and grow, and increase, and extend
+      civilization, Christianity, and liberal principles. Then, sir, if you
+      cannot check the growth of the country in that direction, is it not the
+      part of wisdom to look the danger in the face, and provide for an event
+      which you cannot avoid? I tell you, sir, you must provide for lines of
+      continuous settlement from the Mississippi valley to the Pacific ocean.
+      And in making this provision, you must decide upon what principles the
+      Territories shall be organized; in other words, whether the people shall
+      be allowed to regulate their domestic institutions in their own way,
+      according to the provisions of this bill, or whether the opposite doctrine
+      of Congressional interference is to prevail. Postpone it, if you will; but
+      whenever you do act, this question must be met and decided.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Missouri compromise was interference; the compromise of 1850 was
+      non-interference, leaving the people to exercise their rights under the
+      Constitution. The Committee on Territories were compelled to act on this
+      subject. I, as their chairman, was bound to meet the question. I chose to
+      take the responsibility regardless of consequences personal to myself. I
+      should have done the same thing last year, if there had been time; but we
+      know, considering the late period at which the bill then reached us from
+      the House, that there was not sufficient time to consider the question
+      fully, and to prepare a report upon the subject.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I was, therefore, persuaded by my friends to allow the bill to be reported
+      to the Senate, in order that such action might be taken as should be
+      deemed wise and proper. The bill was never taken up for action&mdash;the
+      last night of the session having been exhausted in debate on a motion to
+      take up the bill. This session, the measure was introduced by my friend
+      from Iowa (Mr. Dodge), and referred to the Territorial Committee during
+      the first week of the session. We have abundance of time to consider the
+      subject; it is a matter of pressing necessity, and there was no excuse for
+      not meeting it directly and fairly. We were compelled to take our position
+      upon the doctrine either of intervention or non-intervention. We chose the
+      latter for two reasons: first, because we believed that the principle was
+      right; and, second, because it was the principle adopted in 1850, to which
+      the two great political parties of the country were solemnly pledged.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There is another reason why I desire to see this principle recognized as a
+      rule of action in all time to come. It will have the effect to destroy all
+      sectional parties and sectional agitations. If, in the language of the
+      report of the committee, you withdraw the slavery question from the halls
+      of Congress and the political arena, and commit it to the arbitrament of
+      those who are immediately interested in and alone responsible for its
+      consequences, there is nothing left out of which sectional parties can be
+      organized. It never was done, and never can be done on the bank, tariff,
+      distribution, or any party issue which has existed, or may exist, after
+      this slavery question is withdrawn from politics. On every other political
+      question these have always supporters and opponents in every portion of
+      the Union&mdash;in each State, county, village, and neighborhood&mdash;residing
+      together in harmony and good fellowship, and combating each other's
+      opinions and correcting each other's errors in a spirit of kindness and
+      friendship. These differences of opinion between neighbors and friends,
+      and the discussions that grow out of them, and the sympathy which each
+      feels with the advocates of his own opinions in every portion of this
+      widespread Republic, add an overwhelming and irresistible moral weight to
+      the strength of the Confederacy. Affection for the Union can never be
+      alienated or diminished by any other party issues than those which are
+      joined upon sectional or geographical lines. When the people of the North
+      shall all be rallied under one banner, and the whole South marshalled
+      under another banner, and each section excited to frenzy and madness by
+      hostility to the institutions of the other, then the patriot may well
+      tremble for the perpetuity of the Union. Withdraw the slavery question
+      from the political arena, and remove it to the States and Territories,
+      each to decide for itself, such a catastrophe can never happen. Then you
+      will never be able to tell, by any Senator's vote for or against any
+      measure, from what State or section of the Union he comes.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Why, then, can we not withdraw this vexed question from politics? Why can
+      we not adopt the principle of this bill as a rule of action in all new
+      Territorial organizations? Why can we not deprive these agitators of their
+      vocation and render it impossible for Senators to come here upon bargains
+      on the slavery question? I believe that the peace, the harmony, and
+      perpetuity of the Union require us to go back to the doctrines of the
+      Revolution, to the principles of the Constitution, to the principles of
+      the Compromise of 1850, and leave the people, under the Constitution, to
+      do as they may see proper in respect to their own internal affairs.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I have not brought this question forward as a Northern man
+      or as a Southern man. I am unwilling to recognize such divisions and
+      distinctions. I have brought it forward as an American Senator,
+      representing a State which is true to this principle, and which has
+      approved of my action in respect to the Nebraska bill. I have brought it
+      forward not as an act of justice to the South more than to the North. I
+      have presented it especially as an act of justice to the people of those
+      Territories and of the States to be formed therefrom, now and in all time
+      to come. I have nothing to say about Northern rights or Southern rights. I
+      know of no such divisions or distinctions under the Constitution. The bill
+      does equal and exact justice to the whole Union, and every part of it; it
+      violates the right of no State or Territory; but places each on a perfect
+      equality, and leaves the people thereof to the free enjoyment of all their
+      rights under the Constitution.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, I wish to say to our Southern friends that if they desire to see
+      this great principle carried out, now is their time to rally around it, to
+      cherish it, preserve it, make it the rule of action in all future time. If
+      they fail to do it now, and thereby allow the doctrine of interference to
+      prevail, upon their heads the consequences of that interference must rest.
+      To our Northern friends, on the other hand, I desire to say, that from
+      this day henceforward they must rebuke the slander which has been uttered
+      against the South, that they desire to legislate slavery into the
+      Territories. The South has vindicated her sincerity, her honor, on that
+      point by bringing forward a provision negativing, in express terms, any
+      such effect as a result of this bill. I am rejoiced to know that while the
+      proposition to abrogate the eighth section of the Missouri act comes from
+      a free State, the proposition to negative the conclusion that slavery is
+      thereby introduced, comes from a slave-holding State. Thus, both sides
+      furnish conclusive evidence that they go for the principle, and the
+      principle only, and desire to take no advantage of any possible
+      misconstruction.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I feel that I owe an apology to the Senate for having
+      occupied their attention so long, and a still greater apology for having
+      discussed the question in such an incoherent and desultory manner. But I
+      could not forbear to claim the right of closing this debate. I thought
+      gentlemen would recognize its propriety when they saw the manner in which
+      I was assailed and misrepresented in the course of this discussion, and
+      especially by assaults still more disreputable in some portions of the
+      country. These assaults have had no other effect upon me than to give me
+      courage and energy for a still more resolute discharge of duty. I say
+      frankly that, in my opinion, this measure will be as popular at the North
+      as at the South, when its provisions and principles shall have been fully
+      developed, and become well understood. The people at the North are
+      attached to the principles of self-government, and you cannot convince
+      them that that is self-government which deprives a people of the right of
+      legislating for themselves, and compels them to receive laws which are
+      forced upon them by a Legislature in which they are not represented. We
+      are willing to stand upon this great principle of self-government
+      every-where; and it is to us a proud reflection that, in this whole
+      discussion, no friend of the bill has urged an argument in its favor which
+      could not be used with the same propriety in a free State as in a slave
+      State, and vice versed. No enemy of the bill has used an argument which
+      would bear repetition one mile across Mason and Dixon's line. Our
+      opponents have dealt entirely in sectional appeals. The friends of the
+      bill have discussed a great principle of universal application, which can
+      be sustained by the same reasons, and the same arguments, in every time
+      and in every corner of the Union.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0006" id="link2H_4_0006">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      CHARLES SUMNER,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF MASSACHUSETTS (BORN 1811, DIED 1874.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS; SENATE, MAY 19-20, 1856. MR. PRESIDENT:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      You are now called to redress a great transgression. Seldom in the history
+      of nations has such a question been presented. Tariffs, Army bills, Navy
+      bills, Land bills, are important, and justly occupy your care; but these
+      all belong to the course of ordinary legislation. As means and instruments
+      only, they are necessarily subordinate to the conservation of government
+      itself. Grant them or deny them, in greater or less degree, and you will
+      inflict no shock. The machinery of government will continue to move. The
+      State will not cease to exist. Far otherwise is it with the eminent
+      question now before you, involving, as it does, Liberty in a broad
+      territory, and also involving the peace of the whole country, with our
+      good name in history forever more.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Take down your map, sir, and you will find that the Territory of Kansas,
+      more than any other region, occupies the middle spot of North America,
+      equally distant from the Atlantic on the east, and the Pacific on the
+      west; from the frozen waters of Hudson's Bay on the north, and the tepid
+      Gulf Stream on the south, constituting the precise territorial centre of
+      the whole vast continent. To such advantages of situation, on the very
+      highway between two oceans, are added a soil of unsurpassed richness, and
+      a fascinating, undulating beauty of surface, with a health-giving climate,
+      calculated to nurture a powerful and generous people, worthy to be a
+      central pivot of American institutions. A few short months only have
+      passed since this spacious and mediterranean country was open only to the
+      savage who ran wild in its woods and prairies; and now it has already
+      drawn to its bosom a population of freemen larger than Athens crowded
+      within her historic gates, when her sons, under Miltiades, won liberty for
+      man-kind on the field of Marathon; more than Sparta contained when she
+      ruled Greece, and sent forth her devoted children, quickened by a mother's
+      benediction, to return with their shields, or on them; more than Rome
+      gathered on her seven hills, when, under her kings, she commenced that
+      sovereign sway, which afterward embraced the whole earth; more than London
+      held, when, on the fields of Crecy and Agincourt, the English banner was
+      carried victoriously over the chivalrous hosts of France.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Against this Territory, thus fortunate in position and population, a crime
+      has been committed, which is without example in the records of the past.
+      Not in plundered provinces or in the cruelties of selfish governors will
+      you find its parallel; and yet there is an ancient instance, which may
+      show at least the path of justice. In the terrible impeachment by which
+      the great Roman orator has blasted through all time the name of Verres,
+      amidst charges of robbery and sacrilege, the enormity which most aroused
+      the indignant voice of his accuser, and which still stands forth with
+      strongest distinctness, arresting the sympathetic indignation of all who
+      read the story, is, that away in Sicily he had scourged a citizen of Rome&mdash;that
+      the cry, "I am a Roman citizen," had been interposed in vain against the
+      lash of the tyrant governor. Other charges were, that he had carried away
+      productions of art, and that he had violated the sacred shrines. It was in
+      the presence of the Roman Senate that this arraignment proceeded; in a
+      temple of the Forum; amidst crowds&mdash;such as no orator had ever before
+      drawn together&mdash;thronging the porticos and colonnades, even clinging
+      to the house-tops and neighboring slopes&mdash;and under the anxious gaze
+      of witnesses summoned from the scene of crime. But an audience grander far&mdash;of
+      higher dignity&mdash;of more various people, and of wider intelligence&mdash;the
+      countless multitude of succeeding generations, in every land, where
+      eloquence has been studied, or where the Roman name has been recognized,&mdash;has
+      listened to the accusation, and throbbed with condemnation of the
+      criminal. Sir, speaking in an age of light, and a land of constitutional
+      liberty, where the safeguards of elections are justly placed among the
+      highest triumphs of civilization, I fearlessly assert that the wrongs of
+      much-abused Sicily, thus memorable in history, were small by the side of
+      the wrongs of Kansas, where the very shrines of popular institutions, more
+      sacred than any heathen altar, have been desecrated; where the ballot-box,
+      more precious than any work, in ivory or marble, from the cunning hand of
+      art, has been plundered; and where the cry, "I am an American citizen,"
+      has been interposed in vain against outrage of every kind, even upon life
+      itself. Are you against sacrilege? I present it for your execration. Are
+      you against;robbery? I hold it up to your scorn. Are you for the
+      protection of American citizens? I show you how their dearest rights have
+      been cloven down, while a Tyrannical Usurpation has sought to install
+      itself on their very necks!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But the wickedness which I now begin to expose is immeasurably aggravated
+      by the motive which prompted it. Not in any common lust for power did this
+      uncommon tragedy have its origin. It is the rape of a virgin Territory,
+      compelling it to the hateful embrace of Slavery; and it may be clearly
+      traced to a depraved longing for a new slave State, the hideous off-spring
+      of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the power of slavery in the
+      National Government. Yes, sir, when the whole world, alike Christian and
+      Turk, is rising up to condemn this wrong, and to make it a hissing to the
+      nations, here in our Republic, force&mdash;ay, sir, FORCE&mdash;has been
+      openly employed in compelling Kansas to this pollution, and all for the
+      sake of political power. There is the simple fact, which you will in vain
+      attempt to deny, but which in itself presents an essential wickedness that
+      makes other public crimes seem like public virtues.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But this enormity, vast beyond comparison, swells to dimensions of
+      wickedness which the imagination toils in vain to grasp, when it is
+      understood that for this purpose are hazarded the horrors of intestine
+      feud not only in this distant Territory, but everywhere throughout the
+      country. Already the muster has begun. The strife is no longer local, but
+      national. Even now, while I speak, portents hang on all the arches of the
+      horizon threatening to darken the broad land, which already yawns with the
+      mutterings of civil war. The fury of the propagandists of Slavery, and the
+      calm determination of their opponents, are now diffused from the distant
+      Territory over widespread communities, and the whole country, in all its
+      extent&mdash;marshalling hostile divisions, and foreshadowing a strife
+      which, unless happily averted by the triumph of Freedom, will become war&mdash;fratricidal,
+      parricidal war&mdash;with an accumulated wickedness beyond the wickedness
+      of any war in human annals; justly provoking the avenging judgment of
+      Providence and the avenging pen of history, and constituting a strife, in
+      the language of the ancient writer, more than foreign, more than social,
+      more than civil; but something compounded of all these strifes, and in
+      itself more than war; <i>sal potius commune quoddam ex omnibus, et plus
+      quam bellum</i>.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Such is the crime which you are to judge. But the criminal also must be
+      dragged into day, that you may see and measure the power by which all this
+      wrong is sustained. From no common source could it proceed. In its
+      perpetration was needed a spirit of vaulting ambition which would hesitate
+      at nothing; a hardihood of purpose which was insensible to the judgment of
+      mankind; a madness for Slavery which would disregard the Constitution, the
+      laws, and all the great examples of our history; also a consciousness of
+      power such as comes from the habit of power; a combination of energies
+      found only in a hundred arms directed by a hundred eyes; a control of
+      public opinion through venal pens and a prostituted press; an ability to
+      subsidize crowds in every vocation of life&mdash;the politician with his
+      local importance, the lawyer with his subtle tongue, and even the
+      authority of the judge on the bench; and a familiar use of men in places
+      high and low, so that none, from the President to the lowest border
+      postmaster, should decline to be its tool; all these things and more were
+      needed, and they were found in the slave power of our Republic. There,
+      sir, stands the criminal, all unmasked before you&mdash;heartless,
+      grasping, and tyrannical&mdash;with an audacity beyond that of Verres, a
+      subtlety beyond that of Machiavel, a meanness beyond that of Bacon, and an
+      ability beyond that of Hastings. Justice to Kansas can be secured only by
+      the prostration of this influence; for this the power behind&mdash;greater
+      than any President&mdash;which succors and sustains the crime. Nay, the
+      proceedings I now arraign derive their fearful consequences only from this
+      connection.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In now opening this great matter, I am not insensible to the austere
+      demands of the occasion; but the dependence of the crime against Kansas
+      upon the slave power is so peculiar and important, that I trust to be
+      pardoned while I impress it with an illustration, which to some may seem
+      trivial. It is related in Northern mythology that the god of Force,
+      visiting an enchanted region, was challenged by his royal entertainer to
+      what seemed an humble feat of strength&mdash;merely, sir, to lift a cat
+      from the ground. The god smiled at the challenge, and, calmly placing his
+      hand under the belly of the animal, with superhuman strength strove, while
+      the back of the feline monster arched far up-ward, even beyond reach, and
+      one paw actually forsook the earth, until at last the discomfited divinity
+      desisted; but he was little surprised at his defeat when he learned that
+      this creature, which seemed to be a cat, and nothing more, was not merely
+      a cat, but that it belonged to and was a part of the great Terrestrial
+      Serpent, which, in its innumerable folds, encircled the whole globe. Even
+      so the creature, whose paws are now fastened upon Kansas, whatever it may
+      seem to be, constitutes in reality a part of the slave power, which, in
+      its loathsome folds, is now coiled about the whole land. Thus do I expose
+      the extent of the present contest, where we encounter not merely local
+      resistance, but also the unconquered sustaining arm behind. But out of the
+      vastness of the crime attempted, with all its woe and shame, I derive a
+      well-founded assurance of a commensurate vastness of effort against it by
+      the aroused masses of the country, determined not only to vindicate Right
+      against Wrong, but to redeem the Republic from the thraldom of that
+      Oligarchy which prompts, directs, and concentrates the distant wrong.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Such is the crime, and such the criminal, which it is my duty in this
+      debate to expose, and, by the blessing of God, this duty shall be done
+      completely to the end. * * *'
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, before entering upon the argument, I must say something of a general
+      character, particularly in response to what has fallen from Senators who
+      have raised themselves to eminence on this floor in championship of human
+      wrongs. I mean the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), and the
+      Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas), who, though unlike as Don Quixote and
+      Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally forth together in the same
+      adventure. I regret much to miss the elder Senator from his seat; but the
+      cause, against which he has run a tilt, with such activity of animosity,
+      demands that the opportunity of exposing him should not be lost; and it is
+      for the cause that I speak. The Senator from South Carolina has read many
+      books of chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight, with
+      sentiments of honor and courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to
+      whom he has made his vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always
+      lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his
+      sight&mdash;I mean the harlot, Slavery. For her, his tongue is always
+      profuse in words. Let her be impeached in character, or any proposition
+      made to shut her out from the extension of her wantonness, and no
+      extravagance of manner or hardihood of assertion is then too great for
+      this Senator. The frenzy of Don Quixote, in behalf of his wench, Dulcinea
+      del Toboso, is all surpassed. The asserted rights of Slavery, which shock
+      equality of all kinds, are cloaked by a fantastic claim of equality. If
+      the slave States cannot enjoy what, in mockery of the great fathers of the
+      Republic, he misnames equality under the Constitution&mdash;in other
+      words, the full power in the National Territories to compel fellow-men to
+      unpaid toil, to separate husband and wife, and to sell little children at
+      the auction block&mdash;then, sir, the chivalric Senator will conduct the
+      State of South Carolina out of the Union! Heroic knight! Exalted Senator!
+      A second Moses come for a second exodus!!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But not content with this poor menace, which we have been twice told was
+      "measured," the Senator in the unrestrained chivalry of his nature, has
+      undertaken to apply opprobrious words to those who differ from him on this
+      floor. He calls them "sectional and fanatical;" and opposition to the
+      usurpation in Kansas he denounces as "an uncalculating fanaticism." To be
+      sure these charges lack all grace of originality, and all sentiment of
+      truth; but the adventurous Senator does not hesitate. He is the
+      uncompromising, unblushing representative on this floor of a flagrant
+      sectionalism, which now domineers over the Republic, and yet with a
+      ludicrous ignorance of his own position&mdash;unable to see himself as
+      others see him&mdash;or with an effrontery which even his white head ought
+      not to protect from rebuke, he applies to those here who resist his
+      sectionalism the very epithet which designates himself. The men who strive
+      to bring back the Government to its original policy, when Freedom and not
+      Slavery was sectional, he arraigns as sectional. This will not do. It
+      involves too great a perversion of terms. I tell that Senator that it is
+      to himself, and to the "organization" of which he is the "committed
+      advocate," that this epithet belongs. I now fasten it upon them. For
+      myself, I care little for names; but since the question has been raised
+      here, I affirm that the Republican party of the Union is in no just sense
+      sectional, but, more than any other party, national; and that it now goes
+      forth to dislodge from the high places of the Government the tyrannical
+      sectionalism of which the Senator from South Carolina is one of the
+      maddest zealots. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      As the Senator from South Carolina, is the Don Quixote, the Senator from
+      Illinois (Mr. Douglas) is the Squire of Slavery, its very Sancho Panza,
+      ready to do all its humiliating offices. This Senator, in his labored
+      address, vindicating his labored report&mdash;piling one mass of elaborate
+      error upon another mass&mdash;constrained himself, as you will remember,
+      to unfamiliar decencies of speech. Of that address I have nothing to say
+      at this moment, though before I sit down I shall show something of its
+      fallacies. But I go back now to an earlier occasion, when, true to his
+      native impulses, he threw into this discussion, "for a charm of powerful
+      trouble," personalities most discreditable to this body. I will not stop
+      to repel the imputations which he cast upon myself; but I mention them to
+      remind you of the "sweltered venom sleeping got," which, with other
+      poisoned ingredients, he cast into the caldron of this debate. Of other
+      things I speak. Standing on this floor, the Senator issued his rescript,
+      requiring submission to the Usurped Power of Kansas; and this was
+      accompanied by a manner&mdash;all his own&mdash;such as befits the
+      tyrannical threat. Very well. Let the Senator try. I tell him now that he
+      cannot enforce any such submission. The Senator, with the slave power at
+      his back, is strong; but he is not strong enough for this purpose. He is
+      bold. He shrinks from nothing. Like Danton, he may cry, "l'audace!
+      l'audace! toujours l'au-dace!" but even his audacity cannot compass this
+      work. The Senator copies the British officer who, with boastful swagger,
+      said that with the hilt of his sword he would cram the "stamps" down the
+      throats of the American people, and he will meet a similar failure. He may
+      convulse this country with a civil feud. Like the ancient madman, he may
+      set fire to this Temple of Constitutional Liberty, grander than the
+      Ephesian dome; but he cannot enforce obedience to that Tyrannical
+      Usurpation.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Senator dreams that he can subdue the North. He disclaims the open
+      threat, but his conduct still implies it. How little that Senator knows
+      himself or the strength of the cause which he persecutes! He is but a
+      mortal man; against him is an immortal principle. With finite power he
+      wrestles with the infinite, and he must fall. Against him are stronger
+      battalions than any marshalled by mortal arm&mdash;the inborn,
+      ineradicable, invincible sentiments of the human heart; against him is
+      nature in all her subtle forces; against him is God. Let him try to subdue
+      these. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      With regret, I come again upon the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+      Butler), who, omnipresent in this debate, overflowed with rage at the
+      simple suggestion that Kansas had applied for admission as a State; and,
+      with incoherent phrases, discharged the loose expectoration of his speech,
+      now upon her representative, and then upon her people. There was no
+      extravagance of the ancient parliamentary debate, which he did not repeat;
+      nor was there any possible deviation from truth which he did not make,
+      with so much of passion, I am glad to add, as to save him from the
+      suspicion of intentional aberration. But the Senator touches nothing which
+      he does not disfigure&mdash;with error, sometimes of principle, sometimes
+      of fact. He shows an incapacity of accuracy, whether in stating the
+      Constitution, or in stating the law, whether in the details of statistics
+      or the diversions of scholarship. He cannot ope his mouth, but out there
+      flies a blunder. Surely he ought to be familiar with the life of Franklin;
+      and yet he referred to this household character, while acting as agent of
+      our fathers in England, as above suspicion; and this was done that he
+      might give point to a false contrast with the agent of Kansas&mdash;not
+      knowing that, however they may differ in genius and fame, in this
+      experience they are alike: that Franklin, when entrusted with the petition
+      of Massachusetts Bay, was assaulted by a foul-mouthed speaker, where he
+      could not be heard in defence, and denounced as a "thief," even as the
+      agent of Kansas has been assaulted on this floor, and denounced as a
+      "forger." And let not the vanity of the Senator be inspired by the
+      parallel with the British statesman of that day; for it is only in
+      hostility to Freedom that any parallel can be recognized.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But it is against the people of Kansas that the sensibilities of the
+      Senator are particularly aroused. Coming, as he announces, "from a State"&mdash;ay,
+      sir, from South Carolina&mdash;he turns with lordly disgust from this
+      newly-formed community, which he will not recognize even as a "body
+      politic." Pray, sir, by what title does he indulge in this egotism? Has he
+      read the history of "the State" which he represents? He cannot surely have
+      forgotten its shameful imbecility from Slavery, confessed throughout the
+      Revolution, followed by its more shameful assumptions for Slavery since.
+      He cannot have forgotten its wretched persistence in the slave-trade as
+      the very apple of its eye, and the condition of its participation in the
+      Union. He cannot have forgotten its constitution, which is Republican only
+      in name, confirming power in the hands of the few, and founding the
+      qualifications of its legislators on "a settled freehold estate and ten
+      negroes." And yet the Senator, to whom that "State" has in part committed
+      the guardianship of its good name, instead of moving, with backward
+      treading steps, to cover its nakedness, rushes forward in the very ecstasy
+      of madness, to expose it by provoking a comparison with Kansas. South
+      Carolina is old; Kansas is young. South Carolina counts by centuries;
+      where Kansas counts by years. But a beneficent example may be born in a
+      day; and I venture to say, that against the two centuries of the older
+      "State," may be already set the two years of trial, evolving corresponding
+      virtue, in the younger community. In the one, is the long wail of Slavery;
+      in the other, the hymns of Freedom. And if we glance at special
+      achievements, it will be difficult to find any thing in the history of
+      South Carolina which presents so much of heroic spirit in an heroic cause
+      as appears in that repulse of the Missouri invaders by the beleaguered
+      town of Lawrence, where even the women gave their effective efforts to
+      Freedom. The matrons of Rome, who poured their jewels into the treasury
+      for the public defence&mdash;the wives of Prussia, who, with delicate
+      fingers, clothed their defenders against French invasion&mdash;the mothers
+      of our own Revolution, who sent forth their sons, covered with prayers and
+      blessings, to combat for human rights, did nothing of self-sacrifice truer
+      than did these women on this occasion. Were the whole history of South
+      Carolina blotted out of existence, from its very beginning down to the day
+      of the last election of the Senator to his present seat on this floor,
+      civilization might lose&mdash;I do not say how little; but surely less
+      than it has already gained by the example of Kansas, in its valiant
+      struggle against oppression, and in the development of a new science of
+      emigration. Already, in Lawrence alone, there are newspapers and schools,
+      including a High School, and throughout this infant Territory there is
+      more mature scholarship far, in proportion to its inhabitants, than in all
+      South Carolina. Ah, sir, I tell the Senator that Kansas, welcomed as a
+      free State, will be a "ministering angel" to the Republic, when South
+      Carolina, in the cloak of darkness which she hugs, "lies howling."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) naturally joins the Senator from
+      South Carolina in this warfare, and gives to it the superior intensity of
+      his nature. He thinks that the National Government has not completely
+      proved its power, as it has never hanged a traitor; but, if the occasion
+      requires, he hopes there will be no hesitation; and this threat is
+      directed at Kansas, and even at the friends of Kansas throughout the
+      country. Again occurs the parallel with the struggle of our fathers, and I
+      borrow the language of Patrick Henry, when, to the cry from the Senator,
+      of "treason," "treason," I reply, "if this be treason, make the most of
+      it." Sir, it is easy to call names; but I beg to tell the Senator that if
+      the word "traitor" is in any way applicable to those who refuse submission
+      to a Tyrannical Usurpation, whether in Kansas or elsewhere, then must some
+      new word, of deeper color, be invented, to designate those mad spirits who
+      could endanger and degrade the Republic, while they betray all the
+      cherished sentiments of the fathers and the spirit of the Constitution, in
+      order to give new spread to Slavery. Let the Senator proceed. It will not
+      be the first time in history, that a scaffold erected for punishment has
+      become a pedestal of honor. Out of death comes life, and the "traitor"
+      whom he blindly executes will live immortal in the cause.
+    </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+     "For Humanity sweeps onward; where to-day the martyr stands,
+     On the morrow crouches Judas, with the silver in his hands;
+     While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return,
+     To glean up the scattered ashes into History's golden urn."
+</pre>
+    <p>
+      Among these hostile Senators, there is yet another, with all the
+      prejudices of the Senator from South Carolina, but without his generous
+      impulses, who, on account of his character before the country, and the
+      rancor of his opposition, deserves to be named. I mean the Senator from
+      Virginia (Mr. Mason), who, as the author of the Fugitive-Slave bill, has
+      associated himself with a special act of inhumanity and tyranny. Of him I
+      shall say little, for he has said little in this debate, though within
+      that little was compressed the bitterness of a life absorbed in the
+      support of Slavery. He holds the commission of Virginia; but he does not
+      represent that early Virginia, so dear to our hearts, which gave to us the
+      pen of Jefferson, by which the equality of men was declared, and the sword
+      of Washington, by which Independence was secured; but he represents that
+      other Virginia, from which Washington and Jefferson now avert their faces,
+      where human beings are bred as cattle for the shambles, and where a
+      dungeon rewards the pious matron who teaches little children to relieve
+      their bondage by reading the Book of Life. It is proper that such a
+      Senator, representing such a State, should rail against free Kansas.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Senators such as these are the natural enemies of Kansas, and I introduce
+      them with reluctance, simply that the country may understand the character
+      of the hostility which must be overcome. Arrayed with them, of course, are
+      all who unite, under any pretext or apology, in the propagandism of human
+      Slavery. To such, indeed, the time-honored safeguards of popular rights
+      can be a name only, and nothing more. What are trial by jury, habeas
+      corpus, the ballot-box, the right of petition, the liberty of Kansas, your
+      liberty, sir, or mine, to one who lends himself, not merely to the support
+      at home, but to the propagandism abroad, of that preposterous wrong, which
+      denies even the right of a man to himself! Such a cause can be maintained
+      only by a practical subversion of all rights. It is, therefore, merely
+      according to reason that its partisans should uphold the Usurpation in
+      Kansas.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To overthrow this Usurpation is now the special, importunate duty of
+      Congress, admitting of no hesitation or postponement. To this end it must
+      lift itself from the cabals of candidates, the machinations of party, and
+      the low level of vulgar strife. It must turn from that Slave Oligarchy
+      which now controls the Republic, and refuse to be its tool. Let its power
+      be stretched forth toward this distant Territory, not to bind, but to
+      unbind; not for the oppression of the weak, but for the subversion of the
+      tyrannical; not for the prop and maintenance of a revolting Usurpation,
+      but for the confirmation of Liberty.
+    </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+     "These are imperial arts and worthy thee!"
+</pre>
+    <p>
+      Let it now take its stand between the living and dead, and cause this
+      plague to be stayed. All this it can do; and if the interests of Slavery
+      did not oppose, all this it would do at once, in reverent regard for
+      justice, law, and order, driving away all the alarms of war; nor would it
+      dare to brave the shame and punishment of this great refusal. But the
+      slave power dares anything; and it can be conquered only by the united
+      masses of the people. From Congress to the People I appeal. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The contest, which, beginning in Kansas, has reached us, will soon be
+      transferred from Congress to a broader stage, where every citizen will be
+      not only spectator, but actor; and to their judgment I confidently appeal.
+      To the People, now on the eve of exercising the electoral franchise, in
+      choosing a Chief Magistrate of the Republic, I appeal, to vindicate the
+      electoral franchise in Kansas. Let the ballot-box of the Union, with
+      multitudinous might, protect the ballot-box in that Territory. Let the
+      voters everywhere, while rejoicing in their own rights, help to guard the
+      equal rights of distant fellow-citizens; that the shrines of popular
+      institutions, now desecrated, may be sanctified anew; that the ballot-box,
+      now plundered, may be restored; and that the cry, "I am an American
+      citizen," may not be sent forth in vain against outrage of every kind. In
+      just regard for free labor in that Territory, which it is sought to blast
+      by unwelcome association with slave labor; in Christian sympathy with the
+      slave, whom it is proposed to task and sell there; in stern condemnation
+      of the crime which has been consummated on that beautiful soil; in rescue
+      of fellow-citizens now subjugated to a Tyrannical Usurpation; in dutiful
+      respect for the early fathers, whose aspirations are now ignobly thwarted;
+      in the name of the Constitution, which has been outraged&mdash;of the laws
+      trampled down&mdash;of Justice banished&mdash;of Humanity degraded&mdash;of
+      Peace destroyed&mdash;of Freedom crushed to earth; and, in the name of the
+      Heavenly Father, whose service is perfect Freedom, I make this last
+      appeal.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      May 20, 1856.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;I shall not detain the Senate by a detailed reply to
+      the speech of the Senator from Massachusetts. Indeed, I should not deem it
+      necessary to say one word, but for the personalities in which he has
+      indulged, evincing a depth of malignity that issued from every sentence,
+      making it a matter of self-respect with me to repel the assaults which
+      have been made.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      As to the argument, we have heard it all before. Not a position, not a
+      fact, not an argument has he used, which has not been employed on the same
+      side of the chamber, and replied to by me twice. I shall not follow him,
+      therefore, because it would only be repeating the same answer which I have
+      twice before given to each of his positions. He seems to get up a speech
+      as in Yankee land they get up a bedquilt. They take all the old calico
+      dresses of various colors, that have been in the house from the days of
+      their grandmothers, and invite the young ladies of the neighborhood in the
+      afternoon, and the young men to meet them at a dance in the evening. They
+      cut up these pieces of old dresses and make pretty figures, and boast of
+      what beautiful ornamental work they have made, although there was not a
+      new piece of material in the whole quilt. Thus it is with the speech which
+      we have had re-hashed here to-day, in regard to matters of fact, matters
+      of law, and matters of argument&mdash;every thing but the personal
+      assaults and the malignity. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      His endeavor seems to be an attempt to whistle to keep up his courage by
+      defiant assaults upon us all. I am in doubt as to what can be his object.
+      He has not hesitated to charge three fourths of the Senate with fraud,
+      with swindling, with crime, with infamy, at least one hundred times over
+      in his speech. Is it his object to provoke some of us to kick him as we
+      would a dog in the street, that he may get sympathy upon the just
+      chastisement? What is the object of this denunciation against the body of
+      which we are members? A hundred times he has called the Nebraska bill a
+      "swindle," an act of crime, an act of infamy, and each time went on to
+      illustrate the complicity of each man who voted for it in perpetrating the
+      crime. He has brought it home as a personal charge to those who passed the
+      Nebraska bill, that they were guilty of a crime which deserved the just
+      indignation of heaven, and should make them infamous among men.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Who are the Senators thus arraigned? He does me the honor to make me the
+      chief. It was my good luck to have such a position in this body as to
+      enable me to be the author of a great, wise measure, which the Senate has
+      approved, and the country will endorse. That measure was sustained by
+      about three fourths of all the members of the Senate. It was sustained by
+      a majority of the Democrats and a majority of the Whigs in this body. It
+      was sustained by a majority of Senators from the slave-holding States, and
+      a majority of Senators from the free States. The Senator, by his charge of
+      crime, then, stultifies three fourths of the whole body, a majority of the
+      North, nearly the whole South, a majority of Whigs, and a majority of
+      Democrats here. He says they are infamous. If he so believed, who could
+      suppose that he would ever show his face among such a body of men? How
+      dare he approach one of those gentlemen to give him his hand after that
+      act? If he felt the courtesies between men he would not do it. He would
+      deserve to have himself spit in the face for doing so. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The attack of the Senator from Massachusetts now is not on me alone. Even
+      the courteous and the accomplished Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+      Butler) could not be passed by in his absence.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. MASON:&mdash;Advantage was taken of it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;It is suggested that advantage is taken of his absence.
+      I think that this is a mistake. I think the speech was written and
+      practised, and the gestures fixed; and, if that part had been stricken out
+      the Senator would not have known how to repeat the speech. All that tirade
+      of abuse must be brought down on the head of the venerable, the courteous,
+      and the distinguished Senator from South Carolina. I shall not defend that
+      gentleman here. Every Senator who knows him loves him. The Senator from
+      Massachusetts may take every charge made against him in his speech, and
+      may verify by his oath, and by the oath of every one of his confederates,
+      and there is not an honest man in this chamber who will not repel it as a
+      slander. Your oaths cannot make a Senator feel that it was not an outrage
+      to assail that honorable gentleman in the terms in which he has been
+      attacked. He, however, will be here in due time to speak for himself, and
+      to act for himself too. I know what will happen. The Senator from
+      Massachusetts will go to him, whisper a secret apology in his ear, and ask
+      him to accept that as satisfaction for a public outrage on his character!
+      I know the Senator from Massachusetts is in the habit of doing those
+      things. I have had some experience of his skill in that respect. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Why these attacks on individuals by name, and two thirds of the Senate
+      collectively? Is it the object to drive men here to dissolve social
+      relations with political opponents? Is it to turn the Senate into a bear
+      garden, where Senators cannot associate on terms which ought to prevail
+      between gentlemen? These attacks are heaped upon me by man after man. When
+      I repel them, it is intimated that I show some feeling on the subject.
+      Sir, God grant that when I denounce an act of infamy I shall do it with
+      feeling, and do it under the sudden impulses of feeling, instead of
+      sitting up at night writing out my denunciation of a man whom I hate,
+      copying it, having it printed, punctuating the proof-sheets, and repeating
+      it before the glass, in order to give refinement to insult, which is only
+      pardonable when it is the outburst of a just indignation.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I shall not occupy the time of the Senate. I dislike to be
+      forced to repel these attacks upon myself, which seem to be repeated on
+      every occasion. It appears that gentlemen on the other side of the chamber
+      think they would not be doing justice to their cause if they did not make
+      myself a personal object of bitter denunciation and malignity. I hope that
+      the debate on this bill may be brought to a close at as early a day as
+      possible. I shall do no more in these side discussions than vindicate
+      myself and repel unjust attacks, but I shall ask the Senate to permit me
+      to close the debate, when it shall close, in a calm, kind summary of the
+      whole question, avoiding personalities.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. SUMNER: Mr. President, To the Senator from Illinois, I should
+      willingly leave the privilege of the common scold&mdash;the last word; but
+      I will not leave to him, in any discussion with me, the last argument, or
+      the last semblance of it. He has crowned the audacity of this debate by
+      venturing to rise here and calumniate me. He said that I came here, took
+      an oath to support the Constitution, and yet determined not to support a
+      particular clause in that Constitution. To that statement I give, to his
+      face, the flattest denial. When it was made on a former occasion on this
+      floor by the absent Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), I then
+      repelled it. I will read from the debate of the 28th of June, 1854, as
+      published in the Globe, to show what I said in response to that calumny
+      when pressed at that hour. Here is what I said to the Senator from South
+      Carolina:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "This Senator was disturbed, when to his inquiry, personally, pointedly,
+      and vehemently addressed to me, whether I would join in returning a
+      fellow-man to slavery? I exclaimed, 'Is thy servant a dog, that he should
+      do this thing?'"
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      You will observe that the inquiry of the Senator from South Carolina, was
+      whether I would join in returning a fellow-man to slavery. It was not
+      whether I would support any clause of the Constitution of the United
+      States&mdash;far from that. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, this is the Senate of the United States, an important body, under the
+      Constitution, with great powers. Its members are justly supposed, from
+      age, to be above the intemperance of youth, and from character to be above
+      the gusts of vulgarity. They are supposed to have something of wisdom, and
+      something of that candor which is the handmaid of wisdom. Let the Senator
+      bear these things in mind, and let him remember hereafter that the
+      bowie-knife and bludgeon are not the proper emblems of Senatorial debate.
+      Let him remember that the swagger of Bob Acres and the ferocity of the
+      Malay cannot add dignity to this body. The Senator has gone on to infuse
+      into his speech the venom which has been sweltering for months&mdash;ay,
+      for years; and he has alleged facts that are entirely without foundation,
+      in order to heap upon me some personal obloquy. I will not go into the
+      details which have flowed out so naturally from his tongue. I only brand
+      them to his face as false. I say, also, to that Senator, and I wish him to
+      bear it in mind, that no person with the upright form of man can be
+      allowed&mdash;(Hesitation.)
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;Say it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. SUMNER:&mdash;I will say it&mdash;no person with the upright form of
+      man can be allowed, without violation to all decency, to switch out from
+      his tongue the perpetual stench of offensive personality. Sir, that is not
+      a proper weapon of debate, at least, on this floor. The noisome, squat,
+      and nameless animal, to which I now refer, is not a proper model for an
+      American Senator. Will the Senator from Illinois take notice?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;I will; and therefore will not imitate you, sir.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. SUMNER:&mdash;I did not hear the Senator.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;I said if that be the case I would certainly never
+      imitate you in that capacity, recognizing the force of the illustration.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. SUMNER:&mdash;Mr. President, again the Senator has switched his
+      tongue, and again he fills the Senate with its offensive odor. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. DOUGLAS:&mdash;I am not going to pursue this subject further. I will
+      only say that a man who has been branded by me in the Senate, and
+      convicted by the Senate of falsehood, cannot use language requiring a
+      reply, and therefore I have nothing more to say.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0007" id="link2H_4_0007">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      PRESTON S. BROOKS,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF SOUTH CAROLINA. (BORN 1819, DIED 1857.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE SUMNER ASSAULT; HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JULY 14, 1856. MR.
+      SPEAKER:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Some time since a Senator from Massachusetts allowed himself, in an
+      elaborately prepared speech, to offer a gross insult to my State, and to a
+      venerable friend, who is my State representative, and who was absent at
+      the time.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Not content with that, he published to the world, and circulated
+      extensively, this uncalled-for libel on my State and my blood. Whatever
+      insults my State insults me. Her history and character have commanded my
+      pious veneration; and in her defence I hope I shall always be prepared,
+      humbly and modestly, to perform the duty of a son. I should have forfeited
+      my own self-respect, and perhaps the good opinion of my countrymen, if I
+      had failed to resent such an injury by calling the offender in question to
+      a personal account. It was a personal affair, and in taking redress into
+      my own hands I meant no disrespect to the Senate of the United States or
+      to this House. Nor, sir, did I design insult or disrespect to the State of
+      Massachusetts. I was aware of the personal responsibilities I incurred,
+      and was willing to meet them. I knew, too, that I was amenable to the laws
+      of the country, which afford the same protection to all, whether they be
+      members of Congress or private citizens. I did not, and do not now
+      believe, that I could be properly punished, not only in a court of law,
+      but here also, at the pleasure and discretion of the House. I did not
+      then, and do not now, believe that the spirit of American freemen would
+      tolerate slander in high places, and permit a member of Congress to
+      publish and circulate a libel on another, and then call upon either House
+      to protect him against the personal responsibilities which he had thus
+      incurred.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But if I had committed a breach of privilege, it was the privilege of the
+      Senate, and not of this House, which was violated. I was answerable there,
+      and not here. They had no right, as it seems to me, to prosecute me in
+      these Halls, nor have you the right in law or under the Constitution, as I
+      respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over offences committed against
+      them. The Constitution does not justify them in making such a request, nor
+      this House in granting it. If, unhappily, the day should ever come when
+      sectional or party feeling should run so high as to control all other
+      considerations of public duty or justice, how easy it will be to use such
+      precedents for the excuse of arbitrary power, in either House, to expel
+      members of the minority who may have rendered themselves obnoxious to the
+      prevailing spirit in the House to which they belong.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Matters may go smoothly enough when one House asks the other to punish a
+      member who is offensive to a majority of its own body; but how will it be
+      when, upon a pretence of insulted dignity, demands are made of this House
+      to expel a member who happens to run counter to its party predilections,
+      or other demands which it may not be so agreeable to grant? It could never
+      have been designed by the Constitution of the United States to expose the
+      two Houses to such temptations to collision, or to extend so far the
+      discretionary power which was given to either House to punish its own
+      members for the violation of its rules and orders. Discretion has been
+      said to be the law of the tyrant, and when exercised under the color of
+      the law, and under the influence of party dictation, it may and will
+      become a terrible and insufferable despotism.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This House, however, it would seem, from the unmistakable tendency of its
+      proceedings, takes a different view from that which I deliberately
+      entertain in common with many others.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      So far as public interests or constitutional rights are involved, I have
+      now exhausted my means of defence. I may, then, be allowed to take a more
+      personal view of the question at issue. The further prosecution of this
+      subject, in the shape it has now assumed, may not only involve my friends,
+      but the House itself, in agitations which might be unhappy in their
+      consequences to the country. If these consequences could be confined to
+      myself individually, I think I am prepared and ready to meet them, here or
+      elsewhere; and when I use this language I mean what I say. But others must
+      not suffer for me. I have felt more on account of my two friends who have
+      been implicated,than for myself, for they have proven that "there is a
+      friend that sticketh closer than a brother." I will not constrain
+      gentlemen to assume a responsibility on my account, which possibly they
+      would not run on their own.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, I cannot, on any own account, assume the responsibility, in the face
+      of the American people, of commencing a line of conduct which in my heart
+      of hearts I believe would result in subverting the foundations of this
+      Government, and in drenching this Hall in blood. No act of mine, on my
+      personal account, shall inaugurate revolution; but when you, Mr. Speaker,
+      return to your own home, and hear the people of the great North&mdash;and
+      they are a great people&mdash;speak of me as a bad man, you will do me the
+      justice to say that a blow struck by me at this time would be followed by
+      revolution&mdash;and this I know. (Applause and hisses in the gallery.)
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Brooks (resuming):&mdash;If I desired to kill the Senator, why did not
+      I do it? You all admit that I had him in my power. Let me tell the member
+      from New Jersey that it was expressly to avoid taking life that I used an
+      ordinary cane, presented to me by a friend in Baltimore, nearly three
+      months before its application to the "bare head" of the Massachusetts
+      Senator. I went to work very deliberately, as I am charged&mdash;and this
+      is admitted,&mdash;and speculated somewhat as to whether I should employ a
+      horsewhip or a cowhide; but knowing that the Senator was my superior in
+      strength, it occurred to me that he might wrest it from my hand, and then&mdash;for
+      I never attempt anything I do not perform&mdash;I might have been
+      compelled to do that which I would have regretted the balance of my
+      natural life.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The question has been asked in certain newspapers, why I did not invite
+      the Senator to personal combat in the mode usually adopted. Well, sir, as
+      I desire the whole truth to be known about the matter, I will for once
+      notice a newspaper article on the floor of the House, and answer here.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      My answer is, that the Senator would not accept a message; and having
+      formed the unalterable determination to punish him, I believed that the
+      offence of "sending a hostile message," superadded to the indictment for
+      assault and battery, would subject me to legal penalties more severe than
+      would be imposed for a simple assault and battery. That is my answer.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, Mr. Speaker, I have nearly finished what I intended to say. If my
+      opponents, who have pursued me with unparalleled bitterness, are satisfied
+      with the present condition of this affair, I am. I return my thanks to my
+      friends, and especially to those who are from nonslave-owning States, who
+      have magnanimously sustained me, and felt that it was a higher honor to
+      themselves to be just in their judgment of a gentleman than to be a member
+      of Congress for life. In taking my leave, I feel that it is proper that I
+      should say that I believe that some of the votes that have been cast
+      against me have been extorted by an outside pressure at home, and that
+      their votes do not express the feelings or opinions of the members who
+      gave them.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To such of these as have given their votes and made their speeches on the
+      constitutional principles involved, and without indulging in personal
+      vilification, I owe my respect. But, sir, they have written me down upon
+      the history of the country as worthy of expulsion, and in no unkindness I
+      must tell them that for all future time my self-respect requires that I
+      shall pass them as strangers.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And now, Mr. Speaker, I announce to you and to this House, that I am no
+      longer a member of the Thirty-Fourth Congress.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      (Mr. Brooks then walked out of the House of Representatives.)
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0008" id="link2H_4_0008">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      JUDAH P. BENJAMIN,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF LOUISIANA. (BORN 1811, DIED 1864.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE PROPERTY DOCTRINE, OR THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY IN SLAVES; SENATE OF
+      THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 11, 1858.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      MR. PRESIDENT, the whole subject of slavery, so far as it is involved in
+      the issue now before the country, is narrowed down at last to a
+      controversy on the solitary point, whether it be competent for the
+      Congress of the United States, directly or indirectly, to exclude slavery
+      from the Territories of the Union. The Supreme Court of the United States
+      have given a negative answer to this proposition, and it shall be my first
+      effort to support that negation by argument, independently of the
+      authority of the decision.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It seems to me that the radical, fundamental error which underlies the
+      argument in affirmation of this power, is the assumption that slavery is
+      the creature of the statute law of the several States where it is
+      established; that it has no existence outside of the limits of those
+      States; that slaves are not property beyond those limits; and that
+      property in slaves is neither recognized nor protected by the Constitution
+      of the United States, nor by international law. I controvert all these
+      propositions, and shall proceed at once to my argument.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, the thirteen colonies, which on the 4th of July, 1776,
+      asserted their independence, were British colonies, governed by British
+      laws. Our ancestors in their emigration to this country brought with them
+      the common law of England as their birthright. They adopted its principles
+      for their government so far as it was not incompatible with the
+      peculiarities of their situation in a rude and unsettled country. Great
+      Britain then having the sovereignty over the colonies, possessed undoubted
+      power to regulate their institutions, to control their commerce, and to
+      give laws to their intercourse, both with the mother and the other nations
+      of the earth. If I can show, as I hope to be able to establish to the
+      satisfaction of the Senate, that the nation thus exercising sovereign
+      power over these thirteen colonies did establish slavery in them, did
+      maintain and protect the institution, did originate and carry on the slave
+      trade, did support and foster that trade, that it forbade the colonies
+      permission either to emancipate or export their slaves, that it prohibited
+      them from inaugurating any legislation in diminution or discouragement of
+      the institution&mdash;nay, sir, more, if, at the date of our Revolution I
+      can show that African slavery existed in England as it did on this
+      continent, if I can show that slaves were sold upon the slave mart, in the
+      Exchange and other public places of resort in the city of London as they
+      were on this continent, then I shall not hazard too much in the assertion
+      that slavery was the common law of the thirteen States of the Confederacy
+      at the time they burst the bonds that united them to the mother country.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      This legislation, Mr. President, as I have said before, emanating from the
+      mother country, fixed the institution upon the colonies. They could not
+      resist it. All their right was limited to petition, to remonstrance, and
+      to attempts at legislation at home to diminish the evil. Every such
+      attempt was sternly repressed by the British Crown. In 1760, South
+      Carolina passed an act prohibiting the further importation of African
+      slaves. The act was rejected by the Crown; the Governor was reprimanded;
+      and a circular was sent to all the Governors of all the colonies, warning
+      them against presuming to countenance such legislation. In 1765, a similar
+      bill was twice read in the Assembly of Jamaica. The news reached Great
+      Britain before its final passage. Instructions were sent out to the royal
+      Governor; he called the House of Assembly before him, communicated his
+      instructions, and forbade any further progress of the bill. In 1774, in
+      spite of this discountenancing action of the mother Government, two bills
+      passed the Legislative Assembly of Jamaica; and the Earl of Dartmouth,
+      then Secretary of State, wrote to Sir Basil Keith, the Governor of the
+      colony, that "these measures had created alarm to the merchants of Great
+      Britain engaged in that branch of commerce;" and forbidding him, "on pain
+      of removal from his Government, to assent to such laws."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Finally, in 1775&mdash;mark the date&mdash;1775&mdash;after the
+      revolutionary struggle had commenced, whilst the Continental Congress was
+      in session, after armies had been levied, after Crown Point and
+      Ticonderoga had been taken possession of by the insurgent colonists, and
+      after the first blood shed in the Revolution had reddened the spring sod
+      upon the green at Lexington, this same Earl of Dartmouth, in remonstrance
+      from the agent of the colonies, replied:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "We cannot allow the colonies to check or discourage in any degree a
+      traffic so beneficial to the nation."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I say, then, that down to the very moment when our independence was won,
+      slavery, by the statute law of England, was the common law of the old
+      thirteen colonies. But, sir, my task does not end here. I desire to show
+      you that by her jurisprudence, that by the decisions of her judges, and
+      the answers of her lawyers to questions from the Crown and from public
+      bodies, this same institution was declared to be recognized by the common
+      law of England; and slaves were declared to be, in their language,
+      merchandise, chattels, just as much private property as any other
+      merchandise or any other chattel.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      A short time prior to the year 1713, a contract had been formed between
+      Spain and a certain company, called the Royal Guinea Company, that had
+      been established in France. This contract was technically called in those
+      days an <i>assiento</i>. By the treaty of Utrecht of the 11th of April,
+      1713, Great Britain, through her diplomatists, obtained a transfer of that
+      contract. She yielded considerations for it. The obtaining of that
+      contract was greeted in England with shouts of joy. It was considered a
+      triumph of diplomacy. It was followed in the month of May, 1713, by a new
+      contract in form, by which the British Government undertook, for the term
+      of thirty years then next to come, to transport annually 4800 slaves to
+      the Spanish American colonies, at a fixed price. Almost immediately after
+      this new contract, a question arose in the English Council as to what was
+      the true legal character of the slaves thus to be exported to the Spanish
+      American colonies; and, according to the forms of the British
+      constitution, the question was submitted by the Crown in council to the
+      twelve judges of England. I have their answer here; it is in these words:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "In pursuance of His Majesty's order in council, hereunto annexed, we do
+      humbly certify our opinion to be that negroes are merchandise."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Signed by Lord Chief-Justice Holt, Judge Pollexfen, and eight other judges
+      of England.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Mason. What is the date of that?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Benjamin. It was immediately after the treaty of Utrecht, in 1713.
+      Very soon afterwards the nascent spirit of fanaticism began to obtain a
+      foothold in England; and although large numbers of negro slaves were owned
+      in Great Britain, and, as I said before, were daily sold on the public
+      exchange in Lon-don, questions arose as to the right of the owners to
+      retain property in their slaves; and the merchants of London, alarmed,
+      submitted the question to Sir Philip Yorke, who afterwards became Lord
+      Hardwicke, and to Lord Talbot, who were then the solicitor and
+      attorney-general of the kingdom. The question was propounded to them,
+      "What are the rights of a British owner of a slave in England?" and this
+      is the answer of those two legal functionaries. They certified that "a
+      slave coming from the West Indies to England with or without his master,
+      doth not become free; and his master's property in him is not thereby
+      determined nor varied, and the master may legally compel him to return to
+      the plantations."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And, in 1749, the same question again came up before Sir Philip Yorke,
+      then Lord Chancellor of England, under the title of Lord Hardwicke, and,
+      by a decree in chancery in the case before him, he affirmed the doctrine
+      which he had uttered when he was attorney-general of Great Britain.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Things thus stood in England until the year 1771, when the spirit of
+      fanaticism, to which I have adverted, acquiring strength, finally operated
+      upon Lord Mansfield, who, by a judgment rendered in a case known as the
+      celebrated Sommersett case, subverted the common law of England by
+      judicial legislation, as I shall prove in an instant. I say it not on my
+      own authority. I would not be so presumptuous. The Senator from Maine (Mr.
+      Fessenden) need not smile at my statement. I will give him higher
+      authority than anything I can dare assert. I say that in 1771 Lord
+      Mansfield subverted the common law of England in the Sommersett case, and
+      decided, not that a slave carried to England from the West Indies by his
+      master thereby became free, but that by the law of England, if the slave
+      resisted the master, there was no remedy by which the master could
+      exercise his control; that the colonial legislation which afforded the
+      master means of controlling his property had no authority in England, and
+      that England by her laws had provided no substitute for that authority.
+      That was what Lord Mansfield decided. I say this was judicial legislation.
+      I say it subverted the entire previous jurisprudence of Great Britain. I
+      have just adverted to the authorities for that position. Lord Mansfield
+      felt it. The case was argued before him over and over again, and he begged
+      the parties to compromise. They said they would not. "Why," said he, "I
+      have known six of these cases already, and in five out of the six there
+      was a compromise; you had better compromise this matter"; but the parties
+      said no, they would stand on the law; and then, after holding the case up
+      two terms, Lord Mansfield mustered up courage to say just what I have
+      asserted to be his decision; that there was no law in England affording
+      the master control over his slave; and that therefore the master's putting
+      him on board of a vessel in irons, being unsupported by authority derived
+      from English law, and the colonial law not being in force in England, he
+      would discharge the slave from custody on <i>habeas corpus</i>, and leave
+      the master to his remedy as best he could find one.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Fessenden. Decided so unwillingly.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Benjamin. The gentleman is right&mdash;very unwillingly. He was driven
+      to the decision by the paramount power which is now perverting the
+      principles, and obscuring the judgment of the people of the North; and of
+      which I must say there is no more striking example to be found than its
+      effect on the clear and logical intellect of my friend from Maine.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, I make these charges in relation to that judgment, because
+      in them I am supported by an intellect greater than Mansfield's; by a
+      judge of resplendent genius and consummate learning; one who, in all
+      questions of international law, on all subjects not dependent upon the
+      peculiar municipal technical common law of England, has won for himself
+      the proudest name in the annals of her jurisprudence&mdash;the gentleman
+      knows well that I refer to Lord Stowell. As late as 1827, twenty years
+      after Great Britain had abolished the slave trade, six years before she
+      was brought to the point of confiscating the property of her colonies
+      which she had forced them to buy, a case was brought before that
+      celebrated judge; a case known to all lawyers by the name of the slave
+      Grace. It was pretended in the argument that the slave Grace was free,
+      because she had been carried to England, and it was said, under the
+      authority of Lord Mansfield's decision in the Sommersett case, that,
+      having once breathed English air, she was free; that the atmosphere of
+      that favored kingdom was too pure to be breathed by a slave. Lord Stowell,
+      in answering that legal argument, said that after painful and laborious
+      research into historical records, he did not find anything touching the
+      peculiar fitness of the English atmosphere for respiration during the ten
+      centuries that slaves had lived in England.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      After that decision had been rendered, Lord Stowell, who was at that time
+      in correspondence with Judge Story, sent him a copy of it, and wrote to
+      him upon the subject of his judgment. No man will doubt the anti-slavery
+      feelings and proclivities of Judge Story. He was asked to take the
+      decision into consideration and give his opinion about it. Here is his
+      answer:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I have read, with great attention, your judgment in the slave case. Upon
+      the fullest consideration which I have been able to give the subject, I
+      entirely concur in your views. If I had been called upon to pronounce a
+      judgment in a like case, I should have certainly arrived at the same
+      result."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      That was the opinion of Judge Story in 1827; but, sir, whilst contending,
+      as I here contend, as a proposition, based in history, maintained by
+      legislation, supported by judicial authority of the greatest weight, that
+      slavery, as an institution, was protected by the common law of these
+      colonies at the date of the Declaration of Independence, I go further,
+      though not necessary to my argument, and declare that it was the common
+      law of North and South America alike.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Thus, Mr. President, I say that even if we admit for the moment that the
+      common law of the nations which colonized this continent, the institution
+      of slavery at the time of our independence, was dying away by the
+      manumissions either gratuitous or for a price of those who held the people
+      as slaves, yet, so far as the continent of America was concerned, North
+      and South, there did not breathe a being who did not know that a negro,
+      under the common law of the continent, was merchandise, was property, was
+      a slave, and that he could only extricate himself from that status,
+      stamped upon him by the common law of the country, by positive proof of
+      manumission. No man was bound to show title to his negro slave. The slave
+      was bound to show manumission under which he had acquired his freedom, by
+      the common law of every colony. Why, sir, can any man doubt, is there a
+      gentleman here, even the Senator from Maine, who doubts that if, after the
+      Revolution, the different States of this Union had not passed laws upon
+      the subject to abolish slavery, to subvert this common law of the
+      continent, every one of these States would be slave States yet? How came
+      they free States? Did not they have this institution of slavery imprinted
+      upon them by the power of the mother country? How did they get rid of it?
+      All, all must admit that they had to pass positive acts of legislation to
+      accomplish this purpose. Without that legislation they would still be
+      slave States. What, then, becomes of the pretext that slavery only exists
+      in those States where it was established by positive legislation, that it
+      has no inherent vitality out of those States, and that slaves are not
+      considered as property by the Constitution of the United States?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      When the delegates of the several colonies which had thus asserted their
+      independence of the British Crown met in convention, the decision of Lord
+      Mansfield in the Sommersett case was recent, was known to all. At the same
+      time, a number of the northern colonies had taken incipient steps for the
+      emancipation of their slaves. Here permit me to say, sir, that, with a
+      prudent regard to what the Senator from Maine (Mr. Hamlin) yesterday
+      called the "sensitive pocket-nerve," they all made these provisions
+      prospective. Slavery was to be abolished after a certain future time&mdash;just
+      enough time to give their citizens convenient opportunity for selling the
+      slaves to southern planters, putting the money in their pockets, and then
+      sending to us here, on this floor, representatives who flaunt in robes of
+      sanctimonious holiness; who make parade of a cheap philanthropy, exercised
+      at our expense; and who say to all men: "Look ye now, how holy, how pure
+      we are; you are polluted by the touch of slavery; we are free from it."
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, because the Supreme Court of the United States says&mdash;what
+      is patent to every man who reads the Constitution of the United States&mdash;that
+      it does guaranty property in slaves,it has been attacked with vituperation
+      here, on this floor, by Senators on all sides. Some have abstained from
+      any indecent, insulting remarks in relation to the Court. Some have
+      confined themselves to calm and legitimate argument. To them I am about to
+      reply. To the others, I shall have something to say a little later. What
+      says the Senator from Maine (Mr. Fessenden)? He says:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Had the result of that election been otherwise, and had not the
+      (Democratic) party triumphed on the dogma which they had thus introduced,
+      we should never have heard of a doctrine so utterly at variance with all
+      truth; so utterly destitute of all legal logic; so founded on error, and
+      unsupported by anything like argument, as is the opinion of the Supreme
+      Court."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      He says, further:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I should like, if I had time, to attempt to demonstrate the fallacy of
+      that opinion. I have examined the view of the Supreme Court of the United
+      States on the question of the power of the Constitution to carry slavery
+      into free territory belonging to the United States, and I tell you that I
+      believe any tolerably respectable lawyer in the United States can show,
+      beyond all question, to any fair and unprejudiced mind, that the decision
+      has nothing to stand upon except assumption, and bad logic from the
+      assumptions made. The main proposition on which that decision is founded,
+      the corner-stone of it, without which it is nothing, without which it
+      fails entirely to satisfy the mind of any man, is this: that the
+      Constitution of the United States recognizes property in slaves, and
+      protects it as such. I deny it. It neither recognizes slaves as property,
+      nor does it protect slaves as property."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Senator here, you see, says that the whole decision is based on that
+      assumption, which is false. He says that the Constitution does not
+      recognize slaves as property, nor protect them as property, and his
+      reasoning, a little further on, is somewhat curious. He says:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "On what do they found the assertion that the Constitution recognizes
+      slavery as property? On the provision of the Constitution by which
+      Congress is prohibited from passing a law to prevent the African slave
+      trade for twenty years; and therefore they say the Constitution recognizes
+      slaves as property."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I should think that was a pretty fair recognition of it. On this point the
+      gentleman declares:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Will not anybody see that this constitutional provision, if it works one
+      way, must work the other? If, by allowing the slave trade for twenty
+      years, we recognize slaves as property, when we say that at the end of
+      twenty years we will cease to allow it, or may cease to do so, is not that
+      denying them to be property after that period elapses?"
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      That is the argument. Nothing but my respect for the logical intellect of
+      the Senator from Maine could make me treat this argument as serious, and
+      nothing but having heard it myself would make me believe that he ever
+      uttered it. What, sir! The Constitution of our country says to the South,
+      "you shall count as the basis of your representation five slaves as being
+      three white men; you may be protected in the natural increase of your
+      slaves; nay, more, as a matter of compromise you may increase their number
+      if you choose, for twenty years, by importation; when these twenty years
+      are out, you shall stop." The Supreme Court of the United States says,
+      "well; is not this a recognition of slavery, of property in slaves?" "Oh,
+      no," says the gentleman, "the rule must work both ways; there is a
+      converse to the proposition." Now, sir, to an ordinary, uninstructed
+      intellect, it would seem that the converse of the proposition was simply
+      that at the end of twenty years you should not any longer increase your
+      numbers by importation; but the gentleman says the converse of the
+      proposition is that at the end of the twenty years, after you have, under
+      the guarantee of the Constitution, been adding by importation to the
+      previous number of your slaves, then all those that you had before, and
+      all those that, under that Constitution, you have imported, cease to be
+      recognized as property by the Constitution, and on this proposition he
+      assails the Supreme Court of the United States&mdash;a proposition which
+      he says will occur to anybody.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Fessenden. Will the Senator allow me?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Benjamin. I should be very glad to enter into this debate now, but I
+      fear it is so late that I shall not be able to get through to-day.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Fessenden. I suppose it is of no consequence.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Benjamin. What says the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Collamer), who also
+      went into this examination somewhat extensively. I read from his printed
+      speech:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "I do not say that slaves are never property. I do not say that they are,
+      or are not. Within the limits of a State which declares them to be
+      property, they are property, because they are within the jurisdiction of
+      that government which makes the declaration; but I should wish to speak of
+      it in the light of a member of the United States Senate, and in the
+      language of the United States Constitution. If this be property in the
+      States, what is the nature and extent of it? I insist that the Supreme
+      Court has often decided, and everybody has understood, that slavery is a
+      local institution, existing by force of State law; and of course that law
+      can give it no possible character beyond the limits of that State." I
+      shall no doubt find the idea better expressed in the opinion of Judge
+      Nelson, in this same Dred Scott decision. I prefer to read his language.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      "Here is the law; and under it exists the law of slavery in the different
+      States. By virtue of this very principle it cannot extend one inch beyond
+      its own territorial limits. A State cannot regulate the relation of master
+      and slave, of owner and property, the manner and title of descent, or
+      anything else, one inch beyond its territory. Then you cannot, by virtue
+      of the law of slavery, if it makes slaves property in a State, if you
+      please, move that property out of the State. It ends whenever you pass
+      from that State. You may pass into another State that has a like law; and
+      if you do, you hold it by virtue of that law; but the moment you pass
+      beyond the limits of the slaveholding States, all title to the property
+      called property in slaves, there ends. Under such a law slaves cannot be
+      carried as property into the Territories, or anywhere else beyond the
+      States authorizing it. It is not property anywhere else. If the
+      Constitution of the United States gives any other and further character
+      than this to slave property, let us acknowledge it fairly and end all
+      strife about it. If it does not, I ask in all candor, that men on the
+      other side shall say so, and let this point be settled. What is the point
+      we are to inquire into? It is this: does the Constitution of the United
+      States make slaves property beyond the jurisdiction of the States
+      authorizing slavery? If it only acknowledges them as property within that
+      jurisdiction, it has not extended the property one inch beyond the State
+      line; but if, as the Supreme Court seems to say, it does recognize and
+      protect them as property further than State limits, and more than the
+      State laws do, then, indeed, it becomes like other property. The Supreme
+      Court rests this claim upon this clause of the Constitution: 'No person
+      held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, shall, in
+      consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such
+      service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom
+      such service or labor may be due.' Now the question is, does that guaranty
+      it? Does that make it the same as other property? The very fact that this
+      clause makes provision on the subject of persons bound to service, shows
+      that the framers of the Constitution did not regard it as other property.
+      It was a thing that needed some provision; other property did not. The
+      insertion of such a provision shows that it was not regarded as other
+      property. If a man's horse stray from Delaware into Pennsylvania, he can
+      go and get it. Is there any provision in the Constitution for it? No. How
+      came this to be there, if a slave is property? If it is the same as other
+      property, why have any provision about it?'"
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It will undoubtedly have struck any person, in hearing this passage read
+      from the speech of the Senator from Vermont, whom I regret not to see in
+      his seat to-day, that the whole argument, ingeniously as it is put, rests
+      upon this fallacy&mdash;if I may say so with due respect to him&mdash;that
+      a man cannot have title in property wherever the law does not give him a
+      remedy or process for the assertion of his title; or, in other words, his
+      whole argument rests upon the old confusion of ideas which considers a
+      man's right and his remedy to be one and the same thing. I have already
+      shown to you, by the passages I have cited from the opinions of Lord
+      Stowell and of Judge Story, how they regard this subject. They say that
+      the slave who goes to England, or goes to Massachusetts, from a slave
+      State, is still a slave, that he is still his master's property; but that
+      his master has lost control over him, not by reason of the cessation of
+      his property, but because those States grant no remedy to the master by
+      which he can exercise his control.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There are numerous illustrations upon this point&mdash;illustrations
+      furnished by the copyright laws, illustrations furnished by patent laws.
+      Let us take a case, one that appeals to us all. There lives now a man in
+      England who from time to time sings to the enchanted ear of the civilized
+      world strains of such melody that the charmed senses seem to abandon the
+      grosser regions of earth, and to rise to purer and serener regions above.
+      God has created that man a poet. His inspiration is his; his songs are his
+      by right divine; they are his property so recognized by human law; yet
+      here in these United States men steal Tennyson's works and sell his
+      property for their profit; and this because, in spite of the violated
+      conscience of the nation, we refuse to give him protection for his
+      property. Examine your Constitution; are slaves the only species of
+      property there recognized as requiring peculiar protection? Sir, the
+      inventive genius of our brethren of the North is a source of vast wealth
+      to them and vast benefit to the nation. I saw a short time ago in one of
+      the New York journals, that the estimated value of a few of the patents
+      now before us in this Capital for renewal, was $40,000,000. I cannot
+      believe that the entire capital, invested in inventions of this character
+      in the United States can fall short of one hundred and fifty or two
+      hundred million dollars. On what protection does this vast property rest?
+      Just upon that same constitutional protection which gives a remedy to the
+      slave owner when his property is, also found outside of the limits of the
+      State in which he lives.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Without this protection, what would be the condition of the northern
+      inventor? Why, sir, the Vermont inventor protected by his own law would
+      come to Massachusetts, and there say to the pirate who had stolen his
+      property, "Render me up my property or pay me value for its use." The
+      Senator from Vermont would receive for answer, if he were the counsel of
+      the Vermont inventor, "Sir, if you want protection for your property go to
+      your own State; property is governed by the laws of the State within whose
+      jurisdiction it is found; you have no property in your invention outside
+      of the limits of your State; you cannot go an inch beyond it." Would not
+      this be so? Does not every man see at once that the right of the inventor
+      to his discovery, that the right of the poet to his inspiration, depends
+      upon those principles of eternal justice which God has implanted in the
+      heart of man, and that wherever he cannot exercise them it is because man,
+      faithless to the trust that he has received from God, denies them the
+      protection to which they are entitled?'
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, follow out the illustration which the Senator from Vermont himself
+      has given; take his very case of the Delaware owner of a horse riding him
+      across the line into Pennsylvania. The Senator says: "Now, you see that
+      slaves are not property like other property; if slaves were property like
+      other property, why have you this special clause in your Constitution to
+      protect a slave? You have no clause to protect the horse, because horses
+      are recognized as property everywhere." Mr. President, the same fallacy
+      lurks at the bottom of this argument, as of all the rest. Let Pennsylvania
+      exercise her undoubted jurisdiction over persons and things within her own
+      boundary; let her do as she has a perfect right to do&mdash;declare that
+      hereafter, within the State of Pennsylvania, there shall be no property in
+      horses, and that no man shall maintain a suit in her courts for the
+      recovery of property in a horse; and where will your horse-owner be then?
+      Just where the English poet is now; just where the slaveholder and the
+      inventor would be if the Constitution, foreseeing a difference of opinion
+      in relation to rights in these subject-matters, had not provided the
+      remedy in relation to such property as might easily be plundered. Slaves,
+      if you please, are not property like other property in this: that you can
+      easily rob us of them; but as to the right in them, that man has to
+      overthrow the whole history of the world, he has to overthrow every
+      treatise on jurisprudence, he has to ignore the common sentiment of
+      mankind, he has to repudiate the authority of all that is considered
+      sacred with man, ere he can reach the conclusion that the person who owns
+      a slave, in a country where slavery has been established for ages, has no
+      other property in that slave than the mere title which is given by the
+      statute law of the land where it is found. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0009" id="link2H_4_0009">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, JUNE 26, 1857.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And now as to the Dred Scott decision. That decision declares two
+      propositions&mdash;first, that a negro cannot sue in the United States
+      courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the
+      Territories. It was made by a divided court&mdash;dividing differently on
+      the different points. Judge Douglas does not discuss the merits of the
+      decision, and in that respect I shall follow his example, believing I
+      could no more improve on McLean and Curtis than he could on Taney.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      He denounces all who question the correctness of that decision, as
+      offering violent resistance to it. But who resists it? Who has, in spite
+      of the decision, declared Dred Scott free, and resisted the authority of
+      his master over him?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Judicial decisions have two uses,&mdash;first, to absolutely determine the
+      case decided; and secondly, to indicate to the public how other similar
+      cases will be decided when they arise. For the latter use they are called
+      "precedents" and "authorities."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We believe as much as Judge Douglas (perhaps more) in obedience to, and
+      respect for, the judicial department of government. We think its decisions
+      on constitutional questions, when fully settled, should control not only
+      the particular cases decided, but the general policy of the country,
+      subject to be disturbed only by amendments to the Constitution as provided
+      in that instrument itself. More than this would be revolution. But we
+      think the Dred Scott decision is erroneous. We know the court that made it
+      has often overruled its own decisions, and we shall do what we can to have
+      it to overrule this. We offer no resistance to it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents
+      according to circumstances. That this should be so accords both with
+      common sense and the customary understanding of the legal profession.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      If this important decision had been made by the unanimous concurrence of
+      the judges, and without any apparent partisan bias, and in accordance with
+      legal public expectation and with the steady practice of the departments
+      throughout our history, and had been in no part based on assumed
+      historical facts which are not really true; or, if wanting in some of
+      these, it had been before the court more than once, and had there been
+      affirmed and reaffirmed through a course of years, it then might be,
+      perhaps would be, factious, nay, even revolutionary, not to acquiesce in
+      it as a precedent.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But when, as is true, we find it wanting in all these claims to the public
+      confidence, it is not factious, it is not even disrespectful, to treat it
+      as not having yet quite established a settled doctrine for the country.
+      But Judge Douglas considers this view awful. Hear him:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "The courts are the tribunals prescribed by the Constitution and created
+      by the authority of the people to determine, expound, and enforce the law.
+      Hence, whoever resists the final decision of the highest judicial tribunal
+      aims a deadly blow at our whole republican system of government&mdash;a
+      blow which, if successful, would place all our rights and liberties at the
+      mercy of passion, anarchy, and violence. I repeat, therefore, that if
+      resistance to the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, in
+      a matter like the points decided in the Dred Scott case, clearly within
+      their jurisdiction as defined by the Constitution, shall be forced upon
+      the country as a political issue, it will become a distinct and naked
+      issue between the friends and enemies of the Constitution&mdash;the
+      friends and the enemies of the supremacy of the laws."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have said, in substance, that the Dred Scott decision was in part based
+      on assumed historical facts which were not really true, and I ought not to
+      leave the subject without giving some reasons for saying this; I therefore
+      give an instance or two, which I think fully sustain me. Chief-Justice
+      Taney, in delivering the opinion of the majority of the court, insists at
+      great length that the negroes were no part of the people who made, or for
+      whom was made, the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution of the
+      United States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      On the contrary, Judge Curtis, in his dissenting opinion, shows that in
+      five of the then thirteen States&mdash;to wit, New Hampshire,
+      Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina&mdash;free negroes
+      were voters, and in proportion to their numbers had the same part in
+      making the Constitution that the white people had. He shows this with so
+      much particularity as to leave no doubt of its truth; and as a sort of
+      conclusion on that point, holds the following language:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United
+      States, through the action in each State, of those persons who were
+      qualified by its laws to act thereon in behalf of themselves and all other
+      citizens of the State. In some of the States, as we have seen, colored
+      persons were among those qualified by law to act on the subject. These
+      colored persons were not only included in the body of 'the people of the
+      United States' by whom the Constitution was ordained and established; but
+      in at least five of the States they had the power to act, and doubtless,
+      did act, by their suffrages, upon the question of its adoption."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Again, Chief-Justice Taney says:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion, in
+      relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and
+      enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of
+      Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed
+      and adopted."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And again, after quoting from the Declaration, he says:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "The general words above quoted would seem to include the whole human
+      family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day, would
+      be so understood."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In these the Chief-Justice does not directly assert, but plainly assumes,
+      as a fact, that the public estimate of the black man is more favorable now
+      than it was in the days of the Revolution. This assumption is a mistake.
+      In some trifling particulars the condition of that race has been
+      ameliorated; but as a whole, in this country, the change between then and
+      now is decidedly the other way; and their ultimate destiny has never
+      appeared so hopeless as in the last three or four years. In two of the
+      five States&mdash;New Jersey and North Carolina&mdash;that then gave the
+      free negro the right of voting, the right has since been taken away, and
+      in the third&mdash;New York&mdash;it has been greatly abridged; while it
+      has not been extended, so far as I know, to a single additional State,
+      though the number of the States has more than doubled. In those days, as I
+      understand, masters could, at their own pleasure, emancipate their slaves;
+      but since then such legal restraints have been made upon emancipation as
+      to amount almost to prohibition. In those days legislatures held the
+      unquestioned power to abolish slavery in their respective States, but now
+      it is becoming quite fashionable for State constitutions to withhold that
+      power from the legislatures. In those days, by common consent, the spread
+      of the black man's bondage to the new countries was prohibited, but now
+      Congress decides that it will not continue the prohibition, and the
+      Supreme Court decides that it could not if it would. In those days our
+      Declaration of Independence was held sacred by all, and thought to include
+      all; but now, to aid in making the bondage of the negro universal and
+      eternal, it is assailed and sneered at and construed, and hawked at and
+      torn, till, if its framers could rise from their graves, they could not at
+      all recognize it. All the powers of earth seem rapidly combining against
+      him. Mammon is after him, ambition follows, philosophy follows, and the
+      theology of the day is fast joining the cry. They have him in his
+      prison-house; they have searched his person, and left no prying instrument
+      with him. One after another they have closed the heavy iron doors upon
+      him; and now they have him, as it were, bolted in with a lock of a hundred
+      keys, which can never be unlocked without the concurrence of every key&mdash;the
+      keys in the hands of a hundred different men, and they scattered to a
+      hundred different and distant places; and they stand musing as to what
+      invention, in all the dominions of mind and matter, can be produced to
+      make the impossibility of his escape more complete than it is.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It is grossly incorrect to say or assume that the public estimate of the
+      negro is more favorable now than it was at the origin of the government.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Three years and a half ago, Judge Douglas brought forward his famous
+      Nebraska bill. The country was at once in a blaze. He scorned all
+      opposition, and carried it through Congress. Since then he has seen
+      himself superseded in a presidential nomination by one indorsing the
+      general doctrine of his measure, but at the same time standing clear of
+      the odium of its untimely agitation and its gross breach of national
+      faith; and he has seen that successful rival constitutionally elected, not
+      by the strength of friends, but by the division of adversaries, being in a
+      popular minority of nearly four hundred thousand votes. He has seen his
+      chief aids in his own State, Shields and Richardson, politically speaking,
+      successively tried, convicted, and executed, for an offense not their own,
+      but his. And now he sees his own case standing next on the docket for
+      trial.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people at the
+      idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races; and
+      Judge Douglas evidently is basing his chief hope upon the chances of his
+      being able to appropriate the benefit of this disgust to himself. If he
+      can, by much drumming and repeating, fasten the odium of that idea upon
+      his adversaries, he thinks he can struggle through the storm. He therefore
+      clings to this hope, as a drowning man to the last plank. He makes an
+      occasion for lugging it in from the opposition to the Dred Scott decision.
+      He finds the Republicans insisting that the Declaration of Independence
+      includes all men, black as well as white, and forthwith he boldly denies
+      that it includes negroes at all, and proceeds to argue gravely that all
+      who contend it does, do so only because they want to vote, and eat, and
+      sleep, and marry with negroes. He will have it that they cannot be
+      consistent else. Now I protest against the counterfeit logic which
+      concludes that, because I do not want a black woman for a slave I must
+      necessarily want her for a wife. I need not have her for either. I can
+      just leave her alone. In some respects she certainly is not my equal; but
+      in her natural right to eat the bread she earns with her own hands without
+      asking leave of any one else, she is my equal, and the equal of all
+      others.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Chief-Justice Taney, in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, admits that
+      the language of the Declaration is broad enough to include the whole human
+      family, but he and Judge Douglas argue that the authors of that instrument
+      did not intend to include negroes, by the fact that they did not at once
+      actually place them on an equality with the whites. Now this grave
+      argument comes to just nothing at all, by the other fact that they did not
+      at once, or ever afterward, actually place all white people on an equality
+      with one another. And this is the staple argument of both the
+      Chief-Justice and the Senator for doing this obvious violence to the
+      plain, unmistakable language of the Declaration.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I think the authors of that notable instrument intended to include all
+      men, but they did not intend to declare all men equal in all respects.
+      They did not mean to say all were equal in color, size, intellect, moral
+      developments, or social capacity. They defined with tolerable distinctness
+      in what respects they did consider all men created equal&mdash;equal with
+      "certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the
+      pursuit of happiness." This they said, and this they meant. They did not
+      mean to assert the obvious untruth that all were then actually enjoying
+      that equality, nor yet that they were about to confer it immediately upon
+      them. In fact, they had no power to confer such a boon. They meant simply
+      to declare the right, so that enforcement of it might follow as fast as
+      circumstances should permit.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should be
+      familiar to all, and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly
+      labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly
+      approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence
+      and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors
+      everywhere. The assertion that "all men are created equal" was of no
+      practical use in effecting our separation from Great Britain; and it was
+      placed in the Declaration not for that, but for future use. Its authors
+      meant it to be&mdash;as, thank God, it is now proving itself&mdash;a
+      stumbling-block to all those who in after times might seek to turn a free
+      people back into the hateful paths of despotism. They knew the proneness
+      of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant when such should reappear
+      in this fair land and commence their vocation, they should find left for
+      them at least one hard nut to crack.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have now briefly expressed my view of the meaning and object of that
+      part of the Declaration of Independence which declares that "all men are
+      created equal."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now let us hear Judge Douglas's view of the same subject as I find it in
+      the printed report of his late speech. Here it is:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "No man can vindicate the character, motives, and conduct of the signers
+      of the Declaration of Independence, except upon the hypothesis that they
+      referred to the white race alone, and not to the African, when they
+      declared all men to have been created equal; that they were speaking of
+      British subjects on this continent being equal to British subjects born
+      and residing in Great Britain; that they were entitled to the same
+      inalienable rights, and among them were enumerated life, liberty, and the
+      pursuit of happiness. The Declaration was adopted for the purpose of
+      justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized world in withdrawing
+      their allegiance from the British crown, and dissolving their connection
+      with the mother country."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      My good friends, read that carefully over in some leisure hour, and ponder
+      well upon it; see what a mere wreck&mdash;mangled ruin&mdash;it makes of
+      our once glorious Declaration.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "They were speaking of British subjects on this continent being equal to
+      British subjects born and residing in Great Britain." Why, according to
+      this, not only negroes but white people outside of Great Britain and
+      America were not spoken of in that instrument. The English, Irish, and
+      Scotch, along with white Americans, were included, to be sure, but the
+      French, Germans, and other white people of the world are all gone to pot
+      along with the Judge's inferior races.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I had thought the Declaration promised something better than the condition
+      of British subjects; but no, it only meant that we should be equal to them
+      in their own oppressed and unequal condition. According to that, it gave
+      no promise that, having kicked off the king and lords of Great Britain, we
+      should not at once be saddled with a king and lords of our own.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I had thought the Declaration contemplated the progressive improvement in
+      the condition of all men everywhere; but no, it merely "was adopted for
+      the purpose of justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized
+      world, in withdrawing their allegiance from the British crown, and
+      dissolving their connection with the mother country." Why, that object
+      having been effected some eighty years ago, the Declaration is of no
+      practical use now&mdash;mere rubbish&mdash;old wadding left to rot on the
+      battle-field after the victory is won.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I understand you are preparing to celebrate the "Fourth," to-morrow week.
+      What for? The doings of that day had no reference to the present; and
+      quite half of you are not even descendants of those who were referred to
+      at that day. But I suppose you will celebrate, and will even go so far as
+      to read the Declaration. Suppose, after you read it once in the
+      old-fashioned way, you read it once more with Judge Douglas's version. It
+      will then run thus: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
+      British subjects who were on this continent eighty-one years ago, were
+      created equal to all British subjects born and then residing in Great
+      Britain."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And now I appeal to all&mdash;to Democrats as well as others&mdash;are you
+      really willing that the Declaration shall thus be frittered away?&mdash;thus
+      left no more, at most, than an interesting memorial of the dead past?&mdash;thus
+      shorn of its vitality and practical value, and left without the germ or
+      even the suggestion of the individual rights of man in it?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0010" id="link2H_4_0010">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON HIS NOMINATION TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AT THE REPUBLICAN STATE
+      CONVENTION, SPRINGFIELD, ILLS., JUNE 16, 1858. MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN
+      OF THE CONVENTION:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could
+      better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth
+      year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident
+      promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of
+      that policy, that agitation not only has not ceased, but has constantly
+      augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been
+      reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I
+      believe this Government cannot endure permanently half slave and half
+      free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved; I do not expect the house
+      to fall; but I do expect that it will cease to be divided. It will become
+      all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will
+      arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall
+      rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its
+      advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all
+      the States, old as well as new, North as well as South. Have we no
+      tendency to the latter condition? Let any one who doubts carefully
+      contemplate that now almost complete legal combination piece of machinery,
+      so to speak&mdash;compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott
+      decision. Let him consider not only what work the machinery is adapted to
+      do, and how well adapted, but also let him study the history of its
+      construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace
+      the evidences of design and concert of action among its chief architects
+      from the beginning.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more than half the States
+      by State constitutions, and from most of the national territory by
+      Congressional prohibition. Four days later commenced the struggle which
+      ended in repealing that Congressional prohibition. This opened all the
+      national territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. But, so
+      far, Congress only had acted, and an indorsement, by the people, real or
+      apparent, was indispensable, to save the point already gained and give
+      chance for more. This necessity had not been overlooked, but had been
+      provided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument of "squatter
+      sovereignty," otherwise called "sacred right of self-government";&mdash;which
+      latter phrase though expressive of the only rightful basis of any
+      government, was so perverted in this attempted use of it as to amount to
+      just this: That, if any one man choose to enslave another, no third man
+      shall be allowed to object. That argument was incorporated with the
+      Nebraska bill itself, in the language which follows: "It being the true
+      intent and meaning of this act, not to legislate slavery into any
+      Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom; but to leave the people
+      thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in
+      their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."
+      Then opened the roar of loose declamation in favor of "squatter
+      sovereignty," and "sacred right of self-government." "But," said
+      opposition members, "let us amend the bill so as to expressly declare that
+      the people of the Territory may exclude slavery." "Not we," said the
+      friends of the measure; and down they voted the amendment.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      While the Nebraska bill was passing through Congress, a law-case,
+      involving the question of a negro's freedom, by reason of his owner having
+      voluntarily taken him first into a free State, and then into a Territory
+      covered by the Congressional prohibition, and held him as a slave for a
+      long time in each, was passing through the United States Circuit Court for
+      the District of Missouri; and both Nebraska bill and lawsuit were brought
+      to a decision in the same month of May, 1854. The negro's name was Dred
+      Scott, which name now designates the decision finally made in the case.
+      Before the then next Presidential election, the law-case came to, and was
+      argued in, the Supreme Court of the United States; but the decision of it
+      was deferred until after the election. Still, before the election, Senator
+      Trumbull, on the floor of the Senate, requested the leading advocate of
+      the Nebraska bill to state his opinion whether the people of a Territory
+      can constitutionally exclude slavery from their limits; and the latter
+      answers: "That is a question for the Supreme Court."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The election came, Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the indorsement, such as
+      it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement,
+      however, fell short of a clear popular majority by nearly four hundred
+      thousand votes, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable and
+      satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his last annual message, as
+      impressively as possible, echoed back upon the people the weight and
+      authority of the indorsement. The Supreme Court met again, did not
+      announce their decision, but ordered a re-argument. The Presidential
+      inauguration came, and still no decision of the court; but the incoming
+      President, in his inaugural address, fervently exhorted the people to
+      abide by the forthcoming decision, whatever it might be. Then, in a few
+      days, came the decision. The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds an
+      early occasion to make a speech at this capital, indorsing the Dred Scott
+      decision, and vehemently denouncing all opposition to it. The new
+      President, too, seizes the early occasion of the Silliman letter to
+      indorse and strongly construe that decision, and to express his
+      astonishment that any different view had ever been entertained.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      At length a squabble springs up between the President and the author of
+      the Nebraska bill, on the mere question of fact, whether the Lecompton
+      constitution was, or was not, in any just sense, made by the people of
+      Kansas; and in that quarrel the latter declares that all he wants is a
+      fair vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery be voted
+      down or voted up.' I do not understand his declaration, that he cares not
+      whether slavery be voted <i>down</i> or voted <i>up</i>, to be intended by
+      him other than as an apt definition of the policy he would impress upon
+      the public mind&mdash;the principle for which he declares he has suffered
+      so much, and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling to that
+      principle. If he has any parental feeling, well may he cling to it. That
+      principle is the only shred left of his original Nebraska doctrine. Under
+      the Dred Scott decision, squatter sovereignty squatted out of existence&mdash;tumbled
+      down like temporary scaffolding&mdash;like the mould at the foundry,
+      served through one blast, and fell back into loose sand,&mdash;helped to
+      carry an election, and then was kicked to the winds. His late joint
+      struggle with the Republicans against the Lecompton constitution involves
+      nothing of the original Nebraska doctrine. That struggle was made on a
+      point&mdash;the right of a people to make their own constitution&mdash;upon
+      which he and the Republicans have never differed.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The several points of the Dred Scott decision, in connection with Senator
+      Douglas's "care-not" policy, constitute the piece of machinery in its
+      present state of advancement. This was the third point gained. The working
+      points of that machinery are: (1) That no negro slave, imported as such
+      from Africa, and no descendant of such slave, can ever be a citizen of any
+      State, in the sense of that term as used in the Constitution of the United
+      States. This point is made in order to deprive the negro, in every
+      possible event, of the benefit of that provision of the United States
+      Constitution, which declares that "the citizens of each State shall be
+      entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several
+      States." (2) That, "subject to the Constitution of the United States,"
+      neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature can exclude slavery from
+      any United States Territory. This point is made in order that individual
+      men may fill up the Territories with slaves, without danger of losing them
+      as property, and thus to enhance the chances of permanency to the
+      institution through all the future. (3) That whether the holding a negro
+      in actual slavery in a free State makes him free, as against the holder,
+      the United States courts will not decide, but will leave to be decided by
+      the courts of any slave State the negro may be forced into by the master.
+      This point is made, not to be pressed immediately; but, if acquiesced in
+      for a while, and apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to
+      sustain the logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might
+      lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the State of Illinois, every other master
+      may lawfully do with any other one or one thousand slaves, in Illinois, or
+      in any other free State.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska
+      doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mould public opinion,
+      at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted
+      down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are, and partially,
+      also, whither we are tending.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It will throw additional light on the latter to go back, and run the mind
+      over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things will
+      now appear less dark and mysterious than they did when they were
+      transpiring. The people were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only to
+      the Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders
+      could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche for
+      the Dred Scott decision to come in afterward, and declare the perfect
+      freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all. Why was the amendment
+      expressly declaring the right of the people voted down? Plainly enough
+      now, the adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for the Dred Scott
+      decision. Why was the court decision held up? Why even a Senator's
+      individual opinion withheld till after the Presidential election? Plainly
+      enough now: the speaking out then would have damaged the "perfectly free"
+      argument upon which the election was to be carried. Why the outgoing
+      President's felicitation on the indorsement? Why the delay of a
+      re-argument? Why the incoming President's advance exhortation in favor of
+      the decision? These things look like the cautious patting and petting of a
+      spirited horse preparatory to mounting him, when it is dreaded that he may
+      give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after indorsement of the decision
+      by the President and others?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations are the result
+      of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions
+      of which we know have been gotten out at different times and places, and
+      by different workmen&mdash;Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, for
+      instance,&mdash;and when we see these timbers joined together, and see
+      that they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and
+      mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and proportions of the
+      different pieces exactly adapted to their respective places, and not a
+      piece too many or too few&mdash;not omitting even scaffolding,&mdash;or,
+      if a single piece be lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted
+      and prepared yet to bring such piece in,&mdash;in such a case, we find it
+      impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James
+      all understood one another from the beginning, and all worked upon a
+      common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was struck.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It should not be overlooked that, by the Nebraska bill, the people of a
+      State, as well as Territory, were to be left "perfectly free," "subject
+      only to the Constitution." Why mention a State? They were legislating for
+      Territories, and not for or about States. Certainly, the people of a State
+      are and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United States; but
+      why is mention of this lugged into this merely Territorial law? Why are
+      the people of a Territory and the people of a State therein lumped
+      together, and their relation to the Constitution therein treated as being
+      precisely the same? While the opinion of the court, by Chief-Justice
+      Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions of all the
+      concurring judges, expressly declare that the Constitution of the United
+      States permits neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature to exclude
+      slavery from any United States Territory, they all omit to declare whether
+      or not the same Constitution permits a State, or the people of a State, to
+      exclude it. Possibly, this is a mere omission; but who can be quite sure,
+      if McLean or Curtis had sought to get into the opinion a declaration of
+      unlimited power in the people of a State to exclude slavery from their
+      limits, just as Chase and Mace sought to get such declaration, in behalf
+      of the people of a territory, into the Nebraska bill&mdash;I ask, who can
+      be quite sure that it would not have been voted down in the one case as it
+      had been in the other? The nearest approach to the point of declaring the
+      power of a State over slavery is made by Judge Nelson. He approaches it
+      more than once, using the precise idea, and almost the language, too, of
+      the Nebraska act. On one occasion, his exact language is: "Except in cases
+      when the power is restrained by the Constitution of the United States, the
+      law of the State is supreme over the subjects of slavery within its
+      jurisdiction." In what cases the power of the States is so restrained by
+      the United States Constitution is left an open question, precisely as the
+      same question, as to the restraint on the power of the Territories, was
+      left open in the Nebraska act. Put this and that together, and we have
+      another nice little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with another
+      Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution of the United
+      States does not permit a State to exclude slavery from its limits. And
+      this may especially be expected if the doctrine of "care not whether
+      slavery be voted down or voted up," shall gain upon the public mind
+      sufficiently to give promise that such a decision can be maintained when
+      made.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being alike lawful in all
+      the States. Welcome or unwelcome, such decision is probably coming, and
+      will soon be upon us, unless the power of the present political dynasty
+      shall be met and overthrown. We shall lie down pleasantly dreaming that
+      the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their State free, and we
+      shall awake to the reality, instead, that the Supreme Court has made
+      Illinois a slave State. To meet and overthrow that dynasty is the work
+      before all those who would prevent that consummation. That is what we have
+      to do. How can we best do it?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There are those who denounce us openly to their own friends, and yet
+      whisper us softly that Senator Douglas is the aptest instrument there is
+      with which to effect that object. They wish us to infer all, from the fact
+      that he now has a little quarrel with the present head of the dynasty; and
+      that he has regularly voted with us on a single point, upon which he and
+      we have never differed. They remind us that he is a great man, and that
+      the largest of us are very small ones. Let this be granted. "But a living
+      dog is better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas, if not a dead lion, for
+      this work, is at least a caged and toothless one. How can he oppose the
+      advances of slavery? He don't care anything about it. His avowed mission
+      is impressing the "public heart" to care nothing about it. A leading
+      Douglas Democratic newspaper thinks Douglas's superior talent will be
+      needed to resist the revival of the African slave-trade. Does Douglas
+      believe an effort to revive that trade is approaching? He has not said so.
+      Does he really think so? But if it is, how can he resist it? For years he
+      has labored to prove it a sacred right of white men to take negro slaves
+      into the new Territories. Can he possibly show that it is less a sacred
+      right to buy them where they can be bought cheapest? And unquestionably
+      they can be bought cheaper in Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in
+      his power to reduce the whole question of slavery to one of a mere right
+      of property; and as such, how can he oppose the foreign slave-trade? How
+      can he refuse that trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free,"
+      unless he does it as a protection to the home production? And as the home
+      producers will probably ask the protection, he will be wholly without a
+      ground of opposition. Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may
+      rightfully be wiser to-day than he was yesterday&mdash;that he may
+      rightfully change when he finds himself wrong. But can we, for that
+      reason, run ahead, and infer that he will make any particular change, of
+      which he himself has given no intimation? Can we safely base our action
+      upon any such vague inference? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent
+      Judge Douglas's position, question his motives, or do aught that can be
+      personally offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and we can come
+      together on principle, so that our cause may have assistance from his
+      great ability, I hope to have interposed no adventitious obstacle. But,
+      clearly, he is not now with us&mdash;he does not pretend to be, he does
+      not promise ever to be.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Our cause, then, must be entrusted to, and conducted by its own undoubted
+      friends&mdash;those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work&mdash;who
+      do care for the result. Two years ago the Republicans of the nation
+      mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under the
+      single impulse of resistance to a common danger. With every external
+      circumstance against us, of strange, discordant, and even hostile
+      elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the
+      battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and
+      pampered enemy. Did we brave all then, to falter now?&mdash;now, when that
+      same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent! The result is not
+      doubtful. We shall not fail&mdash;if we stand firm, we shall not fail.
+      Wise counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay it; but, sooner or later,
+      the victory is sure to come.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0011" id="link2H_4_0011">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      IN REPLY TO MR. LINCOLN; FREEPORT, ILLS., AUGUST 27, 1858. LADIES AND
+      GENTLEMEN:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I am glad that at last I have brought Mr. Lincoln to the conclusion that
+      he had better define his position on certain political questions to which
+      I called his attention at Ottawa. * * * In a few moments I will proceed to
+      review the answers which he has given to these interrogatories; but, in
+      order to relieve his anxiety, I will first respond to those which he has
+      presented to me. Mark you, he has not presented interrogatories which have
+      ever received the sanction of the party with which I am acting, and hence
+      he has no other foundation for them than his own curiosity.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      First he desires to know, if the people of Kansas shall form a
+      constitution by means entirely proper and unobjectionable, and ask
+      admission as a State, before they have the requisite population for a
+      member of Congress, whether I will vote for that admission. Well, now, I
+      regret exceedingly that he did not answer that interrogatory himself
+      before he put it to me, in order that we might understand, and not be left
+      to infer, on which side he is. Mr. Trumbull, during the last session of
+      Congress, voted from the beginning to the end against the admission of
+      Oregon, although a free State, because she had not the requisite
+      population for a member of Congress. Mr. Trumbull would not consent, under
+      any circumstances, to let a State, free or slave, come into the Union
+      until it had the requisite population. As Mr. Trumbull is in the field
+      fighting for Mr. Lincoln, I would like to have Mr. Lincoln answer his own
+      question and tell me whether he is fighting Trumbull on that issue or not.
+      But I will answer his question. * * * Either Kansas must come in as a free
+      State, with whatever population she may have, or the rule must be applied
+      to all the other Territories alike. I therefore answer at once that, it
+      having been decided that Kansas has people enough for a slave State, I
+      hold that she has enough for a free State. I hope Mr. Lincoln is satisfied
+      with my answer; and now I would like to get his answer to his own
+      interrogatory&mdash;whether or not he will vote to admit Kansas before she
+      has the requisite population. I want to know whether he will vote to admit
+      Oregon before that Territory has the requisite population. Mr. Trumbull
+      will not, and the same reason that commits Mr. Trumbull against the
+      admission of Oregon commits him against Kansas, even if she should apply
+      for admission as a free State. If there is any sincerity, any truth, in
+      the argument of Mr. Trumbull in the Senate against the admission of
+      Oregon, because she had not 93,420 people, although her population was
+      larger than that of Kansas, he stands pledged against the admission of
+      both Oregon and Kansas until they have 93,420 inhabitants. I would like
+      Mr. Lincoln to answer this question. I would like him to take his own
+      medicine. If he differs with Mr. Trumbull, let him answer his argument
+      against the admission of Oregon, instead of poking questions at me.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln is, Can the people of
+      the Territory in any lawful way, against the wishes of any citizen of the
+      United States, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of
+      a State Constitution? I answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln has heard me
+      answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that in my opinion
+      the people of a Territory can, by lawful means, exclude slavery from their
+      limits prior to the formation of a State Constitution. Mr. Lincoln knew
+      that I had answered that question over and over again. He heard me argue
+      the Nebraska bill on that principle all over the State in 1854, in 1855,
+      and in 1856; and he has no excuse for pretending to be in doubt as to my
+      position on that question. It matters not what way the Supreme Court may
+      hereafter decide as to the abstract question whether slavery may or may
+      not go into a Territory under the Constitution; the people have the lawful
+      means to introduce it or exclude it as they please, for the reason that
+      slavery cannot exist a day or an hour anywhere unless it is supported by
+      local police regulations. Those police regulations can only be established
+      by the local Legislature; and, if the people are opposed to slavery, they
+      will elect representatives to that body who will by unfriendly legislation
+      effectually prevent the introduction of it into their midst. If, on the
+      contrary, they are for it, their legislation will favor its extension.
+      Hence, no matter what the decision of the Supreme Court may be on that
+      abstract question, still the right of the people to make a slave Territory
+      or a free Territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska bill. I
+      hope Mr. Lincoln deems my answer satisfactory on that point.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In this connection, I will notice the charge which he has introduced in
+      relation to Mr. Chase's amendment. I thought that I had chased that
+      amendment out of Mr. Lincoln's brain at Ottawa; but it seems that it still
+      haunts his imagination, and that he is not yet satisfied. I had supposed
+      that he would be ashamed to press that question further. He is a lawyer,
+      and has been a member of Congress, and has occupied his time and amused
+      you by telling you about parliamentary proceedings. He ought to have known
+      better than to try to palm off his miserable impositions upon this
+      intelligent audience. The Nebraska bill provided that the legislative
+      power and authority of the said Territory should extend to all rightful
+      subjects of legislation, consistent with the organic act and the
+      Constitution of the United States. It did not make any exception as to
+      slavery, but gave all the power that it was possible for Congress to give,
+      without violating the Constitution, to the Territorial Legislature, with
+      no exception or limitation on the subject of slavery at all. The language
+      of that bill, which I have quoted, gave the full power and the fuller
+      authority over the subject of slavery, affirmatively and negatively, to
+      introduce it or exclude it, so far as the Constitution of the United
+      States would permit. What more could Mr. Chase give by his amendment?
+      Nothing! He offered his amendment for the identical purpose for which Mr.
+      Lincoln is using it, to enable demagogues in the country to try and
+      deceive the people. His amendment was to this effect. It provided that the
+      Legislature should have power to exclude slavery; and General Cass
+      suggested: "Why not give the power to introduce as well as to exclude?"
+      The answer was&mdash;they have the power already in the bill to do both.
+      Chase was afraid his amendment would be adopted if he put the alternative
+      proposition, and so made it fair both ways, and would not yield. He
+      offered it for the purpose of having it rejected. He offered it, as he has
+      himself avowed over and over again, simply to make capital out of it for
+      the stump. He expected that it would be capital for small politicians in
+      the country, and that they would make an effort to deceive the people with
+      it; and he was not mistaken, for Lincoln is carrying out the plan
+      admirably. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The third question which Mr. Lincoln presented is&mdash;If the Supreme
+      Court of the United States shall decide that a State of this Union cannot
+      exclude slavery from its own limits, will I submit to it? I am amazed that
+      Mr. Lincoln should ask such a question. Mr. Lincoln's object is to cast an
+      imputation upon the Supreme Court. He knows that there never was but one
+      man in America, claiming any degree of intelligence or decency, who ever
+      for a moment pretended such a thing. It is true that the <i>Washington
+      Union</i>, in an article published on the 17th of last December, did put
+      forth that doctrine, and I denounced the article on the floor of the
+      Senate. * * * Lincoln's friends, Trumbull, and Seward, and Hale, and
+      Wilson, and the whole Black Republican side of the Senate were silent.
+      They left it to me to denounce it. And what was the reply made to me on
+      that occasion? Mr. Toombs, of Georgia, got up and undertook to lecture me
+      on the ground that I ought not to have deemed the article worthy of
+      notice, and ought not to have replied to it; that there was not one man,
+      woman, or child south of the Potomac, in any slave State, who did not
+      repudiate any such pretension. Mr. Lincoln knows that reply was made on
+      the spot, and yet now he asks this question! He might as well ask me&mdash;Suppose
+      Mr. Lincoln should steal a horse, would I sanction it; and it would be as
+      genteel in me to ask him, in the event he stole a horse, what ought to be
+      done with him. He casts an imputation upon the Supreme Court of the United
+      States, by supposing that they would violate the Constitution of the
+      United States. I tell him that such a thing is not possible. It would be
+      an act of moral treason that no man on the bench could ever descend to.
+      Mr. Lincoln himself would never, in his partisan feelings, so far forget
+      what was right as to be guilty of such an act.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The fourth question of Mr. Lincoln is&mdash;Are you in favor of acquiring
+      additional territory in disregard as to how such acquisition may affect
+      the Union on the slavery question? This question is very ingeniously and
+      cunningly put. The Black Republican crowd lays it down expressly that
+      under no circumstances shall we acquire any more territory unless slavery
+      is first prohibited in the country. I ask Mr. Lincoln whether he is in
+      favor of that proposition? Are you opposed to the acquisition of any more
+      territory, under any circumstances, unless slavery is prohibited in it?
+      That he does not like to answer. When I ask him whether he stands up to
+      that article in the platform of his party, he turns, Yankee fashion, and,
+      without answering it, asks me whether I am in favor of acquiring territory
+      without regard to how it may affect the Union on the slavery question. I
+      answer that, whenever it becomes necessary, in our growth and progress, to
+      acquire more territory, I am in favor of it without reference to the
+      question of slavery, and when we have acquired it, I will leave the people
+      free to do as they please, either to make it slave or free territory, as
+      they prefer. It is idle to tell me or you that we have territory enough. *
+      * * With our natural increase, growing with a rapidity unknown in any
+      other part of the globe, with the tide of emigration that is fleeing from
+      despotism in the old world to seek refuge in our own, there is a constant
+      torrent pouring into this country that requires more land, more territory
+      upon which to settle; and just as fast as our interest and our destiny
+      require additional territory in the North, in the South, or in the islands
+      of the ocean, I am for it, and, when we acquire it, will leave the people,
+      according to the Nebraska bill, free to do as they please on the subject
+      of slavery and every other question.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I trust now that Mr. Lincoln will deem him-self answered on his four
+      points. He racked his brain so much in devising these four questions that
+      he exhausted himself, and had not strength enough to invent the others. As
+      soon as he is able to hold a council with his advisers, Love-joy,
+      Farnsworth, and Fred Douglas, he will frame and propound others ("Good,"
+      "good!"). You Black Republicans who say "good," I have no doubt, think
+      that they are all good men. I have reason to recollect that some people in
+      this country think that Fred Douglas is a very good man. The last time I
+      came here to make a speech, while talking from a stand to you, people of
+      Freeport, as I am doing to-day, I saw a carriage, and a magnificent one it
+      was, drive up and take a position on the outside of the crowd; a beautiful
+      young lady was sitting on the box seat, whilst Fred Douglas and her mother
+      reclined inside, and the owner of the carriage acted as driver. I saw this
+      in your own town. ("What of it?") All I have to say of it is this, that if
+      you Black Republicans think that the negro ought to be on a social
+      equality with your wives and daughters, and ride in a carriage with your
+      wife, whilst you drive the team, you have a perfect right to do so. I am
+      told that one of Fred Douglas' kinsmen, another rich black negro, is now
+      travelling in this part of the State making speeches for his friend
+      Lincoln as the champion of black men. ("What have you to say against it?")
+      All I have to say on that subject is, that those of you who believe that
+      the negro is your equal, and ought to be on an equality with you socially,
+      politically, and legally, have a right to entertain those opinions, and of
+      course will vote for Mr. Lincoln.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0006" id="linkimage-0006">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/seward.jpg" alt="William H. Steward " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0012" id="link2H_4_0012">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      WILLIAM. H. SEWARD,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF NEW YORK. (BORN 1801, DIED 1872.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT; ROCHESTER, OCTOBER 25, 1858.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      THE unmistakable outbreaks of zeal which occur all around me, show that
+      you are earnest men&mdash;and such a man am I. Let us therefore, at least
+      for a time, pass all secondary and collateral questions, whether of a
+      personal or of a general nature, and consider the main subject of the
+      present canvass. The Democratic party, or, to speak more accurately, the
+      party which wears that attractive name&mdash;is in possession of the
+      Federal Government. The Republicans propose to dislodge that party, and
+      dismiss it from its high trust.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The main subject, then, is, whether the Democratic party deserves to
+      retain the confidence of the American people. In attempting to prove it
+      unworthy, I think that I am not actuated by prejudices against that party,
+      or by pre-possessions in favor of its adversary; for I have learned, by
+      some experience, that virtue and patriotism, vice and selfishness, are
+      found in all parties, and that they differ less in their motives than in
+      the policies they pursue.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Our country is a theatre, which exhibits, in full operation, two radically
+      different political systems; the one resting on the basis of servile or
+      slave labor, the other on voluntary labor of freemen. The laborers who are
+      enslaved are all negroes, or persons more or less purely of African
+      derivation. But this is only accidental. The principle of the system is,
+      that labor in every society, by whomsoever performed, is necessarily
+      unintellectual, grovelling and base; and that the laborer, equally for his
+      own good and for the welfare of the State, ought to be enslaved. The white
+      laboring man, whether native or foreigner, is not enslaved, only because
+      he cannot, as yet, be reduced to bondage.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      You need not be told now that the slave system is the older of the two,
+      and that once it was universal. The emancipation of our own ancestors,
+      Caucasians and Europeans as they were, hardly dates beyond a period of
+      five hundred years. The great melioration of human society which modern
+      times exhibit, is mainly due to the incomplete substitution of the system
+      of voluntary labor for the one of servile labor, which has already taken
+      place. This African slave system is one which, in its origin and in its
+      growth, has been altogether foreign from the habits of the races which
+      colonized these States, and established civilization here. It was
+      introduced on this continent as an engine of conquest, and for the
+      establishment of monarchical power, by the Portuguese and the Spaniards,
+      and was rapidly extended by them all over South America, Central America,
+      Louisiana, and Mexico. Its legitimate fruits are seen in the poverty,
+      imbecility, and anarchy which now pervade all Portuguese and Spanish
+      America. The free-labor system is of German extraction, and it was
+      established in our country by emigrants from Sweden, Holland, Germany,
+      Great Britain and Ireland. We justly ascribe to its influences the
+      strength, wealth, greatness, intelligence, and freedom, which the whole
+      American people now enjoy. One of the chief elements of the value of human
+      life is freedom in the pursuit of happiness. The slave system is not only
+      intolerable, unjust, and inhuman, toward the laborer, whom, only because
+      he is a laborer, it loads down with chains and converts into merchandise,
+      but is scarcely less severe upon the freeman, to whom, only because he is
+      a laborer from necessity, it denies facilities for employment, and whom it
+      expels from the community because it cannot enslave and convert into
+      merchandise also. It is necessarily improvident and ruinous, because, as a
+      general truth, communities prosper and flourish, or droop and decline, in
+      just the degree that they practise or neglect to practise the primary
+      duties of justice and humanity. The free-labor system conforms to the
+      divine law of equality, which is written in the hearts and consciences of
+      man, and therefore is always and everywhere beneficent.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The slave system is one of constant danger, distrust, suspicion, and
+      watchfulness. It debases those whose toil alone can produce wealth and
+      resources for defence, to the lowest degree of which human nature is
+      capable, to guard against mutiny and insurrection, and thus wastes
+      energies which otherwise might be employed in national development and
+      aggrandizement.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The free-labor system educates all alike, and by opening all the fields of
+      industrial employment and all the departments of authority, to the
+      unchecked and equal rivalry of all classes of men, at once secures
+      universal contentment, and brings into the highest possible activity all
+      the physical, moral, and social energies of the whole state. In states
+      where the slave system prevails, the masters, directly or indirectly,
+      secure all political power, and constitute a ruling aristocracy. In states
+      where the free-labor system prevails, universal suffrage necessarily
+      obtains, and the state inevitably becomes, sooner or later, a republic or
+      democracy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Russia yet maintains slavery, and is a despotism. Most of the other
+      European states have abolished slavery, and adopted the system of free
+      labor. It was the antagonistic political tendencies of the two systems
+      which the first Napoleon was contemplating when he predicted that Europe
+      would ultimately be either all Cossack or all republican. Never did human
+      sagacity utter a more pregnant truth. The two systems are at once
+      perceived to be incongruous. But they are more than incongruous&mdash;they
+      are incompatible. They never have permanently existed together in one
+      country, and they never can. It would be easy to demonstrate this
+      impossibility, from the irreconcilable contrast between their great
+      principles and characteristics. But the experience of mankind has
+      conclusively established it. Slavery, as I have already intimated, existed
+      in every state in Europe. Free labor has supplanted it everywhere except
+      in Russia and Turkey. State necessities developed in modern times are now
+      obliging even those two nations to encourage and employ free labor; and
+      already, despotic as they are, we find them engaged in abolishing slavery.
+      In the United States, slavery came into collision with free labor at the
+      close of the last century, and fell before it in New England, New York,
+      New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, but triumphed over it effectually, and
+      excluded it for a period yet undetermined, from Virginia, the Carolinas,
+      and Georgia. Indeed, so incompatible are the two systems, that every new
+      State which is organized within our ever-extending domain makes its first
+      political act a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at
+      the cost of civil war, if necessary. The slave States, without law, at the
+      last national election, successfully forbade, within their own limits,
+      even the casting of votes for a candidate for President of the United
+      States supposed to be favorable to the establishment of the free-labor
+      system in new States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different States, but side by
+      side within the American Union. This has happened because the Union is a
+      confederation of States. But in another aspect the United States
+      constitute only one nation. Increase of population, which is filling the
+      States out to their very borders, together with a new and extended network
+      of railroads and other avenues, and an internal commerce which daily
+      becomes more intimate, is rapidly bringing the States into a higher and
+      more perfect social unity or consolidation. Thus, these antagonistic
+      systems are continually coming into closer contact, and collision results.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think that it is
+      accidental, unnecessary, the work of interested or fanatical agitators,
+      and therefore ephemeral, mistake the case altogether. It is an
+      irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces, and it means
+      that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become either
+      entirely a slave-holding nation, or entirely a free-labor nation. Either
+      the cotton- and rice-fields of South Carolina and the sugar plantations of
+      Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free-labor, and Charleston and New
+      Orleans become marts of legitimate merchandise alone, or else the
+      rye-fields and wheat-fields of Massachusetts and New York must again be
+      surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and to the production of
+      slaves, and Boston and New York become once more markets for trade in the
+      bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend this great truth
+      that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at final compromises between
+      the slave and free States, and it is the existence of this great fact that
+      renders all such pretended compromises, when made, vain and ephemeral.
+      Startling as this saying may appear to you, fellow-citizens, it is by no
+      means an original or even a modern one. Our forefathers knew it to be
+      true, and unanimously acted upon it when they framed the Constitution of
+      the United States. They regarded the existence of the servile system in so
+      many of the States with sorrow and shame, which they openly confessed, and
+      they looked upon the collision between them, which was then just revealing
+      itself, and which we are now accustomed to deplore, with favor and hope.
+      They knew that one or the other system must exclusively prevail.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Unlike too many of those who in modern time invoke their authority, they
+      had a choice between the two. They preferred the system of free labor, and
+      they determined to organize the government, and so direct its activity,
+      that that system should surely and certainly prevail. For this purpose,
+      and no other, they based the whole structure of the government broadly on
+      the principle that all men are created equal, and therefore free&mdash;little
+      dreaming that, within the short period of one hundred years, their
+      descendants would bear to be told by any orator, however popular, that the
+      utterance of that principle was merely a rhetorical rhapsody; or by any
+      judge, however venerated, that it was attended by mental reservation,
+      which rendered it hypocritical and false. By the ordinance of 1787, they
+      dedicated all of the national domain not yet polluted by slavery to free
+      labor immediately, thenceforth and forever; while by the new Constitution
+      and laws they invited foreign free labor from all lands under the sun, and
+      interdicted the importation of African slave labor, at all times, in all
+      places, and under all circumstances whatsoever. It is true that they
+      necessarily and wisely modified this policy of freedom by leaving it to
+      the several States, affected as they were by different circumstances, to
+      abolish slavery in their own way and at their own pleasure, instead of
+      confiding that duty to Congress; and that they secured to the slave
+      States, while yet retaining the system of slavery, a three-fifths
+      representation of slaves in the Federal Government, until they should find
+      themselves able to relinquish it with safety. But the very nature of these
+      modifications fortifies my position, that the fathers knew that the two
+      systems could not endure within the Union, and expected within a short
+      period slavery would disappear forever. Moreover, in order that these
+      modifications might not altogether defeat their grand design of a republic
+      maintaining universal equality, they provided that two thirds of the
+      States might amend the Constitution.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It remains to say on this point only one word, to guard against
+      misapprehension. If these States are to again become universally
+      slave-holding, I do not pretend to say with what violations of the
+      Constitution that end shall be accomplished. On the other hand, while I do
+      confidently believe and hope that my country will yet become a land of
+      universal freedom, I do not expect that it will be made so otherwise than
+      through the action of the several States cooperating with the Federal
+      Government, and all acting in strict conformity with their respective
+      constitutions.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The strife and contentions concerning slavery, which gently-disposed
+      persons so habitually deprecate, are nothing more than the ripening of the
+      conflict which the fathers themselves not only thus regarded with favor,
+      but which they may be said to have instituted.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      * * * I know&mdash;few, I think, know better than I&mdash;the resources
+      and energies of the Democratic party, which is identical with the slave
+      power. I do ample justice to its traditional popularity. I know further&mdash;few,
+      I think, know better than I&mdash;the difficulties and disadvantages of
+      organizing a new political force, like the Republican party, and the
+      obstacles it must encounter in laboring without prestige and without
+      patronage. But, understanding all this, I know that the Democratic party
+      must go down, and that the Republican party must rise into its place. The
+      Democratic party derived its strength, originally, from its adoption of
+      the principles of equal and exact justice to all men. So long as it
+      practised this principle faithfully, it was invulnerable. It became
+      vulnerable when it renounced the principle, and since that time it has
+      maintained itself, not by virtue of its own strength, or even of its
+      traditional merits, but because there as yet had appeared in the political
+      field no other party that had the conscience and the courage to take up,
+      and avow, and practise the life-inspiring principle which the Democratic
+      party had surrendered. At last, the Republican party has appeared. It
+      avows, now, as the Republican party of 1800 did, in one word, its faith
+      and its works, "Equal and exact justice to all men." Even when it first
+      entered the field, only half organized, it struck a blow which only just
+      failed to secure complete and triumphant victory. In this, its second
+      campaign, it has already won advantages which render that triumph now both
+      easy and certain.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The secret of its assured success lies in that very characteristic which,
+      in the mouth of scoffers, constitutes its great and lasting imbecility and
+      reproach. It lies in the fact that it is a party of one idea; but that is
+      a noble one&mdash;an idea that fills and expands all generous souls; the
+      idea of equality&mdash;the equality of all men before human tribunals and
+      human laws, as they all are equal before the Divine tribunal and Divine
+      laws.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I know, and you know, that a revolution has begun. I know, and all the
+      world knows, that revolutions never go backward. Twenty Senators and a
+      hundred Representatives proclaim boldly in Congress to-day sentiments and
+      opinions and principles of freedom which hardly so many men, even in this
+      free State, dared to utter in their own homes twenty years ago. While the
+      Government of the United States, under the conduct of the Democratic
+      party, has been all that time surrendering one plain and castle after
+      another to slavery, the people of the United States have been no less
+      steadily and perseveringly gathering together the forces with which to
+      recover back again all the fields and all the castles which have been
+      lost, and to confound and overthrow, by one decisive blow, the betrayers
+      of the Constitution and freedom forever.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0013" id="link2H_4_0013">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      VI. &mdash; SECESSION.
+    </h2>
+    <p>
+      From the beginning of our history it has been a mooted question whether we
+      are to consider the United States as a political state or as a congeries
+      of political states, as a <i>Bundesstaat</i> or as a <i>Staatenbund</i>.
+      The essence of the controversy seems to be contained in the very title of
+      the republic, one school laying stress on the word United, as the other
+      does on the word States. The phases of the controversy have been beyond
+      calculation, and one of its consequences has been a civil war of
+      tremendous energy and cost in blood and treasure.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Looking at the facts alone of our history, one would be most apt to
+      conclude that the United States had been a political state from the
+      beginning, its form being entirely revolutionary until the final
+      ratification of the Articles of Confederation in 1781, then under the very
+      loose and inefficient government of the Articles until 1789, and
+      thereafter under the very efficient national government of the
+      Constitution; that, in the final transformation of 1787-9, there were
+      features which were also decidedly revolutionary; but that there was no
+      time when any of the colonies had the prospect or the power of
+      establishing a separate national existence of its own. The facts are not
+      consistent with the theory that the States ever were independent political
+      states, in any scientific sense.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It cannot be said, however, that the actors in the history always had a
+      clear perception of the facts as they took place. In the teeth of the
+      facts, our early history presents a great variety of assertions of State
+      independence by leading men, State Legislatures, or State constitutions,
+      which still form the basis of the argument for State sovereignty. The
+      State constitutions declared the State to be sovereign and independent,
+      even though the framers knew that the existence of the State depended on
+      the issue of the national struggle against the mother country. The treaty
+      of 1783 with Great Britain recognized the States separately and by name as
+      "free, sovereign, and independent," even while it established national
+      boundaries outside of the States, covering a vast western territory in
+      which no State would have ventured to forfeit its interest by setting up a
+      claim to practical freedom, sovereignty, or independence. All our early
+      history is full of such contradictions between fact and theory. They are
+      largely obscured by the undiscriminating use of the word "people." As used
+      now, it usually means the national people; but many apparently national
+      phrases as to the "sovereignty of the people," as they were used in
+      1787-9, would seem far less national if the phraseology could show the
+      feeling of those who then used them that the "people" referred to was the
+      people of the State. In that case the number of the contradictions would
+      be indefinitely increased; and the phraseology of the Constitution's
+      preamble, "We, the people of the United States," would not be offered as a
+      consciously nationalizing phrase of its framers. It is hardly to be
+      doubted, from the current debates, that the conventions of Massachusetts,
+      New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York, Virginia, North Carolina, and South
+      Carolina, seven of the thirteen States, imagined and assumed that each
+      ratified the Constitution in 1788&mdash;90 by authority of the State's
+      people alone, by the State's sovereign will; while the facts show that in
+      each of these conventions a clear majority was coerced into ratification
+      by a strong minority in its own State, backed by the unanimous
+      ratifications of the other States. If ratification or rejection had really
+      been open to voluntary choice, to sovereign will, the Constitution would
+      never have had a moment's chance of life; so far from being ratified by
+      nine States as a condition precedent to going into effect, it would have
+      been summarily rejected by a majority of the States. In the language of
+      John Adams, the Constitution was "extorted from the grinding necessities
+      of a reluctant people." The theory of State sovereignty was successfully
+      contradicted by national necessities.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The change from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution, though
+      it could not help antagonizing State sovereignty, was carefully managed so
+      as to do so as little as possible. As soon as the plans by which the
+      Federal party, under Hamilton's leadership, proposed to develop the
+      national features of the Constitution became evident, the latent State
+      feeling took fire. Its first symptom was the adoption of the name
+      Republican by the new opposition party which took form in 1792-3 under
+      Jefferson's leadership. Up to this time the States had been the only means
+      through which Americans had known any thing of republican government; they
+      had had no share in the government of the mother country in colonial
+      times, and no efficient national government to take part in under the
+      Articles of Confederation. The claim of an exclusive title to the name of
+      Republican does not seem to have been fundamentally an implication of
+      monarchical tendencies against the Federalists so much as an implication
+      that they were hostile to the States, the familiar exponents of republican
+      government. When the Federalist majority in Congress forced through, in
+      the war excitement against France in 1798, the Alien and Sedition laws,
+      which practically empowered the President to suppress all party criticism
+      of and opposition to the dominant party, the Legislatures of Kentucky and
+      Virginia, in 1798-9, passed series of resolutions, prepared by Jefferson
+      and Madison respectively, which for the first time asserted in plain terms
+      the sovereignty of the States. The two sets of resolutions agreed in the
+      assertion that the Constitution was a "compact," and that the States were
+      the "parties" which had formed it. In these two propositions lies the gist
+      of State sovereignty, of which all its remotest consequences are only
+      natural developments. If it were true that the States, of their sovereign
+      will, had formed such a compact; if it were not true that the adoption of
+      the Constitution was a mere alteration of the form of a political state
+      already in existence; it would follow, as the Kentucky resolutions
+      asserted, that each State had the exclusive right to decide for itself
+      when the compact had been broken, and the mode and measure of redress. It
+      followed, also, that, if the existence and force of the Constitution in a
+      State were due solely to the sovereign will of the State, the sovereign
+      will of the State was competent, on occasion, to oust the Constitution
+      from the jurisdiction covered by the State. In brief, the Union was wholly
+      voluntary in its formation and in its continuance; and each State reserved
+      the unquestionable right to secede, to abandon the Union, and assume an
+      independent existence whenever due reason, in the exclusive judgment of
+      the State, should arise. These latter consequences, not stated in the
+      Kentucky resolutions, and apparently not contemplated by the Virginia
+      resolutions, were put into complete form by Professor Tucker, of the
+      University of Virginia, in 1803, in the notes to his edition of
+      "Blackstone's Commentaries." Thereafter its statements of American
+      constitutional law controlled the political training of the South.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Madison held a modification of the State sovereignty theory, which has
+      counted among its adherents the mass of the ability and influence of
+      American authorities on constitutional law. Holding that the Constitution
+      was a compact, and that the States were the parties to it, he held that
+      one of the conditions of the compact was the abandonment of State
+      sovereignty; that the States were sovereign until 1787-8, but thereafter
+      only members of a political state, the United States. This seems to have
+      been the ground taken by Webster, in his debates with Hayne and Calhoun.
+      It was supported by the instances in which the appearance of a sovereignty
+      in each State was yielded in the fourteen years before 1787; but,
+      unfortunately for the theory, Calhoun was able to produce instances
+      exactly parallel after 1787. If the fact that each State predicated its
+      own sovereignty as an essential part of the steps preliminary to the
+      convention of 1787 be a sound argument for State sovereignty before 1787,
+      the fact that each State predicated its sovereignty as an essential part
+      of the ratification of the Constitution must be taken as an equally sound
+      argument for State sovereignty under the Constitution; and it seems
+      difficult, on the Madison theory, to resist Calhoun's triumphant
+      conclusion that, if the States went into the convention as sovereign
+      States, they came out of it as sovereign States, with, of course, the
+      right of secession. Calhoun himself had a sincere desire to avoid the
+      exercise of the right of secession, and it was as a substitute for it that
+      he evolved his doctrine of nullification, which has been placed in the
+      first volume. When it failed in 1833, the exercise of the right of
+      secession was the only remaining remedy for an asserted breach of State
+      sovereignty.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The events which led up to the success of the Republican party in electing
+      Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency in 1860 are so intimately connected with the
+      anti-slavery struggle that they have been placed in the preceding volume.
+      They culminated in the first organized attempt to put the right of
+      secession to a practical test. The election of Lincoln, the success of a
+      "sectional party," and the evasion of the fugitive-slave law through the
+      passage of "personal-liberty laws" by many of the Northern States, are the
+      leading reasons assigned by South Carolina for her secession in 1860.
+      These were intelligible reasons, and were the ones most commonly used to
+      influence the popular vote. But all the evidence goes to show that the
+      leaders of secession were not so weak in judgment as to run the hazards of
+      war by reason of "injuries" so minute as these. Their apprehensions were
+      far broader, if less calculated to influence a popular vote. In 1789 the
+      proportions of population and wealth in the two sections were very nearly
+      equal. The slave system of labor had hung as a clog upon the progress of
+      the South, preventing the natural development of manufactures and
+      commerce, and shutting out immigration. As the numerical disproportion
+      between the two sections increased, Southern leaders ceased to attempt to
+      control the House of Representatives, contenting themselves with balancing
+      new Northern with new Southern States, so as to keep an equal vote in the
+      Senate. Since 1845 this resource had failed. Five free States, Iowa,
+      Wisconsin, California, Minnesota, and Oregon, had been admitted, with no
+      new slave States; Kansas was calling almost imperatively for admission;
+      and there was no hope of another slave State in future. When the election
+      of 1860 demonstrated that the progress of the antislavery struggle had
+      united all the free States, it was evident that it was but a question of
+      time when the Republican party would control both branches of Congress and
+      the Presidency, and have the power to make laws according to its own
+      interpretation of the constitutional powers of the Federal Government.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The peril to slavery was not only the probable prohibition of the
+      inter-State slave-trade, though this itself would have been an event which
+      negro slavery in the South could hardly have long survived. The more
+      pressing danger lay in the results of such general Republican success on
+      the Supreme Court. The decision of that Court in the Dred Scott case had
+      fully sustained every point of the extreme Southern claims as to the
+      status of slavery in the Territories; it had held that slaves were
+      property in the view of the Constitution; that Congress was bound to
+      protect slave-holders in this property right in the Territories, and,
+      still more, bound not to prohibit slavery or allow a Territorial
+      Legislature to prohibit slavery in the Territories, and that the Missouri
+      compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional and void. The Southern Democrats
+      entered the election of 1860 with this distinct decision of the highest
+      judicial body of the country to back them. The Republican party had
+      refused to admit that the decision of the Dred Scott case was law or
+      binding. Given a Republican majority in both Houses and a Republican
+      President, there was nothing to hinder the passage of a law increasing the
+      number of Supreme Court justices to any desired extent, and the new
+      appointments would certainly be of such a nature as to make the reversal
+      of the Dred Scott decision an easy matter. The election of 1860 had
+      brought only a Republican President; the majority in both Houses was to be
+      against him until 1863 at least. But the drift in the North and West was
+      too plain to be mistaken, and it was felt that 1860&mdash;would be the
+      last opportunity for the Gulf States to secede with dignity and with the
+      prestige of the Supreme Court's support.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Finally, there seems to have been a strong feeling among the extreme
+      secessionists, who loved the right of secession for its own sake, that the
+      accelerating increase in the relative power of the North would soon make
+      secession, on any grounds, impossible. Unless the right was to be
+      forfeited by non-user, it must be established by practical exercise, and
+      at once.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Until about 1825-9 Presidential electors were chosen in most of the States
+      by the Legislature. After that period the old practice was kept up only in
+      South Carolina. On election day of November, 1860, the South Carolina
+      Legislature was in session for the purpose of choosing electors, but it
+      continued its session after this duty was performed. As soon as Lincoln's
+      election was assured, the Legislature called a State Convention for Dec.
+      17th, took the preliminary steps toward putting the State on a war
+      footing, and adjourned. The convention met at the State capital, adjourned
+      to Charleston, and here, Dec. 20, 1860, passed unanimously an Ordinance of
+      Secession. By its terms the people of South Carolina, in convention
+      assembled, repealed the ordinance of May 23, 1788, by which the
+      Constitution had been ratified, and all Acts of the Legislature ratifying
+      amendments to the Constitution, and declared the union between the State
+      and other States, under the name of the United States of America, to be
+      dissolved. By a similar process, similar ordinances were adopted by the
+      State Conventions of Mississippi (Jan. 9th), Florida (Jan. 10th), Alabama
+      (Jan. 11th), Georgia (Jan. 19th), Louisiana (Jan. 25th), and Texas (Feb.
+      1st),&mdash;seven States in all.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Outside of South Carolina, the struggle in the States named turned on the
+      calling of the convention; and in this matter the opposition was
+      unexpectedly strong. We have the testimony of Alexander H. Stephens that
+      the argument most effective in overcoming the opposition to the calling of
+      a convention was: "We can make better terms out of the Union than in it."
+      The necessary implication was that secession was not to be final; that it
+      was only to be a temporary withdrawal until terms of compromise and
+      security for the fugitive-slave law and for slavery in the Territories
+      could be extorted from the North and West. The argument soon proved to be
+      an intentional sham.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      There has always been a difference between the theory of the State
+      Convention at the North and at the South. At the North, barring a few very
+      exceptional cases, the rule has been that no action of a State Convention
+      is valid until confirmed by popular vote. At the South, in obedience to
+      the strictest application of State sovereignty, the action of the State
+      Convention was held to be the voice of the people of the State, which
+      needed no popular ratification. There was, therefore, no remedy when the
+      State Conventions, after passing the ordinances of secession, went on to
+      appoint delegates to a Confederate Congress, which met at Montgomery, Feb.
+      4, 1861, adopted a provisional constitution Feb. 8th, and elected a
+      President and Vice-President Feb. 9th. The conventions ratified the
+      provisional constitution and adjourned, their real object having been
+      completely accomplished; and the people of the several seceding States, by
+      the action of their omnipotent State Conventions, and without their having
+      a word to say about it, found themselves under a new government, totally
+      irreconcilable with the jurisdiction of the United States, and necessarily
+      hostile to it. The only exception was Texas, whose State Convention had
+      been called in a method so utterly revolutionary that it was felt to be
+      necessary to condone its defects by a popular vote.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      No declaration had ever been made by any authority that the erection of
+      such hostile power within the national boundaries of the United States
+      would be followed by war; such a declaration would hardly seem necessary.
+      The recognition of the original national boundaries of the United States
+      had been extorted from Great Britain by successful warfare. They had been
+      extended by purchase from France and Spain in 1803 and 1819, and again by
+      war from Mexico in 1848. The United States stood ready to guarantee their
+      integrity by war against all the rest of the world; was an ordinance of
+      South Carolina, or the election of a <i>de facto</i> government within
+      Southern borders, likely to receive different treatment than was given
+      British troops at Bunker Hill, or Santa Anna's lancers at Buena Vista? Men
+      forgot that the national boundaries had been so drawn as to include
+      Vermont before Vermont's admission and without Vermont's consent; that
+      unofficial propositions to divide Rhode Island between Connecticut and
+      Massachusetts, to embargo commerce with North Carolina, and demand her
+      share of the Confederation debt, had in 1789-90 been a sufficient
+      indication that it was easier for a State to get into the American Union
+      than to get out of it. It was a fact, nevertheless, that the national
+      power to enforce the integrity of the Union had never been formally
+      declared; and the mass of men in the South, even though they denied the
+      expediency, did not deny the right of secession, or acknowledge the right
+      of coercion by the Federal Government. To reach the original area of
+      secession with land-forces, it was necessary for the Federal Government to
+      cross the Border States, whose people in general were no believers in the
+      right of coercion. The first attempt to do so extended the secession
+      movement by methods which were far more openly revolutionary than the
+      original secessions. North Carolina and Arkansas seceded in orthodox
+      fashion as soon as President Lincoln called for volunteers after the
+      capture of Fort Sumter. The State governments of Virginia and Tennessee
+      concluded "military leagues" with the Confederacy, allowed Confederate
+      troops to take possession of their States, and then submitted an ordinance
+      of secession to the form of a popular vote. The State officers of Missouri
+      were chased out of the State before they could do more than begin this
+      process. In Maryland, the State government arrayed itself successfully
+      against secession.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In selecting the representative opinions for this period, all the marked
+      shades of opinion have been respected, both the Union and the
+      anti-coercion sentiment of the Border States, the extreme secession spirit
+      of the Gulf States, and, from the North, the moderate and the extreme
+      Republican, and the orthodox Democratic, views. The feeling of the
+      so-called "peace Democrats" of the North differed so little from those of
+      Toombs or Iverson that it has not seemed advisable to do more than refer
+      to Vallandigham's speech in opposition to the war, under the next period.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0014" id="link2H_4_0014">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      JOHN PARKER HALE,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (BORN 1806, DIED 1873.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON SECESSION; MODERATE REPUBLICAN OPINION; IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE,
+      DECEMBER 5, 1860. MR. PRESIDENT:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I was very much in hopes when the message was presented that it would be a
+      document which would commend itself cordially to somebody. I was not so
+      sanguine about its pleasing myself, but I was in hopes that it would be
+      one thing or another. I was in hopes that the President would have looked
+      in the face the crisis in which he says the country is, and that his
+      message would be either one thing or another. But, sir, I have read it
+      somewhat carefully. I listened to it as it was read at the desk; and, if I
+      understand it&mdash;and I think I do&mdash;it is this: South Carolina has
+      just cause for seceding from the Union; that is the first proposition. The
+      second is, that she has no right to secede. The third is, that we have no
+      right to prevent her from seceding. That is the President's message,
+      substantially. He goes on to represent this as a great and powerful
+      country, and that no State has a right to secede from it; but the power of
+      the country, if I understand the President, consists in what Dickens makes
+      the English constitution to be&mdash;a power to do nothing at all.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, I think it was incumbent upon the President of the United States
+      to point out definitely and recommend to Congress some rule of action, and
+      to tell us what he recommended us to do. But, in my judgment, he has
+      entirely avoided it. He has failed to look the thing in the face. He has
+      acted like the ostrich, which hides her head and thereby thinks to escape
+      danger. Sir, the only way to escape danger is to look it in the face. I
+      think the country did expect from the President some exposition of a
+      decided policy; and I confess that, for one, I was rather indifferent as
+      to what that policy was that he recommended; but I hoped that it would be
+      something; that it would be decisive. He has utterly failed in that
+      respect.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I think we may as well look this matter right clearly in the face; and I
+      am not going to be long about doing it. I think that this state of affairs
+      looks to one of two things: it looks to absolute submission, not on the
+      part of our Southern friends and the Southern States, but of the North, to
+      the abandonment of their position,&mdash;it looks to a surrender of that
+      popular sentiment which has been uttered through the constituted forms of
+      the ballot-box, or it looks to open war. We need not shut our eyes to the
+      fact. It means war, and it means nothing else; and the State which has put
+      herself in the attitude of secession, so looks upon it. She has asked no
+      council, she has considered it as a settled question, and she has armed
+      herself. As I understand the aspect of affairs, it looks to that, and it
+      looks to nothing else except unconditional submission on the part of the
+      majority. I did not read the paper&mdash;I do not read many papers&mdash;but
+      I understand that there was a remedy suggested in a paper printed, I
+      think, in this city, and it was that the President and the Vice-President
+      should be inaugurated (that would be a great concession!) and then, being
+      inaugurated, they should quietly resign! Well, sir, I am not entirely
+      certain that that would settle the question. I think that after the
+      President and Vice-President-elect had resigned, there would be as much
+      difficulty in settling who was to take their places as there was in
+      settling it before.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I do not wish, sir, to say a word that shall increase any irritation; that
+      shall add any feeling of bitterness to the state of things which really
+      exists in the country, and I would bear and forbear before I would say any
+      thing which would add to this bitterness. But I tell you, sir, the plain,
+      true way is to look this thing in the face&mdash;see where we are. And I
+      avow here&mdash;I do not know whether or not I shall be sustained by those
+      who usually act with me&mdash;if the issue which is presented is that the
+      constitutional will of the public opinion of this country, expressed
+      through the forms of the Constitution, will not be submitted to, and war
+      is the alternative, let it come in any form or in any shape. The Union is
+      dissolved and it cannot be held together as a Union, if that is the
+      alternative upon which we go into an election. If it is pre-announced and
+      determined that the voice of the majority, expressed through the regular
+      and constituted forms of the Constitution, will not be submitted to, then,
+      sir, this is not a Union of equals; it is a Union of a dictatorial
+      oligarchy on one side, and a herd of slaves and cowards on the other. That
+      is it, sir; nothing more, nothing less. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0015" id="link2H_4_0015">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      ALFRED IVERSON,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1798, DIED 1874.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION; IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER
+      5, 1860
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I do not rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of entering,at any length
+      into this discussion, or to defend the President's message, which has been
+      attacked by the Senator from New Hampshire.* I am not the mouth-piece of
+      the President. While I do not agree with some portions of the message, and
+      some of the positions that have been taken by the President, I do not
+      perceive all the inconsistencies in that document which the Senator from
+      New Hampshire has thought proper to present.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It is true, that the President denies the constitutional right of a State
+      to secede from the Union; while, at the same time, he also states that
+      this Federal Government has no constitutional right to enforce or to
+      coerce a State back into the Union which may take upon itself the
+      responsibility of secession. I do not see any inconsistency in that. The
+      President may be right when he asserts the fact that no State has a
+      constitutional right to secede from the Union. I do not myself place the
+      right of a State to secede from the Union upon constitutional grounds. I
+      admit that the Constitution has not granted that power to a State. It is
+      exceedingly doubtful even whether the right has been reserved. Certainly
+      it has not been reserved in express terms. I therefore do not place the
+      expected action of any of the Southern States, in the present contingency,
+      upon the constitutional right of secession; and I am not prepared to
+      dispute therefore, the, position which the President has taken upon that
+      point.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I rather agree with the President that the secession of a State is an act
+      of revolution taken through that particular means or by that particular
+      measure. It withdraws from the Federal compact, disclaims any further
+      allegiance to it, and sets itself up as a separate government, an
+      independent State. The State does it at its peril, of course, because it
+      may or may not be cause of war by the remaining States composing the
+      Federal Government. If they think proper to consider it such an act of
+      disobedience, or if they consider that the policy of the Federal
+      Government be such that it cannot submit to this dismemberment, why then
+      they may or may not make war if they choose upon the seceding States. It
+      will be a question of course for the Federal Government or the remaining
+      States to decide for themselves, whether they will permit a State to go
+      out of the Union, and remain as a separate and independent State, or
+      whether they will attempt to force her back at the point of the bayonet.
+      That is a question, I presume, of policy and expediency, which will be
+      considered by the remaining States composing the Federal Government,
+      through their organ, the Federal Government, whenever the contingency
+      arises.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, while a State has no power, under the Constitution, conferred
+      upon it to secede from the Federal Government or from the Union, each
+      State has the right of revolution, which all admit. Whenever the burdens
+      of the government under which it acts become so onerous that it cannot
+      bear them, or if anticipated evil shall be so great that the State
+      believes it would be better off&mdash;even risking the perils of secession&mdash;out
+      of the Union than in it, then that State, in my opinion, like all people
+      upon earth has the right to exercise the great fundamental principle of
+      self-preservation, and go out of the Union&mdash;though, of course, at its
+      own peril&mdash;and bear the risk of the consequences. And while no State
+      may have the constitutional right to secede from the Union, the President
+      may not be wrong when he says the Federal Government has no power under
+      the Constitution to compel the State to come back into the Union. It may
+      be a <i>casus omissus</i> in the Constitution; but I should like to know
+      where the power exists in the Constitution of the United States to
+      authorize the Federal Government to coerce a sovereign State. It does not
+      exist in terms, at any rate, in the Constitution. I do not think there is
+      any inconsistency, therefore, between the two positions of the President
+      in the message upon these particular points.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The only fault I have to find with the message of the President, is the
+      inconsistency of another portion. He declares that, as the States have no
+      power to secede, the Federal Government is in fact a consolidated
+      government; that it is not a voluntary association of States. I deny it.
+      It was a voluntary association of States. No State was ever forced to come
+      into the Federal Union. Every State came voluntarily into it. It was an
+      association, a voluntary association of States; and the President's
+      position that it is not a voluntary association is, in my opinion,
+      altogether wrong.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But whether that be so or not, the President declares and assumes that
+      this government is a consolidated government to this extent: that all the
+      laws of the Federal Government are to operate directly upon each
+      individual of the States, if not upon the States themselves, and must be
+      enforced; and yet, at the same time, he says that the State which secedes
+      is not to be coerced. He says that the laws of the United States must be
+      enforced against every individual of a State.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Of course, the State is composed of individuals within its limits, and if
+      you enforce the laws and obligations of the Federal Government against
+      each and every individual of the State, you enforce them against a State.
+      While, therefore, he says that a State is not to be coerced, he declares,
+      in the same breath, his determination to enforce the laws of the Union,
+      and therefore to coerce the State if a State goes out. There is the
+      inconsistency, according to my idea, which I do not see how the President
+      or anybody else can reconcile. That the Federal Government is to enforce
+      its laws over the seceding State, and yet not coerce her into obedience,
+      is to me incomprehensible.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But I did not rise, Mr. President, to discuss these questions in relation
+      to the message; I rose in behalf of the State that I represent, as well as
+      other Southern States that are engaged in this movement, to accept the
+      issue which the Senator from New Hampshire has seen fit to tender&mdash;that
+      is, of war. Sir, the Southern States now moving in this matter are not
+      doing it without due consideration. We have looked over the whole field.
+      We believe that the only security for the institution to which we attach
+      so much importance is secession and a Southern confederacy. We are
+      satisfied, notwithstanding the disclaimers upon the part of the Black
+      Republicans to the contrary, that they intend to use the Federal power,
+      when they get possession of it, to put down and extinguish the institution
+      of slavery in the Southern States. I do not intend to enter upon the
+      discussion of that point. That, however, is my opinion. It is the opinion
+      of a large majority of those with whom I associate at home, and I believe
+      of the Southern people. Believing that this is the intention and object,
+      the ultimate aim and design, of the Republican party, the Abolitionists of
+      the North, we do not intend to stay in this Union until we shall become so
+      weak that we shall not be able to resist when the time comes for
+      resistance. Our true policy is the one which we have made up our minds to
+      follow. Our true policy is to go out of this Union now, while we have
+      strength to resist any attempt on the part of the Federal Government to
+      coerce us. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We intend, Mr. President, to go out peaceably if we can, forcibly if we
+      must; but I do not believe, with the Senator from New Hampshire, that
+      there is going to be any war. If five or eight States go out, they will
+      necessarily draw all the other Southern States after them. That is a
+      consequence that nothing can prevent. If five or eight States go out of
+      this Union, I should like to see the man that would propose a declaration
+      of war against them, or attempt to force them into obedience to the
+      Federal Government at the point of the bayonet or the sword.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, there has been a good deal of vaporing on this subject. A great many
+      threats have been thrown out. I have heard them on this floor, and upon
+      the floor of the other House of Congress; but I have also perceived this:
+      they come from those who would be the very last men to attempt to put
+      their threats into execution. Men talk sometimes about their eighteen
+      million who are to whip us; and yet we have heard of cases in which just
+      such men had suffered themselves to be switched in the face, and trembled
+      like sheep-stealing dogs, expecting to be shot every minute. These threats
+      generally come from men who would be the last to execute them. Some of
+      these Northern editors talk about whipping the Southern States like
+      spaniels. Brave words; but I venture to assert none of those men would
+      ever volunteer to command an army to be sent down South to coerce us into
+      obedience to Federal power. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, I apprehend that when we go out and form our confederacy&mdash;as
+      I think and hope we shall do very shortly&mdash;the Northern States, or
+      the Federal Government, will see its true policy to be to let us go in
+      peace and make treaties of commerce and amity with us, from which they
+      will derive more advantages than from any attempt to coerce us. They
+      cannot succeed in coercing us. If they allow us to form our government
+      without difficulty, we shall be very willing to look upon them as a
+      favored nation and give them all the advantages of commercial and amicable
+      treaties. I have no doubt that both of us&mdash;certainly the Southern
+      States&mdash;would live better, more happily, more prosperously, and with
+      greater friendship, than we live now in this Union.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, disguise the fact as you will, there is an enmity between the
+      Northern and Southern people that is deep and enduring, and you never can
+      eradicate it&mdash;never! Look at the spectacle exhibited on this floor.
+      How is it? There are the Republican Northern Senators upon that side. Here
+      are the Southern Senators on this side. How much social intercourse is
+      there between us? You sit upon your side, silent and gloomy; we sit upon
+      ours with knit brows and portentous scowls. Yesterday I observed that
+      there was not a solitary man on that side of the Chamber came over here
+      even to extend the civilities and courtesies of life; nor did any of us go
+      over there. Here are two hostile bodies on this floor; and it is but a
+      type of the feeling that exists between the two sections. We are enemies
+      as much as if we were hostile States. I believe that the Northern people
+      hate the South worse than ever the English people hated France; and I can
+      tell my brethren over there that there is no love lost upon the part of
+      the South.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In this state of feeling, divided as we are by interest, by a geographical
+      feeling, by every thing that makes two people separate and distinct, I ask
+      why we should remain in the same Union together? We have not lived in
+      peace; we are not now living in peace. It is not expected or hoped that we
+      shall ever live in peace. My doctrine is that whenever even man and wife
+      find that they must quarrel, and cannot live in peace, they ought to
+      separate; and these two sections&mdash;the North and South&mdash;manifesting,
+      as they have done and do now, and probably will ever manifest, feelings of
+      hostility, separated as they are in interests and objects, my own opinion
+      is they can never live in peace; and the sooner they separate the better.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, these sentiments I have thrown out crudely I confess, and upon the
+      spur of the occasion. I should not have opened my mouth but that the
+      Senator from New Hampshire seemed to show a spirit of bravado, as if he
+      intended to alarm and scare the Southern States into a retreat from their
+      movements. He says that war is to come, and you had better take care,
+      therefore. That is the purport of his language; of course those are not
+      his words; but I understand him very well, and everybody else, I
+      apprehend, understands him that war is threatened, and therefore the South
+      had better look out. Sir, I do not believe that there will be any war; but
+      if war is to come, let it come. We will meet the Senator from New
+      Hampshire and all the myrmidons of Abolitionism and Black Republicanism
+      everywhere, upon our own soil; and in the language of a distinguished
+      member from Ohio in relation to the Mexican War, we will "welcome you with
+      bloody hands to hospitable graves."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0016" id="link2H_4_0016">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      BENJAMIN WADE,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF OHIO, (BORN 1800, DIED 1878.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON SECESSION, AND THE STATE OF THE UNION; REPUBLICAN OPINION; SENATE OF
+      THE UNITED STATES, DECEMBER 17, 1860. MR. PRESIDENT:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      At a time like this, when there seems to be a wild and unreasoning
+      excitement in many parts of the country, I certainly have very little
+      faith in the efficacy of any argument that may be made; but at the same
+      time, I must say, when I hear it stated by many Senators in this Chamber,
+      where we all raised our hands to Heaven, and took a solemn oath to support
+      the Constitution of the United States, that we are on the eve of a
+      dissolution of this Union, and that the Constitution is to be trampled
+      under foot&mdash;silence under such circumstances seems to me akin to
+      treason itself.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have listened to the complaints on the other side patiently, and with an
+      ardent desire to ascertain what was the particular difficulty under which
+      they were laboring. Many of those who have supposed themselves aggrieved
+      have spoken; but I confess that I am now totally unable to understand
+      precisely what it is of which they complain. Why, sir, the party which
+      lately elected their President, and are prospectively to come into power,
+      have never held an executive office under the General Government, nor has
+      any individual of them. It is most manifest, therefore, that the party to
+      which I belong have as yet committed no act of which anybody can complain.
+      If they have fears as to the course that we may hereafter pursue, they are
+      mere apprehensions&mdash;a bare suspicion; arising, I fear, out of their
+      unwarrantable prejudices, and nothing else.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I wish to ascertain at the outset whether we are right; for I tell
+      gentlemen that, if they can convince me that I am holding any political
+      principle that is not warranted by the Constitution under which we live,
+      or that trenches upon their rights, they need not ask me to compromise it.
+      I will be ever ready to grant redress, and to right myself whenever I am
+      wrong. No man need approach me with a threat that the Government under
+      which I live is to be destroyed; because I hope I have now, and ever shall
+      have, such a sense of justice that, when any man shows me that I am wrong,
+      I shall be ready to right it without price or compromise.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, sir, what is it of which gentlemen complain? When I left my home in
+      the West to come to this place, all was calm, cheerful, and contented. I
+      heard of no discontent. I apprehended that there was nothing to interrupt
+      the harmonious course of our legislation. I did not learn that, since we
+      adjourned from this place at the end of the last session, there had been
+      any new fact intervening that should at all disturb the public mind. I do
+      not know that there has been any encroachment upon the rights of any
+      section of the country since that time; I came here, therefore, expecting
+      to have a very harmonious session. It is very true, sir, that the great
+      Republican party which has been organized ever since you repealed the
+      Missouri Compromise, and who gave you, four years ago, full warning that
+      their growing strength would probably result as it has resulted, have
+      carried the late election; but I did not suppose that would disturb the
+      equanimity of this body. I did suppose that every man who was observant of
+      the signs of the times might well see that things would result as they
+      have resulted. Nor do I understand now that anything growing out of that
+      election is the cause of the present excitement that pervades the country.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Why, Mr. President, this is a most singular state of things. Who is it
+      that is complaining? They that have been in a minority? They that have
+      been the subjects of an oppressive and aggressive Government? No, sir. Let
+      us suppose that when the leaders of the old glorious Revolution met at
+      Philadelphia eighty-four years ago to draw up a bill of indictment against
+      a wicked King and his ministers, they had been at a loss what they should
+      set forth as the causes of their complaint. They had no difficulty in
+      setting them forth so that the great article of impeachment will go down
+      to all posterity as a full justification of all the acts they did. But let
+      us suppose that, instead of its being these old patriots who had met there
+      to dissolve their connection with the British Government, and to trample
+      their flag under foot, it had been the ministers of the Crown, the leading
+      members of the British Parliament, of the dominant party that had ruled
+      Great Britain for thirty years previous: who would not have branded every
+      man of them as a traitor? It would be said: "You who have had the
+      Government in your own hands: you who have been the ministers of the
+      Crown, advising everything that has been done, set up here that you have
+      been oppressed and aggrieved by the action of that very Government which
+      you have directed yourselves." Instead of a sublime revolution, the
+      uprising of an oppressed people, ready to battle against unequal power for
+      their rights, it would have been an act of treason.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      How is it with the leaders of this modern revolution? Are they in a
+      position to complain of the action of this Government for years past? Why,
+      sir, they have had more than two-thirds of the Senate for many years past,
+      and until very recently, and have almost that now. You&mdash;who complain,
+      I ought to say&mdash;represent but a little more than one-fourth of the
+      free people of these United States, and yet your counsels prevail, and
+      have prevailed all along for at least ten years past. In the Cabinet, in
+      the Senate of the United States, in the Supreme Court, in every department
+      of the Government, your officers, or those devoted to you, have been in
+      the majority, and have dictated all the policies of this Government. Is it
+      not strange, sir, that they who now occupy these positions should come
+      here and complain that their rights are stricken down by the action of the
+      Government?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But what has caused this great excitement that undoubtedly prevails in a
+      portion of our country? If the newspapers are to be credited, there is a
+      reign of terror in all the cities and large towns in the southern portion
+      of this community that looks very much like the reign of terror in Paris
+      during the French revolution. There are acts of violence that we read of
+      almost every day, wherein the rights of northern men are stricken down,
+      where they are sent back with indignities, where they are scourged,
+      tarred, feathered, and murdered, and no inquiry made as to the cause. I do
+      not suppose that the regular Government, in times of excitement like
+      these, is really responsible for such acts. I know that these outbreaks of
+      passion, these terrible excitements that sometimes pervade the community,
+      are entirely irrepressible by the law of the country. I suppose that is
+      the case now; because if these outrages against northern citizens were
+      really authorized by the State authorities there, were they a foreign
+      Government, everybody knows, if it were the strongest Government on earth,
+      we should declare war upon her in one day.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But what has caused this great excitement? Sir, I will tell you what I
+      suppose it is. I do not (and I say it frankly) so much blame the people of
+      the South; because they believe, and they are led to believe by all the
+      information that ever comes before them, that we, the dominant party
+      to-day, who have just seized upon the reins of this Government, are their
+      mortal enemies, and stand ready to trample their institutions under foot.
+      They have been told so by our enemies at the North. Their misfortune, or
+      their fault, is that they have lent a too easy ear to the insinuations of
+      those who are our mortal enemies, while they would not hear us.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now I wish to inquire, in the first place, honestly, candidly, and fairly,
+      whether the Southern gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber that
+      complain so much, have any reasonable grounds for that complaint&mdash;I
+      mean when they are really informed as to our position.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Northern Democrats have sometimes said that we had personal liberty bills
+      in some few of the States of the North, which somehow trenched upon the
+      rights of the South under the fugitive bill to recapture their runaway
+      slaves; a position that in not more than two or three cases, so far as I
+      can see, has the slightest foundation in fact; and even if those where it
+      is most complained of, if the provisions of their law are really repugnant
+      to that of the United States, they are utterly void, and the courts would
+      declare them so the moment you brought them up. Thus it is that I am glad
+      to hear the candor of those gentlemen on the other side, that they do not
+      complain of these laws. The Senator from Georgia (Mr. Iverson) himself
+      told us that they had never suffered any injury, to his knowledge and
+      belief, from those bills, and they cared nothing about them. The Senator
+      from Virginia (Mr. Mason) said the same thing; and, I believe, the Senator
+      from Mississippi (Mr. Brown). You all, then, have given up this bone of
+      contention, this matter of complaint which Northern men have set forth as
+      a grievance more than anybody else.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Mason. Will the Senator indulge me one moment.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Wade. Certainly.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Mason. I know he does not intend to misrepresent me or other
+      gentlemen. What I said was, that the repeal of those laws would furnish no
+      cause of satisfaction to the Southern States. Our opinions of those laws
+      we gave freely. We said the repeal of those laws would give no
+      satisfaction.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Wade. Mr. President, I do not intend to misrepresent anything. I
+      understood those gentlemen to suppose that they had not been injured by
+      them. I understood the Senator from Virginia to believe that they were
+      enacted in a spirit of hostility to the institutions of the South, and to
+      object to them not because the acts themselves had done them any hurt, but
+      because they were really a stamp of degradation upon Southern men, or
+      something like that&mdash;I do not quote his words. The other Senators
+      that referred to it probably intended to be understood in the same way;
+      but they did acquit these laws of having done them injury to their
+      knowledge or belief.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I do not believe that these laws were, as the Senator supposed, enacted
+      with a view to exasperate the South, or to put them in a position of
+      degradation. Why, sir, these laws against kidnapping are as old as the
+      common law itself, as that Senator well knows. To take a freeman and
+      forcibly carry him out of the jurisdiction of the State, has ever been, by
+      all civilized countries, adjudged to be a great crime; and in most of
+      them, wherever I have understood anything about it, they have penal laws
+      to punish such an offence. I believe the State of Virginia has one to-day
+      as stringent in all its provisions as almost any other of which you
+      complain. I have not looked over the statute-books of the South; but I do
+      not doubt that there will be found this species of legislation upon all
+      your statute-books.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Here let me say, because the subject occurs to me right here, the Senator
+      from Virginia seemed not so much to point out any specific acts that
+      Northern people had done injurious to your property as, what he took to be
+      a dishonor and a degradation. I think I feel as sensitive upon that
+      subject as any other man. If I know myself, I am the last man that would
+      be the advocate of any law or any act that would humiliate or dishonor any
+      section of this country, or any individual in it; and, on the other hand,
+      let me tell these gentlemen I am exceedingly sensitive upon that same
+      point, whatever they may think about it. I would rather sustain an injury
+      than an insult or dishonor; and I would be as unwilling to inflict it upon
+      others as I would be to submit to it myself. I never will do either the
+      one or the other if I know it.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      I know that charges have been made and rung in our ears, and reiterated
+      over and over again, that we have been unfaithful in the execution of your
+      fugitive bill. Sir, that law is exceedingly odious to any free people. It
+      deprives us of all the old guarantees of liberty that the Anglo-Saxon race
+      everywhere have considered sacred&mdash;more sacred than anything else.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, the gentleman says, if I understood him, that these
+      fugitives might be turned over to the authorities of the State from whence
+      they came. That would be a very poor remedy for a free man in humble
+      circumstances who was taken under the provisions of this bill in a summary
+      way, to be carried&mdash;where? Where he came from? There is no law that
+      requires that he should be carried there. Sir, if he is a free man he may
+      be carried into the market-place anywhere in a slave State; and what
+      chance has he, a poor, ignorant individual, and a stranger, of asserting
+      any rights there, even if there were no prejudices or partialities against
+      him? That would be mere mockery of justice and nothing else, and the
+      Senator well knows it. Sir, I know that from the stringent, summary
+      provisions of this bill, free men have been kidnapped and carried into
+      captivity and sold into everlasting slavery. Will any man who has a regard
+      to the sovereign rights of the State rise here and complain that a State
+      shall not make a law to protect her own people against kidnapping and
+      violent seizures from abroad? Of all men, I believe those who have made
+      most of these complaints should be the last to rise and deny the power of
+      a sovereign State to protect her own citizens against any Federal
+      legislation whatever. These liberty bills, in my judgment, have been
+      passed, not with a view of degrading the South, but with an honest purpose
+      of guarding the rights of their own citizens from unlawful seizures and
+      abductions. I was exceedingly glad to hear that the Senators on the other
+      side had arisen in their places and had said that the repeal of those laws
+      would not relieve the case from the difficulties under which they now
+      labor.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Gentlemen, it will be very well for us all to take a view of all the
+      phases of this controversy before we come to such conclusions as seem to
+      have been arrived at in some quarters. I make the assertion here that I do
+      not believe, in the history of the world, there ever was a nation or a
+      people where a law repugnant to the general feeling was ever executed with
+      the same faithfulness as has been your most savage and atrocious fugitive
+      bill in the North. You yourselves can scarcely point out any case that has
+      come before any northern tribunal in which the law has not been enforced
+      to the very letter. You ought to know these facts, and you do know them.
+      You all know that when a law is passed anywhere to bind any people, who
+      feel, in conscience, or for any other reason, opposed to its execution, it
+      is not in human nature to enforce it with the same certainty as a law that
+      meets with the approbation of the great mass of the citizens. Every
+      rational man understands this, and every candid man will admit it.
+      Therefore it is that I do not violently impeach you for your
+      unfaithfulness in the execution of many of your laws. You have in South
+      Carolina a law by which you take free citizens of Massachusetts or any
+      other maritime State, who visit the city of Charleston, and lock them up
+      in jail under the penalty, if they cannot pay the jail-fees, of eternal
+      slavery staring them in the face&mdash;a monstrous law, revolting to the
+      best feelings of humanity and violently in conflict with the Constitution
+      of the United States. I do not say this by way of recrimination; for the
+      excitement pervading the country is now so great that I do not wish to add
+      a single coal to the flame; but nevertheless I wish the whole truth to
+      appear.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      Now, Mr. President, I have shown, I think, that the dominant majority here
+      have nothing to complain of in the legislation of Congress, or in the
+      legislation of any of the States, or in the practice of the people of the
+      North, under the fugitive slave bill, except so far as they say certain
+      State legislation furnishes some evidence of hostility to their
+      institutions. And here, sir, I beg to make an observation. I tell the
+      Senator, and I tell all the Senators, that the Republican party of the
+      Northern States, so far as I know, and of my own State in particular, hold
+      the same opinions with regard to this peculiar institution of yours that
+      are held by all the civilized nations of the world. We do not differ from
+      the public sentiment of England, of France, of Germany, of Italy, and
+      every other civilized nation on God's earth; and I tell you frankly that
+      you never found, and you never will find, a free community that are in
+      love with your peculiar institution. The Senator from Texas (Mr. Wigfall)
+      told us the other day that cotton was king, and that by its influence it
+      would govern all creation. He did not say so in words, but that was the
+      substance of his remark: that cotton was king, and that it had its
+      subjects in Europe who dared not rebel against it. Here let me say to that
+      Senator, in passing, that it turns out that they are very rebellious
+      subjects, and they are talking very disrespectfully at present of that
+      king that he spoke of. They defy you to exercise your power over them.
+      They tell you that they sympathize in this controversy with what you call
+      the black Republicans. Therefore, I hope that, so far as Europe is
+      concerned at least, we shall hear no more of this boast that cotton is
+      king; and that he is going to rule all the civilized nations of the world,
+      and bring them to his footstool. Sir, it will never be done.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, I wish to inquire whether the Southern people are injured by, or
+      have any just right to complain of that platform of principles that we put
+      out, and on which we have elected a President and Vice-President. I have
+      no concealments to make, and I shall talk to you, my Southern friends,
+      precisely as I would talk upon the stump on the subject. I tell you that
+      in that platform we did lay it down that we would, if we had the power,
+      prohibit slavery from another inch of free territory under this
+      Government. I stand on that position to-day. I have argued it probably to
+      half a million people. They stand there, and have commissioned and
+      enjoined me to stand there forever; and, so help me God, I will. I say to
+      you frankly, gentlemen, that while we hold this doctrine, there is no
+      Republican, there is no convention of Republicans, there is no paper that
+      speaks for them, there is no orator that sets forth their doctrines, who
+      ever pretends that they have any right in your States to interfere with
+      your peculiar institution; but, on the other hand, our authoritative
+      platform repudiates the idea that we have any right or any intention ever
+      to invade your peculiar institution in your own States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, what do you complain of? You are going to break up this Government;
+      you are going to involve us in war and blood, from a mere suspicion that
+      we shall justify that which we stand everywhere pledged not to do. Would
+      you be justified in the eyes of the civilized world in taking so monstrous
+      a position, and predicating it on a bare, groundless suspicion? We do not
+      love slavery. Did you not know that before to-day, before this session
+      commenced? Have you not a perfect confidence that the civilized world is
+      against you on this subject of loving slavery or believing that it is the
+      best institution in the world? Why, sir, everything remains precisely as
+      it was a year ago. No great catastrophe has occurred. There is no recent
+      occasion to accuse us of anything. But all at once, when we meet here, a
+      kind of gloom pervades the whole community and the Senate Chamber.
+      Gentlemen rise and tell us that they are on the eve of breaking up this
+      Government, that seven or eight States are going to break off their
+      connection with the Government, retire from the Union, and set up a
+      hostile government of their own, and they look imploringly over to us, and
+      say to us: "You can prevent it; we can do nothing to prevent it; but it
+      all lies with you." Well, sir, what can we do to prevent it? You have not
+      even condescended to tell us what you want; but I think I see through the
+      speeches that I have heard from gentlemen on the other side. If we would
+      give up the verdict of the people, and take your platform, I do not know
+      but you would be satisfied with it. I think the Senator from Texas rather
+      intimated, and I think the Senator from Georgia more than intimated, that
+      if we would take what is exactly the Charleston platform on which Mr.
+      Breckenridge was placed, and give up that on which we won our victory, you
+      would grumblingly and hesitatingly be satisfied.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Iverson. I would prefer that the Senator would look over my remarks
+      before quoting them so confidently. I made no such statement as that. I
+      did not say that I would be satisfied with any such thing. I would not be
+      satisfied with it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Wade. I did not say that the Senator said so; but by construction I
+      gathered that from his speech. I do not know that I was right in it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Iverson. The Senator is altogether wrong in his construction.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Wade. Well, sir, I have now found what the Senator said on the other
+      point to which he called my attention a little while ago. Here it is:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Nor do we suppose that there will be any overt acts upon the part of Mr.
+      Lincoln. For one, I do not dread these overt acts. I do not propose to
+      wait for them. Why, sir, the power of this Federal Government could be so
+      exercised against the institution of slavery in the Southern States, as
+      that, without an overt act, the institution would not last ten years. We
+      know that, sir; and seeing the storm which is approaching, although it may
+      be seemingly in the distance, we are determined to seek our own safety and
+      security before it shall burst upon us and overwhelm us with its fury,
+      when we are not in a situation to defend ourselves."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      That is what the Senator said.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Iverson. Yes; that is what I said.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Wade. Well, then, you did not expect that Mr. Lincoln would commit any
+      overt act against the Constitution&mdash;that was not it&mdash;you were
+      not going to wait for that, but were going to proceed on your supposition
+      that probably he might; and that is the sense of what I said before.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, Mr. President, I have disavowed all intention on the part of the
+      Republican party to harm a hair of your heads anywhere. We hold to no
+      doctrine that can possibly work you an inconvenience. We have been
+      faithful to the execution of all the laws in which you have any interest,
+      as stands confessed on this floor by your own party, and as is known to me
+      without their confessions. It is not, then, that Mr. Lincoln is expected
+      to do any overt act by which you may be injured; you will not wait for
+      any; but anticipating that the Government may work an injury, you say you
+      will put an end to it, which means simply, that you intend either to rule
+      or ruin this Government. That is what your complaint comes to; nothing
+      else. We do not like your institution, you say. Well, we never liked it
+      any better than we do now. You might as well have dissolved the Union at
+      any other period as now, on that account, for we stand in relation to it
+      precisely as we have ever stood; that is, repudiating it among ourselves
+      as a matter of policy and morals, but nevertheless admitting that where it
+      is out of our jurisdiction, we have no hold upon it, and no designs upon
+      it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Then, sir, as there is nothing in the platform on which Mr. Lincoln was
+      elected of which you complain, I ask, is there anything in the character
+      of the President-elect of which you ought to complain? Has he not lived a
+      blameless life? Did he ever transgress any law? Has he ever committed any
+      violation of duty of which the most scrupulous can complain? Why, then,
+      your suspicions that he will? I have shown that you have had the
+      government all the time until, by some misfortune or maladministration,
+      you brought it to the very verge of destruction, and the wisdom of the
+      people had discovered that it was high time that the scepter should depart
+      from you, and be placed in more competent hands; I say that this being so,
+      you have no constitutional right to complain; especially when we disavow
+      any intention so to make use of the victory we have won as to injure you
+      at all.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This brings me, sir, to the question of compromises. On the first day of
+      this session, a Senator rose in his place and offered a resolution for the
+      appointment of a committee to inquire into the evils that exist between
+      the different sections, and to ascertain what can be done to settle this
+      great difficulty. That is the proposition substantially. I tell the
+      Senator that I know of no difficulty; and as to compromises, I had
+      supposed that we were all agreed that the day of compromises was at an
+      end. The most solemn compromises we have ever made have been violated
+      without a whereas. Since I have had a seat in this body, one of
+      considerable antiquity, that had stood for more than thirty years, was
+      swept away from your statute-books. When I stood here in the minority
+      arguing against it; when I asked you to withhold your hand; when I told
+      you it was a sacred compromise between the sections, and that when it was
+      removed we should be brought face to face with all that sectional
+      bitterness that has intervened; when I told you that it was a sacred
+      compromise which no man should touch with his finger, what was your reply?
+      That it was a mere act of Congress&mdash;nothing more, nothing less&mdash;and
+      that it could be swept away by the same majority that passed it. That was
+      true in point of fact, and true in point of law; but it showed the
+      weakness of compromises. Now, sir, I only speak for myself; and I say
+      that, in view of the manner in which other compromises have been
+      heretofore treated, I should hardly think any two of the Democratic party
+      would look each other in the face and say "compromise" without a smile.
+      (Laughter.) A compromise to be brought about by act of Congress, after the
+      experience we have had, is absolutely ridiculous.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      I say, then, that so far as I am concerned, I will yield to no compromise.
+      I do not come here begging, either. It would be an indignity to the people
+      that I represent if I were to stand here parleying as to the rights of the
+      party to which I belong. We have won our right to the Chief Magistracy of
+      this nation in the way that you have always won your predominance; and if
+      you are as willing to do justice to others as to exact it from them, you
+      would never raise an inquiry as to a committee for compromises. Here I
+      beg, barely for myself, to say one thing more. Many of you stand in an
+      attitude hostile to this Government; that is to say, you occupy an
+      attitude where you threaten that, unless we do so and so, you will go out
+      of this Union and destroy the Government. I say to you for myself, that,
+      in my private capacity, I never yielded to anything by way of threat, and
+      in my public capacity I have no right to yield to any such thing; and
+      therefore I would not entertain a proposition for any compromise, for, in
+      my judgment, this long, chronic controversy that has existed between us
+      must be met, and met upon the principles of the Constitution and laws, and
+      met now. I hope it may be adjusted to the satisfaction of all; and I know
+      no other way to adjust it, except that way which is laid down by the
+      Constitution of the United States. Whenever we go astray from that, we are
+      sure to plunge ourselves into difficulties. The old Constitution of the
+      United States, although commonly and frequently in direct opposition to
+      what I could wish, nevertheless, in my judgment, is the wisest and best
+      constitution that ever yet organized a free Government; and by its
+      provisions I am willing, and intend, to stand or fall. Like the Senator
+      from Mississippi, I ask nothing more. I ask no ingrafting upon it. I ask
+      nothing to be taken away from it. Under its provisions a nation has grown
+      faster than any other in the history of the world ever did before in
+      prosperity, in power, and in all that makes a nation great and glorious.
+      It has ministered to the advantages of this people; and now I am unwilling
+      to add or take away anything till I can see much clearer than I can now
+      that it wants either any addition or lopping off.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      The Senator from Texas says&mdash;it is not exactly his language&mdash;we
+      will force you to an ignominious treaty up in Faneuil Hall. Well, sir, you
+      may. We know you are brave; we understand your prowess; we want no fight
+      with you; but, nevertheless, if you drive us to that necessity, we must
+      use all the powers of this Government to maintain it intact in its
+      integrity. If we are overthrown, we but share the fate of a thousand other
+      Governments that have been subverted. If you are the weakest then you must
+      go to the wall; and that is all there is about it. That is the condition
+      in which we stand, provided a State sets herself up in opposition to the
+      General Government.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I say that is the way it seems to me, as a lawyer. I see no power in the
+      Constitution to release a Senator from this position. Sir, if there was
+      any other, if there was an absolute right of secession in the Constitution
+      of the United States when we stepped up there to take our oath of office,
+      why was there not an exception in that oath? Why did it not run "that we
+      would support the Constitution of the United States unless our State shall
+      secede before our term was out?" Sir, there is no such immunity. There is
+      no way by which this can be done that I can conceive of, except it is
+      standing upon the Constitution of the United States, demanding equal
+      justice for all, and vindicating the old flag of the Union. We must
+      maintain it, unless we are cloven down by superior force.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, sir, it may happen that you can make your way out of the Union, and
+      that, by levying war upon the Government, you may vindicate your right to
+      independence. If you should do so, I have a policy in my mind. No man
+      would regret more than myself that any portion of the people of these
+      United States should think themselves impelled, by grievances or anything
+      else, to depart out of this Union, and raise a foreign flag and a hand
+      against the General Government. If there was any just cause on God's earth
+      that I could see that was within my reach of honorable release from any
+      such pretended grievance, they should have it; but they set forth none; I
+      can see none. It is all a matter of prejudice, superinduced unfortunately,
+      I believe, as I intimated before, more because you have listened to the
+      enemies of the Republican party and what they said of us, while, from your
+      intolerance, you have shut out all light as to what our real principles
+      are. We have been called and branded in the North and in the South and
+      everywhere else, as John Brown men, as men hostile to your institutions,
+      as meditating an attack upon your institutions in your own States&mdash;a
+      thing that no Republican ever dreamed of or ever thought of, but has
+      protested against as often as the question has been up; but your people
+      believe it. No doubt they believe it because of the terrible excitement
+      and reign of terror that prevails there. No doubt they think so, but it
+      arises from false information, or the want of information&mdash;that is
+      all. Their prejudices have been appealed to until they have become
+      uncontrolled and uncontrollable.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, sir, if it shall be so; if that "glorious Union," as we call it,
+      under which the Government has so long lived and prospered, is now about
+      to come to a final end, as perhaps it may, I have been looking around to
+      see what policy we should adopt; and through that gloom which has been
+      mentioned on the other side, if you will have it so, I still see a
+      glorious future for those who stand by the old flag of the nation.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, I am for maintaining the Union of these States. I will sacrifice
+      everything but honor to maintain it. That glorious old flag of ours, by
+      any act of mine, shall never cease to wave over the integrity of this
+      Union as it is. But if they will not have it so, in this new, renovated
+      Government of which I have spoken, the 4th of July, with all its glorious
+      memories, will never be repealed. The old flag of 1776 will be in our
+      hands, and shall float over this nation forever; and this capital, that
+      some gentlemen said would be reserved for the Southern republic, shall
+      still be the capital. It was laid out by Washington; it was consecrated by
+      him; and the old flag that he vindicated in the Revolution shall still
+      float from the Capitol.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I say, sir, I stand by the Union of these States. Washington and his
+      compatriots fought for that good old flag. It shall never be hauled down,
+      but shall be the glory of the Government to which I belong, as long as my
+      life shall continue. To maintain it, Washington and his compatriots fought
+      for liberty and the rights of man. And here I will add that my own father,
+      although but a humble soldier, fought in the same great cause, and went
+      through hardships and privations sevenfold worse than death, in order to
+      bequeath it to his children. It is my inheritance. It was my protector in
+      infancy, and the pride and glory of my riper years; and, Mr. President,
+      although it may be assailed by traitors on every side, by the grace of
+      God, under its shadow I will die.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0017" id="link2H_4_0017">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF KENTUCKY. (BORN 1787, DIED 1863.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON THE CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE; UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 18, 1860.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I am gratified, Mr. President, to see in the various propositions which
+      have been made, such a universal anxiety to save the country from the
+      dangerous dissensions which now prevail; and I have, under a very serious
+      view and without the least ambitious feeling whatever connected with it,
+      prepared a series of constitutional amendments, which I desire to offer to
+      the Senate, hoping that they may form, in part at least, some basis for
+      measures that may settle the controverted questions which now so much
+      agitate our country. Certainly, sir, I do not propose now any elaborate
+      discussion of the subject. Before presenting these resolutions, however,
+      to the Senate, I desire to make a few remarks explanatory of them, that
+      the Senate may understand their general scope.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The questions of an alarming character are those which have grown out of
+      the controversy between the northern and southern sections of our country
+      in relation to the rights of the slave-holding States in the Territories
+      of the United States, and in relation to the rights of the citizens of the
+      latter in their slaves. I have endeavored by these resolutions to meet all
+      these questions and causes of discontent, and by amendments to the
+      Constitution of the United States, so that the settlement, if we happily
+      agree on any, may be permanent, and leave no cause for future controversy.
+      These resolutions propose, then, in the first place, in substance, the
+      restoration of the Missouri Compromise, extending the line throughout the
+      Territories of the United States to the eastern border of California,
+      recognizing slavery in all the territory south of that line, and
+      prohibiting slavery in all the territory north of it; with a provision,
+      however, that when any of those Territories, north or south, are formed
+      into States, they shall then be at liberty to exclude or admit slavery as
+      they please; and that, in the one case or the other, it shall be no
+      objection to their admission into the Union. In this way, sir, I propose
+      to settle the question, both as to territory and slavery, so far as it
+      regards the Territories of the United States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I propose, sir, also, that the Constitution be so amended as to declare
+      that Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery in the District of
+      Columbia so long as slavery exists in the States of Maryland and Virginia;
+      and that they shall have no power to abolish slavery in any of the places
+      under their special jurisdiction within the Southern States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      These are the constitutional amendments which I propose, and embrace the
+      whole of them in regard to the questions of territory and slavery. There
+      are other propositions in relation to grievances, and in relation to
+      controversies, which I suppose are within the jurisdiction of Congress,
+      and may be removed by the action of Congress. I propose, in regard to
+      legislative action, that the fugitive slave law, as it is commonly called,
+      shall be declared by the Senate to be a constitutional act, in strict
+      pursuance of the Constitution. I propose to declare that it has been
+      decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to be constitutional,
+      and that the Southern States are entitled to a faithful and complete
+      execution of that law, and that no amendment shall be made hereafter to it
+      which will impair its efficiency. But, thinking that it would not impair
+      its efficiency, I have proposed amendments to it in two particulars. I
+      have understood from gentlemen of the North that there is objection to the
+      provision giving a different fee where the commissioner decides to deliver
+      the slave to the claimant, from that which is given where he decides to
+      discharge the alleged slave; the law declares that in the latter case he
+      shall have but five dollars, while in the other he shall have ten dollars&mdash;twice
+      the amount in one case than in the other. The reason for this was very
+      obvious. In case he delivers the servant to his claimant he is required to
+      draw out a lengthy certificate, stating the principle and substantial
+      grounds on which his decision rests, and to return him either to the
+      marshal or to the claimant to remove him to the State from which he
+      escaped. It was for that reason that a larger fee was given to the
+      commissioner, where he had the largest service to perform. But, sir, the
+      act being viewed unfavorably and with great prejudice, in a certain
+      portion of our country, this was regarded as very obnoxious, because it
+      seemed to give an inducement to the commissioner to return the slave to
+      the master, as he thereby obtained the larger fee of ten dollars instead
+      of the smaller one of five dollars. I have said, let the fee be the same
+      in both cases.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have understood, furthermore, sir, that inasmuch as the fifth section of
+      that law was worded somewhat vaguely, its general terms had admitted of
+      the construction in the Northern States that all the citizens were
+      required, upon the summons of the marshal, to go with him to hunt up, as
+      they express it, and arrest the slave; and this is regarded as obnoxious.
+      They have said, "in the Southern States you make no such requisition on
+      the citizen"; nor do we, sir. The section, construed according to the
+      intention of the framers of it, I suppose, only intended that the marshal
+      should have the same right in the execution of process for the arrest of a
+      slave that he has in all other cases of process that he is required to
+      execute&mdash;to call on the <i>posse comitatus</i> for assistance where
+      he is resisted in the execution of his duty, or where, having executed his
+      duty by the arrest, an attempt is made to rescue the slave. I propose such
+      an amendment as will obviate this difficulty and limit the right of the
+      master and the duty of the citizen to cases where, as in regard to all
+      other process, persons may be called upon to assist in resisting
+      opposition to the execution of the laws.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have provided further, sir, that the amendment to the Constitution which
+      I here propose, and certain other provisions of the Constitution itself,
+      shall be unalterable, thereby forming a permanent and unchangeable basis
+      for peace and tranquillity among the people. Among the provisions in the
+      present Constitution, which I have by amendment proposed to render
+      unalterable, is that provision in the first article of the Constitution
+      which provides the rule for representation, including in the computation
+      three-fifths of the slaves. That is to be rendered unchangeable. Another
+      is the provision for the delivery of fugitive slaves. That is to be
+      rendered unchangeable.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      And with these provisions, Mr. President, it seems to me we have a solid
+      foundation upon which we may rest our hopes for the restoration of peace
+      and good-will among all the States of this Union, and all the people. I
+      propose,sir, to enter into no particular discussion. I have explained the
+      general scope and object of my proposition. I have provided further, which
+      I ought to mention, that, there having been some difficulties experienced
+      in the courts of the United States in the South in carrying into execution
+      the laws prohibiting the African slave trade, all additions and amendments
+      which may be necessary to those laws to render them effectual should be
+      immediately adopted by Congress, and especially the provision of those
+      laws which prohibit the importation of African slaves into the United
+      States. I have further provided it as a recommendation to all the States
+      of this Union, that whereas laws have been passed of an unconstitutional
+      character, (and all laws are of that character which either conflict with
+      the constitutional acts of Congress, or which in their operation hinder or
+      delay the proper execution of the acts of Congress,) which laws are null
+      and void, and yet, though null and void, they have been the source of
+      mischief and discontent in the country, under the extraordinary
+      circumstances in which we are placed; I have supposed that it would not be
+      improper or unbecoming in Congress to recommend to the States, both North
+      and South, the repeal of all such acts of theirs as were intended to
+      control, or intended to obstruct the operation of the acts of Congress, or
+      which in their operation and in their application have been made use of
+      for the purpose of such hindrance and opposition, and that they will
+      repeal these laws or make such explanations or corrections of them as to
+      prevent their being used for any such mischievous purpose.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I have endeavored to look with impartiality from one end of our country to
+      the other; I have endeavored to search up what appeared to me to be the
+      causes of discontent pervading the land; and, as far as I am capable of
+      doing so, I have endeavored to propose a remedy for them. I am far from
+      believing that, in the shape in which I present these measures, they will
+      meet with the acceptance of the Senate. It will be sufficiently gratifying
+      if, with all the amendments that the superior knowledge of the Senate may
+      make to them, they shall, to any effectual extent, quiet the country.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, great dangers surround us. The Union of these States is
+      dear to the people of the United States. The long experience of its
+      blessings, the mighty hopes of the future, have made it dear to the hearts
+      of the American people. Whatever politicians may say, whatever of
+      dissension may, in the heat of party politics, be created among our
+      people, when you come down to the question of the existence of the
+      Constitution, that is a question beyond all politics; that is a question
+      of life and death. The Constitution and the Union are the life of this
+      great people&mdash;yes, sir, the life of life. We all desire to preserve
+      them, North and South; that is the universal desire. But some of the
+      Southern States, smarting under what they conceive to be aggressions of
+      their Northern brethren and of the Northern States, are not contented to
+      continue this Union, and are taking steps, formidable steps, towards a
+      dissolution of the Union, and towards the anarchy and the bloodshed, I
+      fear, that are to follow. I say, sir, we are in the presence of great
+      events. We must elevate ourselves to the level of the great occasion. No
+      party warfare about mere party questions or party measures ought now to
+      engage our attention. They are left behind; they are as dust in the
+      balance. The life, the existence of our country, of our Union, is the
+      mighty question; and we must elevate ourselves to all those considerations
+      which belong to this high subject.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I hope, therefore, gentlemen will be disposed to bring the sincerest
+      spirit of conciliation, the sincerest spirit and desire to adjust all
+      these difficulties, and to think nothing of any little concessions of
+      opinions that they may make, if thereby the Constitution and the country
+      can be preserved.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The great difficulty here, sir&mdash;I know it; I recognize it as the
+      difficult question, particularly with the gentlemen from the North&mdash;is
+      the admission of this line of division for the territory, and the
+      recognition of slavery on the one side, and the prohibition of it on the
+      other. The recognition of slavery on the southern side of that line is the
+      great difficulty, the great question with them. Now, I beseech you to
+      think, and you, Mr. President, and all, to think whether, for such a
+      comparative trifle as that, the Union of this country is to be sacrificed.
+      Have we realized to ourselves the momentous consequences of such an event?
+      When has the world seen such an event? This is a mighty empire. Its
+      existence spreads its influence throughout the civilized world. Its
+      overthrow will be the greatest shock that civilization and free government
+      have received; more extensive in its consequences; more fatal to mankind
+      and to the great principles upon which the liberty of mankind depends,
+      than the French revolution with all its blood, and with all its war and
+      violence. And all for what? Upon questions concerning this line of
+      division between slavery and freedom? Why, Mr. President, suppose this day
+      all the Southern States, being refused this right; being refused this
+      partition; being denied this privilege, were to separate from the Northern
+      States, and do it peacefully, and then were to come to you peacefully and
+      say, "let there be no war between us; let us divide fairly the Territories
+      of the United States"; could the northern section of the country refuse so
+      just a demand? What would you then give them? What would be the fair
+      proportion? If you allowed them their fair relative proportion, would you
+      not give them as much as is now proposed to be assigned on the southern
+      side of that line, and would they not be at liberty to carry their slaves
+      there, if they pleased? You would give them the whole of that; and then
+      what would be its fate?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Is it upon the general principle of humanity, then, that you (addressing
+      Republican Senators) wish to put an end to slavery, or is it to be urged
+      by you as a mere topic and point of party controversy to sustain party
+      power? Surely I give you credit for looking at it upon broader and more
+      generous principles. Then, in the worst event, after you have encountered
+      disunion, that greatest of all political calamities to the people of this
+      country, and the disunionists come, the separating States come, and demand
+      or take their portion of the Territories, they can take, and will be
+      entitled to take, all that will now lie on the southern side of the line
+      which I have proposed. Then they will have a right to permit slavery to
+      exist in it; and what do you gain for the cause of anti-slavery? Nothing
+      whatever. Suppose you should refuse their demand, and claim the whole for
+      yourselves, that would be a flagrant injustice which you would not be
+      willing that I should suppose would occur. But if you did, what would be
+      the consequence? A State north and a State south, and all the States,
+      north and south, would be attempting to grasp at and seize this territory,
+      and to get all of it that they could. That would be the struggle, and you
+      would have war; and not only disunion, but all these fatal consequences
+      would follow from your refusal now to permit slavery to exist, to
+      recognize it as existing, on the southern side of the proposed line, while
+      you give to the people there the right to exclude it when they come to
+      form a State government, if such should be their will and pleasure.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now, gentlemen, in view of this subject, in view of the mighty
+      consequences, in view of the great events which are present before you,
+      and of the mighty consequences which are just now to take effect, is it
+      not better to settle the question by a division upon the line of the
+      Missouri Compromise? For thirty years we lived quietly and peacefully
+      under it. Our people, North and South, were accustomed to look at it as a
+      proper and just line. Can we not do so again? We did it then to preserve
+      the peace of the country. Now you see this Union in the most imminent
+      danger. I declare to you that it is my solemn conviction that unless
+      something be done, and something equivalent to this proposition, we shall
+      be a separated and divided people in six months from this time. That is my
+      firm conviction. There is no man here who deplores it more than I do; but
+      it is my sad and melancholy conviction that that will be the consequence.
+      I wish you to realize fully the danger. I wish you to realize fully the
+      consequences which are to follow. You can give increased stability to this
+      Union; you can give it an existence, a glorious existence, for great and
+      glorious centuries to come, by now setting it upon a permanent basis,
+      recognizing what the South considers as its rights; and this is the
+      greatest of them all; it is that you should divide the territory by this
+      line, and allow the people south of it to have slavery when they are
+      admitted into the Union as States, and to have it during the existence of
+      the territorial government. That is all. Is it not the cheapest price at
+      which such a blessing as this Union was ever purchased? You think,
+      perhaps, or some of you, that there is no danger, that it will but thunder
+      and pass away. Do not entertain such a fatal delusion. I tell you it is
+      not so. I tell you that as sure as we stand here disunion will progress. I
+      fear it may swallow up even old Kentucky in its vortex&mdash;as true a
+      State to the Union as yet exists in the whole Confederacy&mdash;unless
+      something be done; but that you will have disunion, that anarchy and war
+      will follow it, that all this will take place in six months, I believe as
+      confidently as I believe in your presence. I want to satisfy you of the
+      fact.
+    </p>
+    <hr />
+    <p>
+      The present exasperation; the present feeling of disunion, is the result
+      of a long-continued controversy on the subject of slavery and of
+      territory. I shall not attempt to trace that controversy; it is
+      unnecessary to the occasion, and might be harmful. In relation to such
+      controversies, I will say, though, that all the wrong is never on one
+      side, or all the right on the other. Right and wrong, in this world, and
+      in all such controversies, are mingled together. I forbear now any
+      discussion or any reference to the right or wrong of the controversy, the
+      mere party controversy; but in the progress of party, we now come to a
+      point where party ceases to deserve consideration, and the preservation of
+      the Union demands our highest and our greatest exertions. To preserve the
+      Constitution of the country is the highest duty of the Senate, the highest
+      duty of Congress&mdash;to preserve it and to perpetuate it, that we may
+      hand down the glories which we have received to our children and to our
+      posterity, and to generations far beyond us. We are, Senators, in
+      positions where history is to take notice of the course we pursue.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      History is to record us. Is it to record that when the destruction of the
+      Union was imminent; when we saw it tottering to its fall; when we saw
+      brothers arming their hands for hostility with one another, we stood
+      quarrelling about points of party politics; about questions which we
+      attempted to sanctify and to consecrate by appealing to our conscience as
+      the source of them? Are we to allow such fearful catastrophes to occur
+      while we stand trifling away our time? While we stand thus, showing our
+      inferiority to the great and mighty dead, showing our inferiority to the
+      high positions which we occupy, the country may be destroyed and ruined;
+      and to the amazement of all the world, the great Republic may fall
+      prostrate and in ruins, carrying with it the very hope of that liberty
+      which we have heretofore enjoyed; carrying with it, in place of the peace
+      we have enjoyed, nothing but revolution and havoc and anarchy. Shall it be
+      said that we have allowed all these evils to come upon our country, while
+      we were engaged in the petty and small disputes and debates to which I
+      have referred? Can it be that our name is to rest in history with this
+      everlasting stigma and blot upon it?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Sir, I wish to God it was in my power to preserve this Union by renouncing
+      or agreeing to give up every conscientious and other opinion. I might not
+      be able to discard it from my mind; I am under no obligation to do that. I
+      may retain the opinion, but if I can do so great a good as to preserve my
+      country and give it peace, and its institutions and its Union stability, I
+      will forego any action upon my opinions. Well, now, my friends (addressing
+      the Republican Senators), that is all that is asked of you. Consider it
+      well, and I do not distrust the result. As to the rest of this body, the
+      gentlemen from the South, I would say to them, can you ask more than this?
+      Are you bent on revolution, bent on disunion. God forbid it. I cannot
+      believe that such madness possesses the American people. This gives
+      reasonable satisfaction. I can speak with confidence only of my own State.
+      Old Kentucky will be satisfied with it, and she will stand by the Union
+      and die by the Union if this satisfaction be given. Nothing shall seduce
+      her. The clamor of no revolution, the seductions and temptations of no
+      revolution, will tempt her to move one step. She has stood always by the
+      side of the Constitution; she has always been devoted to it, and is this
+      day. Give her this satisfaction, and I believe all the States of the South
+      that are not desirous of disunion as a better thing than the Union and the
+      Constitution, will be satisfied and will adhere to the Union, and we shall
+      go on again in our great career of national prosperity and national glory.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, sir, it is not necessary for me to speak to you of the consequences
+      that will follow disunion. Who of us is not proud of the greatness we have
+      achieved? Disunion and separation destroy that greatness. Once disunited,
+      we are no longer great. The nations of the earth who have looked upon you
+      as a formidable Power, and rising to untold and immeasurable greatness in
+      the future, will scoff at you. Your flag, that now claims the respect of
+      the world, that protects American property in every port and harbor of the
+      world, that protects the rights of your citizens everywhere, what will
+      become of it? What becomes of its glorious influence? It is gone; and with
+      it the protection of American citizens and property. To say nothing of the
+      national honor which it displayed to all the world, the protection of your
+      rights, the protection of your property abroad is gone with that national
+      flag, and we are hereafter to conjure and contrive different flags for our
+      different republics according to the feverish fancies of revolutionary
+      patriots and disturbers of the peace of the world. No, sir; I want to
+      follow no such flag. I want to preserve the union of my country. We have
+      it in our power to do so, and we are responsible if we do not do it.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I do not despair of the Republic. When I see before me Senators of so much
+      intelligence and so much patriotism, who have been so honored by their
+      country, sent here as the guardians of that very union which is now in
+      question, sent here as the guardians of our national rights, and as
+      guardians of that national flag, I cannot despair; I cannot despond. I
+      cannot but believe that they will find some means of reconciling and
+      adjusting the rights of all parties, by concessions, if necessary, so as
+      to preserve and give more stability to the country and to its
+      institutions.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0018" id="link2H_4_0018">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      ROBERT TOOMBS,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1810&mdash;DIED 1885.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION; IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY
+      7, 1861. MR. PRESIDENT AND SENATORS:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The success of the Abolitionists and their allies, under the name of the
+      Republican party, has produced its logical results already. They have for
+      long years been sowing dragons' teeth, and have finally got a crop of
+      armed men. The Union, sir, is dissolved. That is an accomplished fact in
+      the path of this discussion that men may as well heed. One of your
+      confederates has already, wisely, bravely, boldly, confronted public
+      danger, and she is only ahead of many of her sisters because of her
+      greater facility for speedy action. The greater majority of those sister
+      States, under like circumstances, consider her cause as their cause; and I
+      charge you in their name to-day, "Touch not Saguntum." It is not only
+      their cause, but it is a cause which receives the sympathy and will
+      receive the support of tens and hundreds of thousands of honest patriotic
+      men in the non-slave-holding States, who have hither-to maintained
+      constitutional rights, and who respect their oaths, abide by compacts, and
+      love justice. And while this Congress, this Senate, and this House of
+      Representatives, are debating the constitutionality and the expediency of
+      seceding from the Union, and while the perfidious authors of this mischief
+      are showering down denunciations upon a large portion of the patriotic men
+      of this country, those brave men are coolly and calmly voting what you
+      call revolution&mdash;ay, sir, doing better than that: arming to defend
+      it. They appealed to the Constitution, they appealed to justice, they
+      appealed to fraternity, until the Constitution, justice, and fraternity
+      were no longer listened to in the legislative halls of their country, and
+      then, sir, they prepared for the arbitrament of the sword; and now you see
+      the glittering bayonet, and you hear the tramp of armed men from your
+      Capitol to the Rio Grande. It is a sight that gladdens the eyes and cheers
+      the heart of other millions ready to second them.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Inasmuch, sir, as I have labored earnestly, honestly, sincerely, with
+      these men to avert this necessity so long as I deemed it possible, and
+      inasmuch as I heartily approve their present conduct of resistance, I deem
+      it my duty to state their case to the Senate, to the country, and to the
+      civilized world.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Senators, my countrymen have demanded no new government; they have
+      demanded no new constitution. Look to their records at home and here from
+      the beginning of this national strife until its consummation in the
+      disruption of the empire, and they have not demanded a single thing except
+      that you shall abide by the Constitution of the United States; that
+      constitutional rights shall be respected, and that justice shall be done.
+      Sirs, they have stood by your Constitution; they have stood by all its
+      requirements; they have performed all its duties unselfishly,
+      uncalculatingly, disinterestedly, until a party sprang up in this country
+      which endangered their social system&mdash;a party which they arraign, and
+      which they charge before the American people and all mankind, with having
+      made proclamation of outlawry against four thousand millions of their
+      property in the Territories of the United States; with having put them
+      under the ban of the empire in all the States in which their institutions
+      exist, outside the protection of Federal laws; with having aided and
+      abetted insurrection from within and invasion from without, with the view
+      of subverting those institutions, and desolating their homes and their
+      firesides. For these causes they have taken up arms. I shall proceed to
+      vindicate the justice of their demands, the patriotism of their conduct. I
+      will show the injustice which they suffer and the rightfulness of their
+      resistance.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I shall not spend much time on the question that seems to give my
+      honorable friend (Mr. Crittenden) so much concern&mdash;the constitutional
+      right of a State to secede from this Union. Perhaps he will find out after
+      a while that it is a fact accomplished. You have got it in the South
+      pretty much both ways. South Carolina has given it to you regularly,
+      according to the approved plan. You are getting it just below there (in
+      Georgia), I believe, irregularly, outside of the law, without regular
+      action. You can take it either way. You will find armed men to defend
+      both. I have stated that the discontented States of this Union have
+      demanded nothing but clear, distinct, unequivocal, well-acknowledged
+      constitutional rights; rights affirmed by the highest judicial tribunals
+      of their country; rights older than the Constitution; rights which are
+      planted upon the immutable principles of natural justice; rights which
+      have been affirmed by the good and the wise of all countries, and of all
+      centuries. We demand no power to injure any man. We demand no right to
+      injure our confederate States. We demand no right to interfere with their
+      institutions, either by word or deed. We have no right to disturb their
+      peace, their tranquillity, their security. We have demanded of them
+      simply, solely&mdash;nothing else&mdash;to give us equality, security, and
+      tranquillity. Give us these, and peace restores itself. Refuse them, and
+      take what you can get.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I will now read my own demands, acting under my own convictions, and the
+      universal judgment of my countrymen. They are considered the demands of an
+      extremist. To hold to a constitutional right now makes one considered as
+      an extremist&mdash;I believe that is the appellation these traitors and
+      villains, North and South, employ. I accept their reproach rather than
+      their principles. Accepting their designation of treason and rebellion,
+      there stands before them as good a traitor, and as good a rebel as ever
+      descended from revolutionary loins.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      What do the rebels demand? First, "that the people of the United States
+      shall have an equal right to emigrate and settle in the present or any
+      future acquired territories, with whatever property they may possess
+      (including slaves), and be securely protected in its peaceable enjoyment
+      until such Territory may be admitted as a State into the Union, with or
+      without slavery, as she may determine, on an equality with all existing
+      States." That is our territorial demand. We have fought for this Territory
+      when blood was its price. We have paid for it when gold was its price. We
+      have not proposed to exclude you, though you have contributed very little
+      of blood or money. I refer especially to New England. We demand only to go
+      into those Territories upon terms of equality with you, as equals in this
+      great Confederacy, to enjoy the common property of the whole Union, and
+      receive the protection of the common government, until the Territory is
+      capable of coming into the Union as a sovereign State, when it may fix its
+      own institutions to suit itself.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The second proposition is, "that property in slaves shall be entitled to
+      the same protection from the Government of the United States, in all of
+      its departments, everywhere, which the Constitution confers the power upon
+      it to extend to any other property, provided nothing herein contained
+      shall be construed to limit or restrain the right now belonging to every
+      State to prohibit, abolish, or establish and protect slavery within its
+      limits." We demand of the common government to use its granted powers to
+      protect our property as well as yours. For this protection we pay as much
+      as you do. This very property is subject to taxation. It has been taxed by
+      you and sold by you for taxes. The title to thousands and tens of
+      thousands of slaves is derived from the United States. We claim that the
+      Government, while the Constitution recognizes our property for the
+      purposes of taxation, shall give it the same protection that it gives
+      yours. Ought it not to be so? You say no. Every one of you upon the
+      committee said no. Your Senators say no. Your House of Representatives
+      says no. Throughout the length and breadth of your conspiracy against the
+      Constitution, there is but one shout of no! This recognition of this right
+      is the price of my allegiance. Withhold it, and you do not get my
+      obedience. This is the philosophy of the armed men who have sprung up in
+      this country. Do you ask me to support a government that will tax my
+      property; that will plunder me; that will demand my blood, and will not
+      protect me? I would rather see the population of my native State laid six
+      feet beneath her sod than they should support for one hour such a
+      government. Protection is the price of obedience everywhere, in all
+      countries. It is the only thing that makes government respectable. Deny it
+      and you cannot have free subjects or citizens; you may have slaves.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We demand, in the next place, "that persons committing crimes against
+      slave property in one State, and fleeing to another, shall be delivered up
+      in the same manner as persons committing crimes against other property,
+      and that the laws of the State from which such persons flee shall be the
+      test of criminality." That is another one of the demands of an extremist
+      and rebel. The Constitution of the United States, article four, section
+      two, says:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who
+      shall flee from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand of
+      the executive authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up
+      to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime." But the
+      non-slave-holding States, treacherous to their oaths and compacts, have
+      steadily refused, if the criminal only stole a negro, and that negro was a
+      slave, to deliver him up. It was refused twice on the requisition of my
+      own State as long as twenty-two years ago. It was refused by Kent and by
+      Fairfield, Governors of Maine, and representing, I believe, each of the
+      then Federal parties. We appealed then to fraternity, but we submitted;
+      and this constitutional right has been practically a dead letter from that
+      day to this. The next case came up between us and the State of New York,
+      when the present senior Senator (Mr. Seward) was the Governor of that
+      State; and he refused it. Why? He said it was not against the laws of New
+      York to steal a negro, and therefore he would not comply with the demand.
+      He made a similar refusal to Virginia. Yet these are our confederates;
+      these are our sister States! There is the bargain; there is the compact.
+      You have sworn to it. Both these Governors swore to it. The Senator from
+      New York swore to it. The Governor of Ohio swore to it when he was
+      inaugurated. You cannot bind them by oaths.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Yet they talk to us of treason; and I suppose they expect to whip freemen
+      into loving such brethren! They will have a good time in doing it!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It is natural we should want this provision of the Constitution carried
+      out. The Constitution says slaves are property; the Supreme Court says so;
+      the Constitution says so. The theft of slaves is a crime; they are a
+      subject-matter of felonious asportation. By the text and letter of the
+      Constitution you agreed to give them up. You have sworn to do it, and you
+      have broken your oaths. Of course, those who have done so look out for
+      pretexts. Nobody expected them do otherwise. I do not think I ever saw a
+      perjurer, however bald and naked, who could not invent some pretext to
+      palliate his crime, or who could not, for fifteen shillings, hire an Old
+      Bailey lawyer to invent some for him. Yet this requirement of the
+      Constitution is another one of the extreme demands of an extremist and a
+      rebel.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The next stipulation is that fugitive slaves shall be surrendered under
+      the provisions of the fugitive-slave act of 1850, without being entitled
+      either to a writ of <i>habeas corpus</i>, or trial by jury, or other
+      similar obstructions of legislation, in the State to which he may flee.
+      Here is the Constitution:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof,
+      escaping into an-other, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation
+      therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered
+      up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This language is plain, and everybody understood it the same way for the
+      first forty years of your government. In 1793, in Washington's time, an
+      act was passed to carry out this provision. It was adopted unanimously in
+      the Senate of the United States, and nearly so in the House of
+      Representatives. Nobody then had invented pretexts to show that the
+      Constitution did not mean a negro slave. It was clear; it was plain. Not
+      only the Federal courts, but all the local courts in all the States,
+      decide that this was a constitutional obligation. How is it now? The North
+      sought to evade it; following the instincts of their natural character,
+      they commenced with the fraudulent fiction that fugitives were entitled to
+      <i>habeas corpus</i>, entitled to trial by jury in the State to which they
+      fled. They pretended to believe that our fugitive slaves were entitled to
+      more rights than their white citizens; perhaps they were right, they know
+      one another better than I do. You may charge a white man with treason, or
+      felony, or other crime, and you do not require any trial by jury before he
+      is given up; there is nothing to determine but that he is legally charged
+      with a crime and that he fled, and then he is to be delivered up upon
+      demand. White people are delivered up every day in this way; but not
+      slaves. Slaves, black people, you say, are entitled to trial by jury; and
+      in this way schemes have been invented to defeat your plain constitutional
+      obligations. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The next demand made on behalf of the South is, "that Congress shall pass
+      effective laws for the punishment of all persons in any of the States who
+      shall in any manner aid and abet invasion or insurrection in any other
+      State, or commit any other act against the laws of nations, tending to
+      disturb the tranquillity of the people or government of any other State."
+      That is a very plain principle. The Constitution of the United States now
+      requires, and gives Congress express power, to define and punish piracies
+      and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the laws of
+      nations. When the honorable and distinguished Senator from Illinois (Mr.
+      Douglas) last year introduced a bill for the purpose of punishing people
+      thus offending under that clause of the Constitution, Mr. Lincoln, in his
+      speech at New York, which I have before me, declared that it was a
+      "sedition bill "; his press and party hooted at it. So far from
+      recognizing the bill as intended to carry out the Constitution of the
+      United States, it received their jeers and jibes. The Black Republicans of
+      Massachusetts elected the admirer and eulogist of John Brown's courage as
+      their governor, and we may suppose he will throw no impediments in the way
+      of John Brown's successors. The epithet applied to the bill of the Senator
+      from Illinois is quoted from a deliberate speech delivered by Lincoln in
+      New York, for which, it was stated in the journals, according to some
+      resolution passed by an association of his own party, he was paid a couple
+      of hundred dollars. The speech should therefore have been deliberate.
+      Lincoln denounced that bill. He places the stamp of his condemnation upon
+      a measure intended to promote the peace and security of confederate
+      States. He is, therefore, an enemy of the human race, and deserves the
+      execration of all mankind.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      We demand these five propositions. Are they not right? Are they not just?
+      Take them in detail, and show that they are not warranted by the
+      Constitution, by the safety of our people, by the principles of eternal
+      justice. We will pause and consider them; but mark me, we will not let you
+      decide the question for us. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Senators, the Constitution is a compact. It contains all our obligations
+      and the duties of the Federal Government. I am content and have ever been
+      content to sustain it. While I doubt its perfection, while I do not
+      believe it was a good compact, and while I never saw the day that I would
+      have voted for it as a proposition <i>de novo</i>, yet I am bound to it by
+      oath and by that common prudence which would induce men to abide by
+      established forms rather than to rush into unknown dangers. I have given
+      to it, and intend to give to it, unfaltering support and allegiance, but I
+      choose to put that allegiance on the true ground, not on the false idea
+      that anybody's blood was shed for it. I say that the Constitution is the
+      whole compact. All the obligations, all the chains that fetter the limbs
+      of my people, are nominated in the bond, and they wisely excluded any
+      conclusion against them, by declaring that "the powers not granted by the
+      Constitution to the United States, or forbidden by it to the States,
+      belonged to the States respectively or the people." Now I will try it by
+      that standard; I will subject it to that test. The law of nature, the law
+      of justice, would say&mdash;and it is so expounded by the publicists&mdash;that
+      equal rights in the common property shall be enjoyed. Even in a monarchy
+      the king cannot prevent the subjects from enjoying equality in the
+      disposition of the public property. Even in a despotic government this
+      principle is recognized. It was the blood and the money of the whole
+      people (says the learned Grotius, and say all the publicists) which
+      acquired the public property, and therefore it is not the property of the
+      sovereign. This right of equality being, then, according to justice and
+      natural equity, a right belonging to all States, when did we give it up?
+      You say Congress has a right to pass rules and regulations concerning the
+      Territory and other property of the United States. Very well. Does that
+      exclude those whose blood and money paid for it? Does "dispose of" mean to
+      rob the rightful owners? You must show a better title than that, or a
+      better sword than we have.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      But, you say, try the right. I agree to it. But how? By our judgment? No,
+      not until the last resort. What then; by yours? No, not until the same
+      time. How then try it? The South has always said, by the Supreme Court.
+      But that is in our favor, and Lincoln says he "will not stand that
+      judgment." Then each must judge for himself of the mode and manner of
+      redress. But you deny us that privilege, and finally reduce us to
+      accepting your judgment. The Senator from Kentucky comes to your aid, and
+      says he can find no constitutional right of secession. Perhaps not; but
+      the Constitution is not the place to look for State rights. If that right
+      belongs to independent States, and they did not cede it to the Federal
+      Government, it is reserved to the States, or to the people. Ask your new
+      commentator where he gets the right to judge for us. Is it in the bond?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Northern doctrine was, many years ago, that the Supreme Court was the
+      judge. That was their doctrine in 1800. They denounced Madison for the
+      report of 1799, on the Virginia resolutions; they denounced Jefferson for
+      framing the Kentucky resolutions, because they were presumed to impugn the
+      decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States; and they declared
+      that that court was made, by the Constitution, the ultimate and supreme
+      arbiter. That was the universal judgment&mdash;the declaration of every
+      free State in this Union, in answer to the Virginia resolutions of 1798,
+      or of all who did answer, even including the State of Delaware, then under
+      Federal control.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Supreme Court have decided that, by the Constitution, we have a right
+      to go to the Territories and be protected there with our property. You
+      say, we cannot decide the compact for ourselves. Well, can the Supreme
+      Court decide it for us? Mr. Lincoln says he does not care what the Supreme
+      Court decides, he will turn us out anyhow. He says this in his debate with
+      the honorable member from Illinois [Mr. Douglas]. I have it before me. He
+      said he would vote against the decision of the Supreme Court. Then you did
+      not accept that arbiter. You will not take my construction; you will not
+      take the Supreme Court as an arbiter; you will not take the practice of
+      the government; you will not take the treaties under Jefferson and
+      Madison; you will not take the opinion of Madison upon the very question
+      of prohibition in 1820. What, then, will you take? You will take nothing
+      but your own judgment; that is, you will not only judge for yourselves,
+      not only discard the court, discard our construction, discard the practice
+      of the government, but you will drive us out, simply because you will it.
+      Come and do it! You have sapped the foundations of society; you have
+      destroyed almost all hope of peace. In a compact where there is no common
+      arbiter, where the parties finally decide for themselves, the sword alone
+      at last becomes the real, if not the constitutional, arbiter. Your party
+      says that you will not take the decision of the Supreme Court. You said so
+      at Chicago; you said so in committee; every man of you in both Houses says
+      so. What are you going to do? You say we shall submit to your
+      construction. We shall do it, if you can make us; but not otherwise, or in
+      any other manner. That is settled. You may call it secession, or you may
+      call it revolution; but there is a big fact standing before you, ready to
+      oppose you&mdash;that fact is, freemen with arms in their hands. The cry
+      of the Union will not disperse them; we have passed that point; they
+      demand equal rights; you had better heed the demand. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0019" id="link2H_4_0019">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF OHIO. (BORN, 1824-DIED, 1889.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON SECESSION; DOUGLAS DEMOCRATIC OPINION; IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
+      JANUARY 14, 1861. MR. CHAIRMAN:
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I speak from and for the capital of the greatest of the States of the
+      great West. That potential section is beginning to be appalled at the
+      colossal strides of revolution. It has immense interests at stake in this
+      Union, as well from its position as its power and patriotism. We have had
+      infidelity to the Union before, but never in such a fearful shape. We had
+      it in the East during the late war with England. Even so late as the
+      admission of Texas, Massachusetts resolved herself out of the Union. That
+      resolution has never been repealed, and one would infer, from much of her
+      conduct, that she did not regard herself as bound by our covenant. Since
+      1856, in the North, we have had infidelity to the Union, more insidious
+      infractions of the Constitution than by open rebellion. Now, sir, as a
+      consequence, in part, of these very infractions, we have rebellion itself,
+      open and daring, in terrific proportions, with dangers so formidable as to
+      seem almost remediless. * * *'
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I would not exaggerate the fearful consequences of dissolution. It is the
+      breaking up of a federative Union, but it is not like the breaking up of
+      society. It is not anarchy. A link may fall from the chain, and the link
+      may still be perfect, though the chain have lost its length and its
+      strength. In the uniformity of commercial regulations, in matters of war
+      and peace, postal arrangements, foreign relations, coinage, copyrights,
+      tariff, and other Federal and national affairs, this great government may
+      be broken; but in most of the essential liberties and rights which
+      government is the agent to establish and protect, the seceding State has
+      no revolution, and the remaining States can have none. This arises from
+      that refinement of our polity which makes the States the basis of our
+      instituted labor. Greece was broken by the Persian power, but her
+      municipal institutions remained. Hungary lost her national crown, but her
+      home institutions remain. South Carolina may preserve her constituted
+      domestic authority, but she must be content to glimmer obscurely remote
+      rather than shine and revolve in a constellated band. She even goes out by
+      the ordinance of a so-called sovereign convention, content to lose by her
+      isolation that youthful, vehement, exultant, progressive life, which is
+      our NATIONALITY! She foregoes the hopes, the boasts, the flag, the music,
+      all the emotions, all the traits, and all the energies which, when
+      combined in our United States, have won our victories in war and our
+      miracles of national advancement. Her Governor, Colonel Pickens, in his
+      inaugural, regretfully "looks back upon the inheritance South Carolina had
+      in the common glories and triumphant power of this wonderful confederacy,
+      and fails to find language to express the feelings of the human heart as
+      he turns from the contemplation." The ties of brotherhood, interest,
+      lineage, and history are all to be severed. No longer are we to salute a
+      South Carolinian with the "<i>idem sententiam de republica</i>," which
+      makes unity and nationality. What a prestige and glory are here dimmed and
+      lost in the contaminated reason of man!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Can we realize it? Is it a masquerade, to last for a night, or a reality
+      to be dealt with, with the world's rough passionate handling? It is sad
+      and bad enough; but let us not over-tax our anxieties about it as yet. It
+      is not the sanguinary regime of the French revolution; not the rule of
+      assignats and guillotine; not the cry of "<i>Vivent les Rouges! A mort les
+      gendarmes!</i>" but as yet, I hope I may say, the peaceful attempt to
+      withdraw from the burdens and benefits of the Republic. Thus it is unlike
+      every other revolution. Still it is revolution. It may, according as it is
+      managed, involve consequences more terrific than any revolution since
+      government began.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      If the Federal Government is to be maintained, its strength must not be
+      frittered away by conceding the theory of secession. To concede secession
+      as a right, is to make its pathway one of roses and not of thorns. I would
+      not make its pathway so easy. If the government has any strength for its
+      own preservation, the people demand it should be put forth in its civil
+      and moral forces. Dealing, however, with a sensitive public sentiment, in
+      which this strength reposes, it must not be rudely exercised. It should be
+      the iron hand in the glove of velvet. Firmness should be allied with
+      kindness. Power should assert its own prerogative, but in the name of law
+      and love. If these elements are not thus blended in our policy, as the
+      Executive proposes, our government will prove either a garment of shreds
+      or a coat of mail. We want neither. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Before we enter upon a career of force, let us exhaust every effort at
+      peace. Let us seek to excite love in others by the signs of love in
+      ourselves. Let there be no needless provocation and strife. Let every
+      reasonable attempt at compromise be considered. Otherwise we have a
+      terrible alternative. War, in this age and in this country, sir, should be
+      the <i>ultima ratio</i>. Indeed, it may well be questioned whether there
+      is any reason in it for war. What a war! Endless in its hate, without
+      truce and without mercy. If it ended ever, it would only be after a
+      fearful struggle; and then with a heritage of hate which would forever
+      forbid harmony. * * *
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Small States and great States; new States and old States; slave States and
+      free States; Atlantic States and Pacific States; gold and silver States;
+      iron and copper States; grain States and lumber States; river States and
+      lake States;&mdash;all having varied interests and advantages, would seek
+      superiority in armed strength. Pride, animosity, and glory would inspire
+      every movement. God shield our country from such a fulfilment of the
+      prophecy of the revered founders of the Union! Our struggle would be no
+      short, sharp struggle. Law, and even religion herself, would become false
+      to their divine purpose. Their voice would no longer be the voice of God,
+      but of his enemy. Poverty, ignorance, oppression, and its hand-maid,
+      cowardice, breaking out into merciless cruelty; slaves false; freemen
+      slaves, and society itself poisoned at the cradle and dishonored at the
+      grave;&mdash;its life, now so full of blessings, would be gone with the
+      life of a fraternal and united Statehood. What sacrifice is too great to
+      prevent such a calamity? Is such a picture overdrawn? Already its outlines
+      appear. What means the inaugural of Governor Pickens, when he says: "From
+      the position we may occupy toward the Northern States, as well as from our
+      own internal structure of society, the government may, from necessity,
+      become strongly military in its organization"? What mean the minute-men of
+      Governor Wise? What the Southern boast that they have a rifle or shot-gun
+      to each family?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      What means the Pittsburgh mob? What this alacrity to save Forts Moultrie
+      and Pinckney? What means the boast of the Southern men of being the
+      best-armed people in the world, not counting the two hundred thousand
+      stand of United States arms stored in Southern arsenals? Already Georgia
+      has her arsenals, with eighty thousand muskets. What mean these lavish
+      grants of money by Southern Legislatures to buy more arms? What mean these
+      rumors of arms and force on the Mississippi? These few facts have already
+      verified the prophecy of Madison as to a disunited Republic.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. Speaker, he alone is just to his country, he alone has a mind unwarped
+      by section, and a memory unparalyzed by fear, who warns against
+      precipitancy. He who could hurry this nation to the rash wager of battle
+      is not fit to hold the seat of legislation. What can justify the breaking
+      up of our institutions into belligerent fractions? Better this marble
+      Capitol were levelled to the dust; better were this Congress struck dead
+      in its deliberations; better an immolation of every ambition and passion
+      which here have met to shake the foundations of society than the hazard of
+      these consequences! * * * I appeal to Southern men,who contemplate a step
+      so fraught with hazard and strife, to pause. Clouds are about us! There is
+      lightning in their frown! Cannot we direct it harmlessly to the earth? The
+      morning and evening prayer of the people I speak for in such weakness
+      rises in strength to that Supreme Ruler who, in noticing the fall of a
+      sparrow, cannot disregard the fall of a nation, that our States may
+      continue to be as they have been&mdash;one; one in the unreserve of a
+      mingled national being; one as the thought of God is one!
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      <a name="linkimage-0007" id="linkimage-0007">
+      <!-- IMG --></a>
+    </p>
+    <div class="fig" style="width:80%">
+      <img src="images/davis.jpg" alt="Jefferson Davis " width="100%" /><br />
+    </div>
+    <p>
+      <a name="link2H_4_0020" id="link2H_4_0020">
+      <!--  H2 anchor --> </a>
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 4em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+    <h2>
+      JEFFERSON DAVIS,
+    </h2>
+    <h3>
+      OF MISSISSIPPI. (BORN 1808, DIED 1889.)
+    </h3>
+    <p>
+      ON WITHDRAWAL FROM THE UNION; SECESSIONIST OPINION; UNITED STATES SENATE,
+      JANUARY 21, 1861.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I
+      have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn
+      ordinance of her people in convention assembled, has declared her
+      separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my
+      functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I
+      should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I
+      will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into
+      argument, and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it
+      were otherwise; and yet it seems to become me to say something on the part
+      of the State I here represent, on an occasion so solemn as this.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for many
+      years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty, the right
+      of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not believed
+      there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi was acting
+      without sufficient provocation, or without an existing necessity, I should
+      still, under my theory of the Government, because of my allegiance to the
+      State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by her action. I, however,
+      may be permitted to say that I do think that she has justifiable cause,
+      and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people before that act was
+      taken, counselled them then that if the state of things which they
+      apprehended should exist when the convention met, they should take the
+      action which they have now adopted.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with the
+      advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to disregard
+      its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the law. Such is
+      not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often confounded, are
+      indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a remedy which it is
+      sought to apply within the Union, and against the agent of the States. It
+      is only to be justified when the agent has violated his constitutional
+      obligation, and a State, assuming to judge for itself, denies the right of
+      the agent thus to act, and appeals to the other States of the Union for a
+      decision; but when the States themselves, and when the people of the
+      States, have so acted as to convince us that they will not regard our
+      constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time, arises the
+      doctrine of secession in its practical application.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often
+      arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of
+      nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his
+      deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some remedy
+      for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South
+      Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the doctrine of
+      nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be within the limits
+      of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of
+      bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified
+      upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none
+      denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better comprehension of
+      the theory of our Government, and the inalienable rights of the people of
+      the States, will prevent any one from denying that each State is a
+      sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it has made to any agent
+      whomsoever.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi,
+      believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by
+      their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the
+      important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the
+      Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that the
+      name of the great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth, has
+      been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase "to
+      execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied to the
+      case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of the Union.
+      That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be executed
+      over the United States, and upon the people of the United States. They
+      have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion of terms, at
+      least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which cites that
+      expression for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union.
+      You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the purpose of gentlemen,
+      they may make war against a State which has withdrawn from the Union; but
+      there are no laws of the United States to be executed within the limits of
+      a seceded State. A State finding herself in the condition in which
+      Mississippi has judged she is, in which her safety requires that she
+      should provide for the maintenance of her rights out of the Union,
+      surrenders all the benefits (and they are known to be many), deprives
+      herself of the advantages (they are known to be great), severs all the
+      ties of affection (and they are close and enduring) which have bound her
+      to the Union; and thus divesting herself of every benefit, taking upon
+      herself every burden, she claims to be exempt from any power to execute
+      the laws of the United States within her limits.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the
+      bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife and to
+      be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in
+      Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of
+      egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the
+      case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing the
+      opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct is
+      based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated line
+      of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from the
+      Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar or one
+      man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory of the
+      kind associations which once existed between her and the other States.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief that
+      we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers
+      bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present decision.
+      She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created free and
+      equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social institutions;
+      and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been invoked to maintain
+      the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration of
+      Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and purposes for
+      which it was made. The communities were declaring their independence; the
+      people of those communities were asserting that no man was born&mdash;to
+      use the language of Mr. Jefferson&mdash;booted and spurred to ride over
+      the rest of mankind; that men were created equal&mdash;meaning the men of
+      the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no
+      man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by which
+      power and place descended to families, but that all stations were equally
+      within the grasp of each member of the body-politic. These were the great
+      principles they announced; these were the purposes for which they made
+      their declaration; these were the end to which their enunciation was
+      directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it that
+      among the items of arraignment made against George III. was that he
+      endeavored to do just what the North had been endeavoring of late to do&mdash;to
+      stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration announced that
+      the negroes were free and equal, how was the Prince to be arraigned for
+      stirring up insurrection among them? And how was this to be enumerated
+      among the high crimes which caused the colonies to sever their connection
+      with the mother country? When our Constitution was formed, the same idea
+      was rendered more palpable, for there we find provision made for that very
+      class of persons as property; they were not put upon the footing of
+      equality with white men&mdash;not even upon that of paupers and convicts;
+      but, so far as representation was concerned, were discriminated against as
+      a lower caste, only to be represented in the numerical proportion of
+      three-fifths.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we recur
+      to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when you deny
+      them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a Government
+      which, thus perverted, threatens to be destructive of our rights, we but
+      tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our independence, and
+      take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to others, not to injure
+      any section of the country, not even for our own pecuniary benefit; but
+      from the high and solemn motive of defending and protecting the rights we
+      inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to transmit unshorn to our
+      children.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my
+      constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you, Senators
+      from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever sharp
+      discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now say, in
+      the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure, is the
+      feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you represent. I
+      therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say I hope, and they
+      hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must part. They may be
+      mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have been in the past, if
+      you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on every portion of the
+      country; and if you will have it thus, we will invoke the God of our
+      fathers, who delivered them from the power of the lion, to protect us from
+      the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our trust in God, and in our
+      own firm hearts and strong arms, we will vindicate the right as best we
+      may.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a
+      great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have
+      served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of offense
+      there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile
+      remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed,
+      or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in this
+      hour of our parting to offer you my apology for any pain which, in heat of
+      discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the remembrance
+      of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of making the only
+      reparation in my power for any injury offered.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the
+      occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains for me to bid you a
+      final adieu.
+    </p>
+    <div style="height: 6em;">
+      <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
+    </div>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+***** This file should be named 15393-h.htm or 15393-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/3/9/15393/
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+</pre>
+  </body>
+</html>
diff --git a/15393-h/images/chase.jpg b/15393-h/images/chase.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..517a231
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/chase.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/cover.jpg b/15393-h/images/cover.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..97dbfff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/cover.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/davis.jpg b/15393-h/images/davis.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8689301
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/davis.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/douglas.jpg b/15393-h/images/douglas.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fbbe129
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/douglas.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/everett.jpg b/15393-h/images/everett.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..03196d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/everett.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/seward.jpg b/15393-h/images/seward.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..da4e3d7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/seward.jpg
diff --git a/15393-h/images/titlepage3.jpg b/15393-h/images/titlepage3.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8acdf0d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393-h/images/titlepage3.jpg
diff --git a/15393.txt b/15393.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c5bc4cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,6686 @@
+Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4)
+       Studies In American Political History (1897)
+
+Author: Various
+
+Release Date: March 17, 2005 [EBook #15393]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+AMERICAN ELOQUENCE
+
+
+STUDIES IN AMERICAN POLITICAL HISTORY
+
+
+
+Edited with Introduction by Alexander Johnston
+
+Reedited by James Albert Woodburn
+
+
+
+Volume III. (of 4)
+
+V. --THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE (Continued from Vol. II.)
+VI.--SECESSION.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+
+     INTRODUCTION
+
+
+     SALMON PORTLAND CHASE On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, February 3, 1854.
+
+     EDWARD EVERETT On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, February 8, 1854.
+
+     STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS On The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
+     --United States Senate, March 3, 1854.
+
+     CHARLES SUMNER On The Crime Against Kansas
+     --United States Senate, May 20, 1856.
+
+     PRESTON S. BROOKS On The Sumner Assault
+     --House Of Representatives, July 14, 1856.
+
+     JUDAH P. BENJAMIN On The Property Doctrine And Slavery In The
+     Territories --United States Senate, March 11, 1858.
+
+     ABRAHAM LINCOLN On The Dred Scott Decision
+     --Springfield, Ills., June 26, 1857.
+
+     ABRAHAM LINCOLN On His Nomination To The United States Senate
+     --At The Republican State Convention, June 16,1858.
+
+     THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
+     DOUGLAS In Reply To Lincoln--Freeport, Ills., August 27, 1858.
+
+     WILLIAM H. SEWARD
+     On The Irrepressible Conflict--Rochester, N. Y., October 25, 1858.
+
+
+VI.-SECESSION.
+
+     JOHN PARKER HALE On Secession; Moderate Republican Opinion
+     --United  States Senate, December 5, 1860.
+
+     ALFRED IVERSON On Secession; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States Senate, December 5, 1860.
+
+     BENJAMIN WADE On Secession, And The State Of The Union; Radical
+     Republican Opinion--United States Senate, December 17, 1860.
+
+     JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN On The Crittenden Compromise; Border State
+     Unionist Opinion--United States Senate, December 18, 1860.
+
+     ROBERT TOOMBS On Secession; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States  Senate, January 7, 1861.
+
+     SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX On Secession; Douglas Democratic Opinion
+     --House Of Representatives, January 14, 1861.
+
+     JEFFERSON DAVIS On Withdrawal From The Union; Secessionist Opinion
+     --United States Senate, January 21, 1861.
+
+
+
+LIST OF PORTRAITS
+
+     WILLIAM H. SEWARD -- Frontispiece From a photograph.
+
+     SALMON P. CHASE -- From a daguerreotype, engraved by F. E. JONES.
+
+     EDWARD EVERETT -- From a painting by R. M. STAIGG.
+
+     STEPHEN A. DOUGLASS -- From a steel engraving.
+
+     JEFFERSON DAVIS -- From a photograph.
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION TO THE REVISED VOLUME.
+
+
+The third volume of the American Eloquence is devoted to the
+continuation of the slavery controversy and to the progress of the
+secession movement which culminated in civil war.
+
+To the speeches of the former edition of the volume have been added:
+Everett on the Nebraska bill; Benjamin on the Property Doctrine and
+Slavery in the Territories; Lincoln on the Dred Scott Decision; Wade
+on Secession and the State of the Union; Crittenden on the Crittenden
+Compromise; and Jefferson Davis's notable speech in which he took leave
+of the United State Senate, in January, 1861.
+
+Judged by its political consequences no piece of legislation in American
+history is of greater historical importance than the Kansas-Nebraska
+bill. By that act the Missouri Compromise was repealed and the final
+conflict entered upon with the slave power. In addition to the speeches
+of Douglas and Chase, representing the best word on the opposing sides
+of the famous Nebraska controversy, the new volume includes the notable
+contribution by Edward Everett to the Congressional debates on that
+subject. Besides being an orator of high rank and of literary renown,
+Everett represented a distinct body of political opinion. As a
+conservative Whig he voiced the sentiment of the great body of the
+followers of Webster and Clay who had helped to establish the Compromise
+of 1850 and who wished to leave that settlement undisturbed. The student
+of the Congressional struggles of 1854 will be led by a speech like that
+of Everett to appreciate that moderate and conservative spirit toward
+slavery which would not persist in any anti-slavery action having a
+tendency to disturb the harmony of the Union. That this conservative
+opinion looked upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise as an act of
+aggression in the interest of slavery is indicated by Everett's speech,
+and this gives the speech its historic significance.
+
+Judah P. Benjamin may be said to have been the ablest legal defender of
+slavery in public life during the decade of 1850-60. His speech on
+the right of property in slaves and the right of slavery to national
+protection in the territories was probably the ablest on that side of
+the controversy. Lincoln's speech on the Dred Scott Decision has been
+substituted for one by John C. Breckinridge on the same subject; this
+will serve to bring into his true proportions this great leader of the
+combined anti-slavery forces. No voice, in the beginnings of secession
+and disunion, could better reflect the positive and uncompromising
+Republicanism of the Northwest than that of Wade. The speech from him
+which we have appropriated is in many ways worthy of the attention of
+the historical student.
+
+We may look to Crittenden as the best expositor of the Crittenden
+Compromise, the leading attempt at compromise and conciliation in the
+memorable session of Congress of 1860-61. Crittenden's subject and
+personality add historical prominence to his speech. The Crittenden
+Compromise would probably have been accepted by Southern leaders like
+Davis and Toombs if it had been acceptable to the Republican leaders
+of the North. The failure of that Compromise made disunion and war
+inevitable. Jefferson Davis' memorable farewell to the Senate, following
+the assured failure of compromise, seems a fitting close to the period
+of our history which brings us to the eve of the Civil War.
+
+The introduction of Professor Johnston on "Secession" is retained as
+originally prepared. A study of the speeches, with this introduction
+and the appended notes, will give a fair idea of the political issues
+dividing the country in the important years immediately preceding the
+war. Limitations of space prevent the publication of the full speeches
+from the exhaustive Congressional debates, but in several instances
+where it has seemed especially desirable omissions from the former
+volume have been supplied with the purpose of more fully representing
+the subjects and the speakers. To the reader who is interested in
+historical politics in America these productions of great political
+leaders need no recommendation from the editor.
+
+J. A. W.
+
+
+
+
+SALMON PORTLAND CHASE,
+
+OF OHIO. (BORN 1808, DIED 1873.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL; SENATE,
+
+FEBRUARY 3, 1854.
+
+
+The bill for the organization of the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas
+being under consideration--Mr. CHASE submitted the following amendment:
+
+Strike out from section 14 the words "was superseded by the principles
+of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and;
+so that the clause will read:
+
+"That the Constitution, and all laws of the United States which are not
+locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and effect within the
+said Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except
+the eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri
+into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which is hereby declared
+inoperative."
+
+
+Mr. CHASE said:
+
+Mr. President, I had occasion, a few days ago to expose the utter
+groundlessness of the personal charges made by the Senator from Illinois
+(Mr. Douglas) against myself and the other signers of the Independent
+Democratic Appeal. I now move to strike from this bill a statement
+which I will to-day demonstrate to be without any foundation in fact
+or history. I intend afterward to move to strike out the whole clause
+annulling the Missouri prohibition.
+
+I enter into this debate, Mr. President, in no spirit of personal
+unkindness. The issue is too grave and too momentous for the indulgence
+of such feelings. I see the great question before me, and that question
+only.
+
+Sir, these crowded galleries, these thronged lobbies, this full
+attendance of the Senate, prove the deep, transcendent interest of the
+theme.
+
+A few days only have elapsed since the Congress of the United States
+assembled in this Capitol. Then no agitation seemed to disturb the
+political elements. Two of the great political parties of the country,
+in their national conventions, had announced that slavery agitation was
+at an end, and that henceforth that subject was not to be discussed in
+Congress or out of Congress. The President, in his annual message, had
+referred to this state of opinion, and had declared his fixed purpose to
+maintain, as far as any responsibility attached to him, the quiet of the
+country. Let me read a brief extract from that message:
+
+"It is no part of my purpose to give prominence to any subject which may
+properly be regarded as set at rest by the deliberate judgment of the
+people. But while the present is bright with promise, and the future
+full of demand and inducement for the exercise of active intelligence,
+the past can never be without useful lessons of admonition and
+instruction. If its dangers serve not as beacons, they will evidently
+fail to fulfil the object of a wise design. When the grave shall have
+closed over all those who are now endeavoring to meet the obligations of
+duty, the year 1850 will be recurred to as a period filled with anxious
+apprehension. A successful war had just terminated. Peace brought with
+it a vast augmentation of territory. Disturbing questions arose, bearing
+upon the domestic institutions of one portion of the Confederacy, and
+involving the constitutional rights of the States. But, notwithstanding
+differences of opinion and sentiment, which then existed in relation
+to details and specific provisions, the acquiescence of distinguished
+citizens, whose devotion to the Union can never be doubted, had given
+renewed vigor to our institutions, and restored a sense of repose and
+security to the public mind throughout the Confederacy. That this repose
+is to suffer no shock during my official term, if I have power to avert
+it, those who placed me here may be assured."
+
+The agreement of the two old political parties, thus referred to by the
+Chief Magistrate of the country, was complete, and a large majority of
+the American people seemed to acquiesce in the legislation of which he
+spoke.
+
+A few of us, indeed, doubted the accuracy of these statements, and the
+permanency of this repose. We never believed that the acts of 1850 would
+prove to be a permanent adjustment of the slavery question. We believed
+no permanent adjustment of that question possible except by a return to
+that original policy of the fathers of the Republic, by which slavery
+was restricted within State limits, and freedom, without exception or
+limitation, was intended to be secured to every person outside of State
+limits and under the exclusive jurisdiction of the General Government.
+
+But, sir, we only represented a small, though vigorous and growing,
+party in the country. Our number was small in Congress. By some we were
+regarded as visionaries--by some as factionists; while almost all agreed
+in pronouncing us mistaken.
+
+And so, sir, the country was at peace. As the eye swept the entire
+circumference of the horizon and upward to mid-heaven not a cloud
+appeared; to common observation there was no mist or stain upon the
+clearness of the sky.
+
+But suddenly all is changed. Rattling thunder breaks from the cloudless
+firmament. The storm bursts forth in fury. Warring winds rush into
+conflict.
+
+     "_Eurus, Notusque ruunt, creberque procellis Africus_."
+
+Yes, sir, "_creber procellis Africus_"--the South wind thick with storm.
+And now we find ourselves in the midst of an agitation, the end and
+issue of which no man can foresee.
+
+Now, sir, who is responsible for this renewal of strife and controversy?
+Not we, for we have introduced no question of territorial slavery into
+Congress--not we who are denounced as agitators and factionists. No,
+sir: the quietists and the finalists have become agitators; they who
+told us that all agitation was quieted, and that the resolutions of the
+political conventions put a final period to the discussion of slavery.
+
+This will not escape the observation of the country. It is Slavery that
+renews the strife. It is Slavery that again wants room. It is Slavery,
+with its insatiate demands for more slave territory and more slave
+States.
+
+And what does Slavery ask for now? Why, sir, it demands that a
+time-honored and sacred compact shall be rescinded--a compact which has
+endured through a whole generation--a compact which has been
+universally regarded as inviolable, North and South--a compact, the
+constitutionality of which few have doubted, and by which all have
+consented to abide.
+
+It will not answer to violate such a compact without a pretext. Some
+plausible ground must be discovered or invented for such an act; and
+such a ground is supposed to be found in the doctrine which was advanced
+the other day by the Senator from Illinois, that the compromise acts of
+1850 "superseded "the prohibition of slavery north of 36 deg. 30', in the
+act preparatory for the admission of Missouri. Ay,sir, "superseded" is
+the phrase--"superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850,
+commonly called the compromise measures."
+
+It is against this statement, untrue in fact, and without foundation in
+history, that the amendment which I have proposed is directed.
+
+Sir, this is a novel idea. At the time when these measures were before
+Congress in 1850, when the questions involved in them were discussed
+from day to day, from week to week, and from month to month, in this
+Senate chamber, who ever heard that the Missouri prohibition was to be
+superseded? What man, at what time, in what speech, ever suggested the
+idea that the acts of that year were to affect the Missouri compromise?
+The Senator from Illinois the other day invoked the authority of Henry
+Clay--that departed statesman, in respect to whom, whatever may be the
+differences of political opinion, none question that, among the great
+men of this country, he stood proudly eminent. Did he, in the report
+made by him as the chairman of the Committee of Thirteen, or in any
+speech in support of the compromise acts, or in any conversation in the
+committee, or out of the committee, ever even hint at this doctrine of
+supersedure? Did any supporter or any opponent of the compromise
+acts ever vindicate or condemn them on the ground that the Missouri
+prohibition would be affected by them? Well, sir, the compromise acts
+were passed. They were denounced North, and they were denounced South.
+Did any defender of them at the South ever justify his support of them
+upon the ground that the South had obtained through them the repeal of
+the Missouri prohibition? Did any objector to them at the North ever
+even suggest as a ground of condemnation that that prohibition was swept
+away by them? No, sir! No man, North or South, during the whole of
+the discussion of those acts here, or in that other discussion which
+followed their enactment throughout the country, ever intimated any such
+opinion.
+
+Now, sir, let us come to the last session of Congress. A Nebraska bill
+passed the House and came to the Senate, and was reported from the
+Committee on Territories by the Senator from Illinois, as its chairman.
+Was there any provision in it which even squinted toward this notion of
+repeal by supersedure? Why, sir, Southern gentlemen opposed it on
+the very ground that it left the Territory under the operation of the
+Missouri prohibition. The Senator from Illinois made a speech in defence
+of it. Did he invoke Southern support upon the ground that it superseded
+the Missouri prohibition? Not at all. Was it opposed or vindicated
+by anybody on any such ground? Every Senator knows the contrary. The
+Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison), now the President of this body,
+made a speech upon the bill, in which he distinctly declared that the
+Missouri prohibition was not repealed, and could not be repealed.
+
+I will send this speech to the Secretary, and ask him to read the
+paragraphs marked. The Secretary read as follows:
+
+"I will now state to the Senate the views which induced me to oppose
+this proposition in the early part of this session.
+
+"I had two objections to it. One was that the Indian title in that
+Territory had not been extinguished, or, at least, a very small portion
+of it had been. Another was the Missouri compromise, or, as it is
+commonly called, the slavery restriction. It was my opinion at that
+time--and I am not now very clear on that subject--that the law of
+Congress, when the State of Missouri was admitted into the Union,
+excluding slavery from the Territory of Louisiana north of 36 deg. 30',
+would be enforced in that Territory unless it was specially rescinded,
+and whether that law was in accordance with the Constitution of the
+United States or not, it would do its work, and that work would be to
+preclude slave-holders from going into that Territory. But when I came
+to look into that question, I found that there was no prospect, no
+hope, of a repeal of the Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that
+Territory. Now, sir, I am free to admit, that at this moment, at this
+hour, and for all time to come, I should oppose the organization or
+the settlement of that Territory unless my constituents, and
+the constituents of the whole South--of the slave States of the
+Union,--could go into it upon the same footing, with equal rights and
+equal privileges, carrying that species of property with them as other
+people of this Union. Yes, sir, I acknowledge that that would have
+governed me, but I have no hope that the restriction will ever be
+repealed.
+
+"I have always been of opinion that the first great error committed
+in the political history of this country was the ordinance of 1787,
+rendering the Northwest Territory free territory. The next great error
+was the Missouri compromise. But they are both irremediable. There is no
+remedy for them. We must submit to them. I am prepared to do it. It is
+evident that the Missouri compromise cannot be re-pealed. So far as that
+question is concerned, we might as well agree to the admission of this
+Territory now as next year, or five or ten years hence."--_Congressional
+Globe_, Second Session, 32d Cong., vol. xxvi., page 1113.
+
+That, sir, is the speech of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison),
+whose authority, I think, must go for something upon this question. What
+does he say? "When I came to look into that question"--of the possible
+repeal of the Missouri prohibition--that was the question he was looking
+into--"I found that there was no prospect, no hope, of a repeal of the
+Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that Territory." And yet,
+sir, at that very moment, according to this new doctrine of the Senator
+from Illinois, it had been repealed three years!
+
+Well, the Senator from Missouri said further, that if he thought it
+possible to oppose this restriction successfully, he never would consent
+to the organization of the territory until it was rescinded. But, said
+he, "I acknowledge that I have no hope that the restriction will ever be
+repealed." Then he made some complaint, as other Southern gentlemen have
+frequently done, of the ordinance of 1787, and the Missouri prohibition;
+but went on to say: "They are both irremediable; there is no remedy for
+them; we must submit to them; I am prepared to do it; it is evident that
+the Missouri compromise cannot be repealed."
+
+Now, sir, when was this said? It was on the morning of the 4th of March,
+just before the close of the last session, when that Nebraska bill,
+reported by the Senator from Illinois, which proposed no repeal, and
+suggested no supersedure, was under discussion. I think, sir, that all
+this shows pretty clearly that up to the very close of the last session
+of Congress nobody had ever thought of a repeal by supersedure. Then
+what took place at the commencement of the present session? The Senator
+from Iowa, early in December, introduced a bill for the organization
+of the Territory of Nebraska. I believe it was the same bill which was
+under discussion here at the last session, line for line, word for word.
+If I am wrong, the Senator will correct me.
+
+Did the Senator from Iowa, then, entertain the idea that the Missouri
+prohibition had been superseded? No, sir, neither he nor any other man
+here, so far as could be judged from any discussion, or statement, or
+remark, had received this notion.
+
+Well, on the 4th day of January, the Committee on Territories, through
+their chairman, the Senator from Illinois, made a report on the
+territorial organization of Nebraska; and that report was accompanied by
+a bill. Now, sir, on that 4th day of January, just thirty days ago, did
+the Committee on Territories entertain the opinion that the compromise
+acts of 1850 superseded the Missouri prohibition? If they did, they were
+very careful to keep it to themselves. We will judge the committee by
+their own report. What do they say in that? In the first place they
+describe the character of the controversy, in respect to the Territories
+acquired from Mexico. They say that some believed that a Mexican law
+prohibiting slavery was in force there, while others claimed that the
+Mexican law became inoperative at the moment of acquisition, and that
+slave-holders could take their slaves into the Territory and hold
+them there under the provisions of the Constitution. The Territorial
+Compromise acts, as the committee tell us, steered clear of these
+questions. They simply provided that the States organized out of these
+Territories might come in with or without slavery, as they should elect,
+but did not affect the question whether slaves could or could not be
+introduced before the organization of State governments. That question
+was left entirely to judicial decision.
+
+Well, sir, what did the committee propose to do with the Nebraska
+Territory? In respect to that, as in respect to the Mexican Territory,
+differences of opinion exist in relation to the introduction of slaves.
+There are Southern gentlemen who contend that notwithstanding the
+Missouri prohibition, they can take their slaves into the territory
+covered by it, and hold them there by virtue of the Constitution. On the
+other hand the great majority of the American people, North and South,
+believe the Missouri prohibition to be constitutional and effectual.
+Now, what did the committee pro-pose? Did they propose to repeal the
+prohibition? Did they suggest that it had been superseded? Did they
+advance any idea of that kind? No, sir. This is their language:
+
+"Under this section, as in the case of the Mexican law in New Mexico
+and Utah, it is a disputed point whether slavery is prohibited in the
+Nebraska country by valid enactment. The decision of this question
+involves the constitutional power of Congress to pass laws prescribing
+and regulating the domestic institutions of the various Territories
+of the Union. In the opinion of those eminent statesmen who hold that
+Congress is invested with no rightful authority to legislate upon the
+subject of slavery in the Territories, the eighth section of the act
+preparatory to the admission of Missouri is null and void, while the
+prevailing sentiment in a large portion of the Union sustains the
+doctrine that the Constitution of the United States secures to every
+citizen an inalienable right to move into any of the Territories with
+his property, of whatever kind and description, and to hold and
+enjoy the same under the sanction of law. Your committee do not
+feel themselves called upon to enter into the discussion of these
+controverted questions. They involve the same grave issues which
+produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the fearful struggle
+of 1850."
+
+This language will bear repetition:
+
+"Your committee do not feel themselves called upon to enter into the
+discussion of these controverted questions. They involve the same grave
+issues which produced the agitation, the sectional strife, and the
+fearful struggle of 1850."
+
+And they go on to say:
+
+"Congress deemed it wise and prudent to refrain from deciding the
+matters in controversy then, either by affirming or repealing the
+Mexican laws, or by an act declaratory of the true intent of the
+Constitution and the extent of the protection afforded by it to slave
+property in the Territories; so your committee are not prepared now
+to recommend a departure from the course pursued on that memorable
+occasion, either by affirming or repealing the eighth section of
+the Missouri act, or by any act declaratory of the meaning of the
+Constitution in respect to the legal points in dispute."
+
+Mr. President, here are very remarkable facts. The Committee on
+Territories declared that it was not wise, that it was not prudent, that
+it was not right, to renew the old controversy, and to arouse agitation.
+They declared that they would abstain from any recommendation of a
+repeal of the prohibition, or of any provision declaratory of the
+construction of the Constitution in respect to the legal points in
+dispute.
+
+Mr. President, I am not one of those who suppose that the question
+between Mexican law and the slave-holding claims was avoided in the
+Utah and New Mexico Act; nor do I think that the introduction into the
+Nebraska bill of the provisions of those acts in respect to slavery
+would leave the question between the Missouri prohibition and the same
+slave-holding claims entirely unaffected.' I am of a very different
+opinion. But I am dealing now with the report of the Senator from
+Illinois, as chairman of the committee, and I show, beyond all
+controversy, that that report gave no countenance whatever to the
+doctrine of repeal by supersedure.
+
+Well, sir, the bill reported by the committee was printed in the
+Washington Sentinel on Saturday, January 7th. It contained twenty
+sections; no more, no less. It contained no provisions in respect to
+slavery, except those in the Utah and New Mexico bills. It left those
+provisions to speak for themselves. This was in harmony with the report
+of the committee. On the 10th of January--on Tuesday--the act appeared
+again in the Sentinel; but it had grown longer during the interval.
+It appeared now with twenty-one sections. There was a statement in
+the paper that the twenty-first section had been omitted by a clerical
+error.
+
+But, sir, it is a singular fact that this twenty-first section is
+entirely out of harmony with the committee's report. It undertakes to
+determine the effect of the provision in the Utah and New Mexico bills.
+It declares, among other things, that all questions pertaining
+to slavery in the Territories, and in the new States to be formed
+therefrom, are to be left to the decision of the people residing
+therein, through their appropriate representatives. This provision, in
+effect, repealed the Missouri prohibition, which the committee, in their
+report, declared ought not to be done. Is it possible, sir, that this
+was a mere clerical error? May it not be that this twenty-first section
+was the fruit of some Sunday work, between Saturday the 7th, and Tuesday
+the 10th?
+
+But, sir, the addition of this section, it seems, did not help the bill.
+It did not, I suppose, meet the approbation of Southern gentlemen,
+who contended that they have a right to take their slaves into the
+Territories, notwithstanding any prohibition, either by Congress or by a
+Territorial Legislature. I dare say it was found that the votes of these
+gentlemen could not be had for the bill with that clause in it. It was
+not enough that the committee had abandoned their report, and added
+this twenty-first section, in direct contravention of its reasonings and
+principles. The twenty-first section itself must be abandoned, and the
+repeal of the Missouri prohibition placed in a shape which would not
+deny the slave-holding claim.
+
+The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Dixon), on the 16th of January, submitted
+an amendment which came square up to repeal, and to the claim. That
+amendment, probably, produced some fluttering and some consultation. It
+met the views of Southern Senators, and probably determined the shape
+which the bill has finally assumed. Of the various mutations which it
+has undergone, I can hardly be mistaken in attributing the last to the
+amendment of the Senator from Kentucky. That there is no effect without
+a cause, is among our earliest lessons in physical philosophy, and I
+know of no causes which will account for the remarkable changes which
+the bill underwent after the 16th of January, other than that amendment,
+and the determination of Southern Senators to support it, and to
+vote against any provision recognizing the right of any Territorial
+Legislature to prohibit the introduction of slavery.
+
+It was just seven days, Mr. President, after the Senator from Kentucky
+had offered his amendment, that a fresh amendment was reported from the
+Committee on Territories, in the shape of a new bill, enlarged to forty
+sections. This new bill cuts off from the proposed Territory half
+a degree of latitude on the south, and divides the residue into
+two Territories--the southern Territory of Kansas, and the northern
+Territory of Nebraska. It applies to each all the provisions of the
+Utah and New Mexico bills; it rejects entirely the twenty-first
+clerical-error section, and abrogates the Missouri prohibition by the
+very singular provision, which I will read:
+
+"The Constitution and all laws of the United States which are not
+locally inapplicable shall have the same force and effect within the
+said Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except
+the eighth section of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri
+into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded by the
+principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise
+measures, and is therefore declared inoperative."
+
+Doubtless, Mr. President, this provision operates as a repeal of the
+prohibition. The Senator from Kentucky was right when he said it was in
+effect the equivalent of his amendment. Those who are willing to break
+up and destroy the old compact of 1820 can vote for this bill with full
+assurance that such will be its effect. But I appeal to them not to
+vote for this supersedure clause. I ask them not to incorporate into
+the legislation of the country a declaration which every one knows to be
+wholly untrue.
+
+I have said that this doctrine of supersedure is new. I have now proved
+that it is a plant of but ten days' growth. It was never seen or heard
+of until the 23d day of January, 1854. It was upon that day that this
+tree of Upas was planted; we already see its poison fruits. * * *
+
+The truth is, that the compromise acts of 1850 were not intended to
+introduce any principles of territorial organization applicable to any
+other Territory except that covered by them. The professed object of
+the friends of the compromise acts was to compose the whole slavery
+agitation. There were various matters of complaint. The non-surrender
+of fugitives from service was one. The existence of slavery and the
+slave-trade here in this District and elsewhere, under the exclusive
+jurisdiction of Congress, was another. The apprehended introduction of
+slavery into the Territories furnished other grounds of controversy.
+The slave States complained of the free States, and the free States
+complained of the slave States. It was supposed by some that this whole
+agitation might be stayed, and finally put at rest by skilfully adjusted
+legislation. So, sir, we had the omnibus bill, and its appendages the
+fugitive-slave bill and the District slave-trade suppression bill.
+To please the North--to please the free States--California was to be
+admitted, and the slave depots here in the District were to be broken
+up. To please the slave States, a stringent fugitive-slave act was to
+be passed, and slavery was to have a chance to get into the new
+Territories. The support of the Senators and Representatives from
+Texas was to be gained by a liberal adjustment of boundary, and by the
+assumption of a large portion of their State debt. The general result
+contemplated was a complete and final adjustment of all questions
+relating to slavery. The acts passed. A number of the friends of the
+acts signed a compact pledging themselves to support no man for any
+office who would in any way renew the agitation. The country was
+required to acquiesce in the settlement as an absolute finality. No man
+concerned in carrying those measures through Congress, and least of all
+the distinguished man whose efforts mainly contributed to their success,
+ever imagined that in the Territorial acts, which formed a part of the
+series, they were planting the germs of a new agitation. Indeed, I have
+proved that one of these acts contained an express stipulation which
+precludes the revival of the agitation in the form in which it is now
+thrust upon the country, without manifest disregard of the provisions of
+those acts themselves.
+
+I have thus proved beyond controversy that the averment of the bill,
+which my amendment proposes to strike out, is untrue. Senators, will you
+unite in a statement which you know to be contradicted by the history of
+the country? Will you incorporate into a public statute an affirmation
+which is contradicted by every event which attended or followed the
+adoption of the compromise acts? Will you here, acting under your high
+responsibility as Senators of the States, assert as a fact, by a solemn
+vote, that which the personal recollection of every Senator who was here
+during the discussion of those compromise acts disproves? I will not
+believe it until I see it. If you wish to break up the time-honored
+compact embodied in the Missouri compromise, transferred into the joint
+resolution for the annexation of Texas, preserved and affirmed by these
+compromise acts themselves, do it openly--do it boldly. Repeal the
+Missouri prohibition. Repeal it by a direct vote. Do not repeal it by
+indirection. Do not "declare" it "inoperative," "because superseded by
+the principles of the legislation of 1850."
+
+Mr. President, three great eras have marked the history of this country
+in respect to slavery. The first may be characterized as the Era of
+ENFRANCHISEMENT. It commenced with the earliest struggles for national
+independence. The spirit which inspired it animated the hearts and
+prompted the efforts of Washington, of Jefferson, of Patrick Henry, of
+Wythe, of Adams, of Jay, of Hamilton, of Morris--in short, of all the
+great men of our early history. All these hoped for, all these labored
+for, all these believed in, the final deliverance of the country
+from the curse of slavery. That spirit burned in the Declaration of
+Independence, and inspired the provisions of the Constitution, and the
+Ordinance of 1787. Under its influence, when in full vigor, State after
+State provided for the emancipation of the slaves within their limits,
+prior to the adoption of the Constitution. Under its feebler influence
+at a later period, and during the administration of Mr. Jefferson, the
+importation of slaves was prohibited into Mississippi and Louisiana, in
+the faint hope that those Territories might finally become free States.
+Gradually that spirit ceased to influence our public councils, and lost
+its control over the American heart and the American policy. Another
+era succeeded, but by such imperceptible gradations that the lines which
+separate the two cannot be traced with absolute precision. The facts of
+the two eras meet and mingle as the currents of confluent streams mix
+so imperceptibly that the observer cannot fix the spot where the meeting
+waters blend.
+
+This second era was the Era of CONSERVATISM. Its great maxim was to
+preserve the existing condition. Men said: Let things remain as they
+are; let slavery stand where it is; exclude it where it is not; refrain
+from disturbing the public quiet by agitation; adjust all difficulties
+that arise, not by the application of principles, but by compromises.
+
+It was during this period that the Senator tells us that slavery was
+maintained in Illinois, both while a Territory and after it became a
+State, in despite of the provisions of the ordinance. It is true, sir,
+that the slaves held in the Illinois country, under the French law,
+were not regarded as absolutely emancipated by the provisions of the
+ordinance. But full effect was given to the ordinance in excluding
+the introduction of slaves, and thus the Territory was preserved
+from eventually becoming a slave State. The few slave-holders in
+the Territory of Indiana, which then included Illinois, succeeded in
+obtaining such an ascendency in its affairs, that repeated applications
+were made not merely by conventions of delegates, but by the Territorial
+Legislature itself, for a suspension of the clause in the ordinance
+prohibiting slavery. These applications were reported upon by John
+Randolph, of Virginia, in the House, and by Mr. Franklin in the Senate.
+Both the reports were against suspension. The grounds stated by Randolph
+are specially worthy of being considered now. They are thus stated in
+the report:
+
+"That the committee deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair
+a provision wisely calculated to promote the happiness and prosperity
+of the Northwestern country, and to give strength and security to that
+extensive frontier. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and
+benevolent restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants of Indiana
+will, at no very distant day, find ample remuneration for a temporary
+privation of labor and of emigration."
+
+Sir, these reports, made in 1803 and 1807, and the action of Congress
+upon them, in conformity with their recommendation, saved Illinois, and
+perhaps Indiana, from becoming slave States. When the people of Illinois
+formed their State constitution, they incorporated into it a section
+providing that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall hereafter
+be introduced into this State. The constitution made provision for the
+continued service of the few persons who were originally held as slaves,
+and then bound to service under the Territorial laws, and for the
+freedom of their children, and thus secured the final extinction of
+slavery. The Senator thinks that this result is not attributable to the
+ordinance. I differ from him. But for the ordinance, I have no doubt
+slavery would have been introduced into Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio.
+It is something to the credit of the Era of Conservatism, uniting its
+influences with those of the expiring Era of Enfranchisement, that it
+maintained the ordinance of 1787 in the Northwest.
+
+The Era of CONSERVATISM passed, also by imperceptible gradations, into
+the Era of SLAVERY PROPAGANDISM. Under the influences of this new spirit
+we opened the whole territory acquired from Mexico, except California,
+to the ingress of slavery. Every foot of it was covered by a Mexican
+prohibition; and yet, by the legislation of 1850, we consented to expose
+it to the introduction of slaves. Some, I believe, have actually been
+carried into Utah and New Mexico. They may be few, perhaps, but a few
+are enough to affect materially the probable character of their future
+governments. Under the evil influences of the same spirit, we are now
+called upon to reverse the original policy of the Republic; to support
+even a solemn compact of the conservative period, and open Nebraska to
+slavery.
+
+Sir, I believe that we are upon the verge of another era. That era will
+be the Era of REACTION. The introduction of this question here, and its
+discussion, will greatly hasten its advent. We, who insist upon the
+denationalization of slavery, and upon the absolute divorce of the
+General Government from all connection with it, will stand with the men
+who favored the compromise acts, and who yet wish to adhere to them,
+in their letter and in their spirit, against the repeal of the Missouri
+prohibition. But you may pass it here. You may send it to the other
+House. It may become a law. But its effect will be to satisfy all
+thinking men that no compromises with slavery will endure, except so
+long as they serve the interests of slavery; and that there is no safe
+and honorable ground for non-slaveholders to stand upon, except that
+of restricting slavery within State limits, and excluding it absolutely
+from the whole sphere of Federal jurisdiction. The old questions between
+political parties are at rest. No great question so thoroughly possesses
+the public mind as this of slavery. This discussion will hasten the
+inevitable reorganization of parties upon the new issues which our
+circumstances suggest. It will light up a fire in the country which may,
+perhaps, consume those who kindle it. * * *
+
+
+
+
+EDWARD EVERETT,
+
+OF MASSACHUSETTS.
+
+(BORN 1794, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 8, 1854
+
+
+I will not take up the time of the Senate by going over the somewhat
+embarrassing and perplexed history of the bill, from its first entry
+into the Senate until the present time. I will take it as it now stands,
+as it is printed on our tables, and with the amendment which was offered
+by the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) yesterday, and which, iI
+suppose, is now printed, and on our tables; and I will state, as briefly
+as I can, the difficulties which I have found in giving my support to
+this bill, either as it stands, or as it will stand when the amendment
+shall be adopted. My chief objections are to the provisions on the
+subject of slavery, and especially to the exception which is contained
+in the 14th section, in the following words:
+
+"Except the 8th section of the act preparatory to the admission of
+Missouri into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded
+by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the
+compromise measures, and is hereby declared inoperative."
+
+On the day before yesterday the chairman of the Committee on Territories
+proposed to change the words "superseded by" to "inconsistent with,"
+as expressing more distinctly all that he meant to convey by that
+impression. Yesterday, however, he brought in an amendment drawn up with
+great skill and care, on notice given the day before, which is to strike
+out the words "which was superseded by the principles of the legislation
+of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and is hereby declared
+inoperative," and to insert in lieu of them the following:
+
+"Which being inconsistent with the principle of non-intervention by
+Congress with slavery in the States and Territories, as recognized by
+the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, is
+hereby declared inoperative and void; it being the true intent and
+meaning of this act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or
+State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof
+perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their
+own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, sir, I think, in the first place, that the language of this
+proposed enactment, being obscure, is of somewhat doubtful import, and
+for that reason, unsatisfactory. I should have preferred a little more
+directness. What is the condition of an enactment which is declared by a
+subsequent act of Congress to be "inoperative and void?" Does it remain
+in force? I take it, not. That would be a contradiction in terms, to say
+that an enactment which had been declared by act of Congress inoperative
+and void is still in force. Then, if it is not in force, if it is not
+only inoperative and void, as it is to be declared, but is not in force,
+it is of course repealed. If it is to be repealed, why not say so?
+I think it would have been more direct and more parliamentary to say
+"shall be and is hereby repealed." Then we should know precisely, so far
+as legal and technical terms go, what the amount of this new legislative
+provision is.
+
+If the form is somewhat objectionable, I think the substance is still
+more so. The amendment is to strike out the words "which was superseded
+by," and to insert a provision that the act of 1820 is inconsistent
+with the principle of congressional non-intervention, and is therefore
+inoperative and void. I do not quite understand how much is conveyed
+in this language. The Missouri restriction of 1820, it is said, is
+inconsistent with the principle of the legislation of 1850. If anything
+more is meant by "the principle" of the legislation of 1850, than the
+measures which were adopted at that time in reference to the territories
+of New Mexico and Utah--for I may assume that those are the legislative
+measures referred to--if anything more is meant than that a certain
+measure was adopted, and enacted in reference to those territories, I
+take issue on that point. I do not know that it could be proved that,
+even in reference to those territories, a principle was enacted at all.
+A certain measure, or, if you please, a course of measures, was enacted
+in reference to the Territories of New Mexico and Utah; but I do not
+know that you can call this enacting a principle. It is certainly
+not enacting a principle which is to carry with it a rule for other
+Territories lying in other parts of the country, and in a different
+legal position. As to the principle of non-intervention on the part
+of Congress in the question of slavery, I do not find that, either as
+principle or as measure, it was enacted in those territorial bills of
+1850. I do not, unless I have greatly misread them, find that there is
+anything at all which comes up to that. Every legislative act of those
+territorial governments must come before Congress for allowance or
+disallowance, and under those bills without repealing them, without
+departing from them in the slightest degree, it would be competent for
+Congress to-morrow to pass any law on that subject.
+
+How then can it be said that the principle of non-intervention on the
+part of Congress in the subject of slavery was enacted and established
+by the compromise measures of 1850? But, whether that be so or not, how
+can you find, in a simple measure applying in terms to these individual
+Territories, and to them alone, a rule which is to govern all other
+Territories with a retrospective and with a prospective action? Is
+it not a mere begging of the question to say that those compromise
+measures, adopted in this specific case, amount to such a general rule?
+
+But, let us try it in a parallel case. In the earlier land legislation
+of the United States, it was customary, without exception, when a
+Territory became a State, to require that there should be a stipulation
+in their State constitution that the public lands sold within their
+borders should be exempted from taxation for five years after the sale.
+This, I believe, continued to be the uniform practice down to the year
+1820, when the State of Missouri was admitted. She was admitted under
+the stipulation. If I mistake not, the next State which was admitted
+into the Union--but it is not important whether it was the next or
+not--came in without that stipulation, and they were left free to tax
+the public lands the moment when they were sold. Here was a principle;
+as much a principle as it is contended was established in the Utah and
+New Mexico territorial bill; but did any one suppose that it acted upon
+the other Territories? I believe the whole system is now abolished under
+the operation of general laws, and the influence of that example may
+have led to the change. But, until it was made by legislation, the mere
+fact that public lands sold in Arkansas were immediately subject to
+taxation, could not alter the law in regard to the public lands sold in
+Missouri, or in any other to where they were they were exempt.
+
+There is a case equally analogous to the very matter we are now
+considering--the prohibition or permission of slavery. The ordinance of
+1787 prohibited slavery in the territory northwest of the Ohio. In 1790
+Congress passed an act accepting the cession which the State of North
+Carolina had made of the western part of her territory, with the
+proviso, that in reference to the territory thus ceded Congress should
+pass no laws "tending to the emancipation of the slaves." Here was a
+precisely parallel case. Here was a territory in which, in 1787, slavery
+was prohibited. Here was a territory ceded by North Carolina, which
+became the territory of the United States south of the Ohio, in
+reference to which it was stipulated with North Carolina, that Congress
+should pass no laws tending to the emancipation of slaves. But I believe
+it never occurred to any one that the legislation of 1790 acted back
+upon the ordinance of 1787, or furnished a rule by which any effect
+could be produced upon the state of things existing under that
+ordinance, in the territory to which it applied.
+
+I certainly intend to do the distinguished chairman of the committee
+no injustice; and I am not sure that I fully comprehend his argument in
+this respect; but I think his report sustains the view which I now take
+of the subject: that is, that the legislation of 1850 did not establish
+a principle which was designed to have any such effect as he intimates.
+That report states how matters stood in those new Mexican territories.
+It was alleged on the one hand that by the Mexican _lex loci_ slavery
+was prohibited. On the other hand that was denied, and it was maintained
+that the Constitution of the United States secures to every citizen the
+right to go there and take with him any property recognized as such
+by any of the States of the Union. The report considers that a similar
+state of things now exists in Nebraska--that the validity of the eighth
+section of the Missouri Act, by which slavery is prohibited in that
+Territory, is doubtful, and that it is maintained by many distinguished
+statesmen that Congress has no power to legislate on the subject.
+Then, in this state of the controversy, the report maintains that
+the legislation of Congress in 1850 did not undertake to decide these
+questions. Surely, if they did not undertake to decide them, they could
+not settle the principle which is at stake in them; and, unless they did
+decide them, the measures then adopted must be considered as specific
+measures, relating only to those case and not establishing a principle
+of general operation. This seems to me to be as direct and conclusive as
+anything can be.
+
+At all events, these are not impressions which are put forth by me under
+the exigencies of the present debate or of the present occasion. I have
+never entertained any other opinion. I was called upon for a particular
+purpose, of a literary nature, to which I will presently allude more
+distinctly, shortly after the close of the session of 1850, to draw up a
+narrative of the events that had taken place relative to the passage of
+the compromise measures of that year. I had not, I own, the best sources
+of information. I was not a member of Congress, and had not heard
+the debates, which is almost indispensable to come to a thorough
+understanding of questions of this nature; but I inquired of those who
+had heard them, I read the reports, and I had an opportunity of personal
+intercourse with some who had taken a prominent part in all those
+measures. I never formed the idea--I never received the intimation until
+I got it from this report of the committee--that those measures were
+intended to have any effect beyond the Territories of Utah and New
+Mexico, for which they were enacted. I cannot but think that if it
+was intended that they should have any larger application, if it was
+intended that they should furnish the rule which is now supposed, it
+would have been a fact as notorious as the light of day.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+And now, sir, having alluded to the speech of Mr. Webster, of the 7th
+March, 1850, allow me to dwell upon it for a moment. I was in a position
+the next year--having been requested by that great and lamented man to
+superintend the publication of his works--to know very particularly the
+comparative estimate which he placed upon his own parliamentary efforts.
+He told me more than once that he thought his second speech on Foot's
+resolution was that in which he had best succeeded as a senatorial
+effort, and as a specimen of parliamentary dialectics; but he added,
+with an emotion which even he was unable to suppress, "The speech of the
+7th of March, 1850, much as I have been reviled for it, when I am dead,
+will be allowed to be of the greatest importance to the country." Sir,
+he took the greatest interest in that speech. He wished it to go forth
+with a specific title; and, after considerable deliberation, it was
+called, by his own direction, "A Speech for the Constitution and the
+Union." He inscribed it to the people of Massachusetts, in a dedication
+of the most emphatic tenderness, and he prefixed to it that motto--which
+you all remember--from Livy, the most appropriate and felicitous
+quotation, perhaps, that was ever made: "True things rather than
+pleasant things"--_Vera progratis:_ and with that he sent it forth to
+the world.
+
+In that speech his gigantic intellect brought together all that it
+could gather from the law of nature, from the Constitution of the United
+States, from our past legislation, and from the physical features of
+the region, to strengthen him in that plan of conciliation and peace,
+in which he feared that he might not carry along with him the public
+sentiment of the whole of that, portion of the country which he
+particularly represented here. At its close, when he dilated upon the
+disastrous effects of separation, he rose to a strain of impassioned
+eloquence which had never been surpassed within these walls. Every
+topic, every argument, every fact, was brought to bear upon the point;
+and he felt that all his vast popularity was at stake on the issue. Let
+me commend to the attention of Senators, and let me ask them to consider
+what weight is due to the authority of such a man, speaking under such
+circumstances, and on such an occasion, when he tells you that
+the condition of every foot of land in the country, for slavery or
+non-slavery, is fixed by some irrepealable law. And you are now about
+to repeal the principal law which ascertained and fixed that condition.
+And, sir, if the Senate will take any heed of the opinion of one so
+humble as myself, I will say that I believe Mr. Webster, in that speech,
+went to the very verge of the public sentiment in the non-slaveholding
+States, and that to have gone a hair's-breadth further, would have been
+a step too bold even for his great weight of character.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I conclude, therefore, sir, that the compromise measures of 1850 ended
+where they began, with the Territories of Utah and New Mexico, to
+which they specifically referred; at any rate, that they established
+no principle which was to govern in other cases; that they had no
+prospective action to the organization of territories in all future
+time; and certainly no retrospective action upon lands subject to the
+restriction of 1820, and to the positive enactment that you now propose
+to declare inoperative and void.
+
+I trust that nothing which I have now said will be taken in derogation
+of the compromises of 1850. I adhere to them; I stand by them. I do so
+for many reasons. One is respect for the memory of the great men who
+were the authors of them--lights and ornaments of the country, but now
+taken from its service. I would not so soon, if it were in my power,
+undo their work, if for no other reason. But beside this, I am one of
+those--I am not ashamed to avow it--who believed at that time, and who
+still believe, that at that period the union of these States was in
+great danger, and that the adoption of the compromise measures of 1850
+contributed materially to avert that danger; and therefore, sir, I
+say, as well out of respect to the memory of the great men who were the
+authors of them, as to the healing effect of the measures themselves,
+I would adhere to them. They are not perfect. I suppose that nobody,
+either North or South, thinks them perfect. They contain some provisions
+not satisfactory to the South, and other provisions contrary to the
+public sentiment of the North; but I believed at the time they were
+the wisest, the best, the most effective measures which, under the
+circumstances, could be adopted. But you do not strengthen them, you do
+not show your respect for them, by giving them an application which they
+were never intended to bear.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+A single word, sir, in respect to this supposed principle of
+non-intervention on the part of Congress in the subject of slavery in
+the territories. I confess I am surprised to find this brought forward,
+and stated with so much confidence, as an established principle of the
+Government. I know that distinguished gentlemen hold the opinion. The
+very distinguished Senator from Michigan (Mr. Cass) holds it, and has
+propounded it; and I pay all due respect and deference to his authority,
+which I conceive to be very high. But I was not aware that any such
+principle was considered a settled principle of the territorial policy
+of this country. Why, sir, from the first enactment in 1789, down to the
+bill before us, there is no such principle in our legislation. As far as
+I can see it would be perfectly competent even now for Congress to pass
+any law that they pleased on the subject in the Territories under this
+bill. But however that may be, even by this bill, there is not a law
+which the Territories can pass admitting or excluding slavery, which it
+is of in the power of this Congress to disallow the next day. This
+is not a mere _brutum fulmen_. It is not an unexpected power. Your
+statute-book shows case after case. I believe, in reference to a
+single Territory, that there have been fifteen or twenty cases where
+territorial legislation has been disallowed by Congress. How, then, can
+it be said that this principle of non-intervention in the government of
+the Territories is now to be recognized as an established principle in
+the public policy of the Congress of the United States?
+
+Do gentlemen recollect the terms, almost of disdain, with which this
+supposed established principle of our constitutional policy is treated
+in that last valedictory speech of Mr. Calhoun, which, unable to
+pronounce it himself, he was obliged to give to the Senate through the
+medium of his friend, the Senator from Virginia. He reminded the Senate
+that the occupants of a Territory were not even called the people--but
+simply the inhabitants--till they were allowed by Congress to call a
+convention and form a State constitution.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+A word more, sir, and I have done. With reference to the great question
+of slavery--that terrible question--the only one on which the North and
+South of this great Republic differ irreconcilably--I have not, on this
+occasion, a word to say. My humble career is drawing near its close,
+and I shall end it as I began, with using no other words on that subject
+than those of moderation, conciliation, and harmony between the two
+great sections of the country. I blame no one who differs from me in
+this respect. I allot to others, what I claim for myself, the credit of
+honesty and purity of motive. But for my own part, the rule of my life,
+as far as circumstances have enabled me to act up to it, has been, to
+say nothing that would tend to kindle unkind feeling on this subject. I
+have never known men on this, or any other subject, to be convinced by
+harsh epithets or denunciation.
+
+I believe the union of these States is the greatest possible
+blessing--that it comprises within itself all other blessings,
+political, national, and social; and I trust that my eyes may close long
+before the day shall come--if it ever shall come--when that Union shall
+be at an end. Sir, I share the opinions and the sentiments of the part
+of the country where I was born and educated, where my ashes will be
+laid, and where my children will succeed me. But in relation to my
+fellow-citizens in other parts of the country, I will treat their
+constitutional and their legal rights with respect, and their characters
+and their feelings with tenderness. I believe them to be as good
+Christians, as good patriots, as good men, as we are, and I claim that
+we, in our turn, are as good as they.
+
+I rejoiced to hear my friend from Kentucky, (Mr. Dixon), if he will
+allow me to call him so--I concur most heartily in the sentiment--utter
+the opinion that a wise and gracious Providence, in his own good time,
+will find the ways and the channels to remove from the land what I
+consider this great evil, but I do not expect that what has been done in
+three centuries and a half is to be undone in a day or a year, or a few
+years; and I believe that, in the mean time, the desired end will be
+retarded rather than promoted by passionate sectional agitation. I
+believe, further, that the fate of the great and interesting continent
+in the elder world, Africa, is closely intertwined and wrapped up with
+the fortunes of her children in all the parts of the earth to which they
+have been dispersed, and that at some future time, which is already
+in fact beginning, they will go back to the land of their fathers, the
+voluntary missionaries of Civilization and Christianity; and finally,
+sir, I doubt not that in His own good time the Ruler of all will
+vindicate the most glorious of His prerogatives, "From seeming evil
+still educing good."
+
+
+
+
+STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+
+ON THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILL;
+
+SENATE, MARCH 3, 1854.
+
+
+It has been urged in debate that there is no necessity for these
+Territorial organizations; and I have been called upon to point out any
+public and national considerations which require action at this time.
+Senators seem to forget that our immense and valuable possessions on the
+Pacific are separated from the States and organized Territories on this
+side of the Rocky Mountains by a vast wilderness, filled by hostile
+savages--that nearly a hundred thousand emigrants pass through this
+barbarous wilderness every year, on their way to California
+and Oregon--that these emigrants are American citizens, our own
+constituents, who are entitled to the protection of law and government,
+and that they are left to make their way, as best they may, without the
+protection or aid of law or government. The United States mails for New
+Mexico and Utah, and official communications between this Government and
+the authorities of those Territories, are required to be carried over
+these wild plains, and through the gorges of the mountains, where you
+have made no provisions for roads, bridges, or ferries to facilitate
+travel, or forts or other means of safety to protect life. As often as I
+have brought forward and urged the adoption of measures to remedy these
+evils, and afford security against the damages to which our people are
+constantly exposed, they have been promptly voted down as not being
+of sufficient importance to command the favorable consideration of
+Congress. Now, when I propose to organize the Territories, and allow
+the people to do for themselves what you have so often refused to do for
+them, I am told that there are not white inhabitants enough permanently
+settled in the country to require and sustain a government. True; there
+is not a very large population there, for the very reason that your
+Indian code and intercourse laws exclude the settlers, and forbid their
+remaining there to cultivate the soil. You refuse to throw the
+country open to settlers, and then object to the organization of the
+Territories, upon the ground that there is not a sufficient number of
+inhabitants. * * *
+
+I will now proceed to the consideration of the great principle involved
+in the bill, without omitting, however, to notice some of those
+extraneous matters which have been brought into this discussion with the
+view of producing another anti-slavery agitation. We have been told by
+nearly every Senator who has spoken in opposition to this bill, that
+at the time of its introduction the people were in a state of profound
+quiet and repose, that the anti-slavery agitation had entirely ceased,
+and that the whole country was acquiescing cheerfully and cordially
+in the compromise measures of 1850 as a final adjustment of this vexed
+question. Sir, it is truly refreshing to hear Senators, who contested
+every inch of ground in opposition to those measures, when they were
+under discussion, who predicted all manner of evils and calamities from
+their adoption, and who raised the cry of appeal, and even resistance,
+to their execution, after they had become the laws of the land--I say it
+is really refreshing to hear these same Senators now bear their united
+testimony to the wisdom of those measures, and to the patriotic
+motives which induced us to pass them in defiance of their threats and
+resistance, and to their beneficial effects in restoring peace, harmony,
+and fraternity to a distracted country. These are precious confessions
+from the lips of those who stand pledged never to assent to the
+propriety of those measures, and to make war upon them, so long as
+they shall remain upon the statute-book. I well understand that these
+confessions are now made, not with the view of yielding their assent to
+the propriety of carrying those enactments into faithful execution, but
+for the purpose of having a pretext for charging upon me, as the author
+of this bill, the responsibility of an agitation which they are striving
+to produce. They say that I, and not they, have revived the agitation.
+What have I done to render me obnoxious to this charge? They say that I
+wrote and introduced this Nebraska bill. That is true; but I was not a
+volunteer in the transaction. The Senate, by a unanimous vote,
+appointed me chairman of the Territorial Committee, and associated five
+intelligent and patriotic Senators with me, and thus made it our duty
+to take charge of all Territorial business. In like manner, and with the
+concurrence of these complaining Senators, the Senate referred to us a
+distinct proposition to organize this Nebraska Territory, and required
+us to report specifically upon the question. I repeat, then, we were not
+volunteers in this business. The duty was imposed upon us by the
+Senate. We were not unmindful of the delicacy and responsibility of the
+position. We were aware that, from 1820 to 1850, the abolition doctrine
+of Congressional interference with slavery in the Territories and new
+States had so far prevailed as to keep up an incessant slavery agitation
+in Congress, and throughout the country, whenever any new Territory was
+to be acquired or organized. We were also aware that, in 1850, the right
+of the people to decide this question for themselves, subject only
+to the Constitution, was submitted for the doctrine of Congressional
+intervention. This first question, therefore, which the committee were
+called upon to decide, and indeed the only question of any material
+importance in framing this bill, was this: Shall we adhere to and carry
+out the principle recognized by the compromise measures of 1850,
+or shall we go back to the old exploded doctrine of Congressional
+interference, as established in 1820, in a large portion of the country,
+and which it was the object of the Wilmot proviso to give a universal
+application, not only to all the territory which we then possessed, but
+all which we might hereafter acquire? There are no alternatives. We
+were compelled to frame the bill upon the one or the other of these two
+principles. The doctrine of 1820 or the doctrine of 1850 must prevail.
+In the discharge of the duty imposed upon us by the Senate, the
+committee could not hesitate upon this point, whether we consulted our
+own individual opinions and principles, or those which were known to be
+entertained and boldly avowed by a large majority of the Senate. The two
+great political parties of the country stood solemnly pledged before the
+world to adhere to the compromise measures of 1850, "in principle and
+substance." A large majority of the Senate--indeed, every member of the
+body, I believe, except the two avowed Abolitionists (Mr. Chase and Mr.
+Sumner)--profess to belong to one or the other of these parties, and
+hence were supposed to be under a high moral obligation to carry out
+"the principle and substance" of those measures in all new Territorial
+organizations. The report of the committee was in accordance with
+this obligation. I am arraigned, therefore, for having endeavored to
+represent the opinions and principles of the Senate truly--for having
+performed my duty in conformity with parliamentary law--for having been
+faithful to the trust imposed in me by the Senate. Let the vote
+this night determine whether I have thus faithfully represented your
+opinions. When a majority of the Senate shall have passed the bill--when
+the majority of the States shall have endorsed it through their
+representatives upon this floor--when a majority of the South and a
+majority of the North shall have sanctioned it--when a majority of the
+Whig party and a majority of the Democratic party shall have voted for
+it--when each of these propositions shall be demonstrated by the vote
+this night on the final passage of the bill, I shall be willing to
+submit the question to the country, whether, as the organ of the
+committee, I performed my duty in the report and bill which have called
+down upon my head so much denunciation and abuse.
+
+Mr. President, the opponents of this measure have had much to say about
+the mutations and modifications which this bill has undergone since it
+was first introduced by myself, and about the alleged departure of the
+bill, in its present form, from the principle laid down in the original
+report of the committee as a rule of action in all future Territorial
+organizations. Fortunately there is no necessity, even if your patience
+would tolerate such a course of argument at this late hour of the night,
+for me to examine these speeches in detail, and reply to each charge
+separately. Each speaker seems to have followed faithfully in the
+footsteps of his leader in the path marked out by the Abolition
+confederates in their manifesto, which I took occasion to expose on a
+former occasion. You have seen them on their winding way, meandering
+the narrow and crooked path in Indian file, each treading close upon the
+heels of the other, and neither venturing to take a step to the right or
+left, or to occupy one inch of ground which did not bear the footprint
+of the Abolition champion. To answer one, therefore, is to answer the
+whole. The statement to which they seem to attach the most importance,
+and which they have repeated oftener, perhaps, than any other, is, that,
+pending the compromise measures of 1850, no man in or out of Congress
+ever dreamed of abrogating the Missouri compromise; that from that
+period down to the present session nobody supposed that its validity had
+been impaired, or any thing done which endered it obligatory upon us to
+make it inoperative hereafter; that at the time of submitting the report
+and bill to the Senate, on the fourth of January last, neither I nor any
+member of the committee ever thought of such a thing; and that we could
+never be brought to the point of abrogating the eighth section of
+the Missouri act until after the Senator from Kentucky introduced his
+amendment to my bill.
+
+Mr. President, before I proceed to expose the many misrepresentations
+contained in this complicated charge, I must call the attention of
+the Senate to the false issue which these gentlemen are endeavoring to
+impose upon the country, for the purpose of diverting public attention
+from the real issue contained in the bill. They wish to have the people
+believe that the abrogation of what they call the Missouri compromise
+was the main object and aim of the bill, and that the only question
+involved is, whether the prohibition of slavery north of 36 deg. 30'
+shall be repealed or not? That which is a mere incident they choose to
+consider the principle. They make war on the means by which we propose to
+accomplish an object, instead of openly resisting the object itself.
+The principle which we propose to carry into effect by the bill is this:
+That Congress shall neither legislate slavery into any Territories
+or State, nor out of the same; but the people shall be left free to
+regulate their domestic concerns in their own way, subject only to the
+Constitution of the United States.
+
+In order to carry this principle into practical operation, it becomes
+necessary to remove whatever legal obstacles might be found in the way
+of its free exercise. It is only for the purpose of carrying out this
+great fundamental principle of self-government that the bill renders the
+eighth section of the Missouri act inoperative and void.
+
+Now, let me ask, will these Senators who have arraigned me, or any one
+of them, have the assurance to rise in his place and declare that this
+great principle was never thought of or advocated as applicable to
+Territorial bills, in 1850; that from that session until the present,
+nobody ever thought of incorporating this principle in all new
+Territorial organizations; that the Committee on Territories did not
+recommend it in their report; and that it required the amendment of the
+Senator from Kentucky to bring us up to that point? Will any one of my
+accusers dare to make this issue, and let it be tried by the record? I
+will begin with the compromises of 1850, Any Senator who will take the
+trouble to examine our journals, will find that on the 25th of March
+of that year I reported from the Committee on Territories two bills
+including the following measures; the admission of California, a
+Territorial government for New Mexico, and the adjustment of the Texas
+boundary. These bills proposed to leave the people of Utah and New
+Mexico free to decide the slavery question for themselves, in the
+precise language of the Nebraska bill now under discussion. A few weeks
+afterward the committee of thirteen took those two bills and put a wafer
+between them, and reported them back to the Senate as one bill,
+with some slight amendments. One of these amendments was, that the
+Territorial Legislatures should not legislate upon the subject of
+African slavery. I objected to that provision upon the ground that it
+subverted the great principle of self-government upon which the bill had
+been originally framed by the Territorial Committee. On the first trial,
+the Senate refused to strike it out, but subsequently did so, after full
+debate, in order to establish that principle as the rule of action in
+Territorial organizations. * * * But my accusers attempt to raise up a
+false issue, and thereby divert public attention from the real one, by
+the cry that the Missouri compromise is to be repealed or violated by
+the passage of this bill. Well, if the eighth section of the Missouri
+act, which attempted to fix the destinies of future generations in those
+Territories for all time to come, in utter disregard of the rights and
+wishes of the people when they should be received into the Union as
+States, be inconsistent with the great principles of self-government
+and the Constitution of the United States. it ought to be abrogated.
+The legislation of 1850 abrogated the Missouri compromise, so far as the
+country embraced within the limits of Utah and New Mexico was covered
+by the slavery restriction. It is true, that those acts did not in
+terms and by name repeal the act of 1820, as originally adopted, or as
+extended by the resolutions annexing Texas in 1845, any more than the
+report of the Committee on Territories proposed to repeal the same acts
+this session. But the acts of 1850 did authorize the people of those
+Territories to exercise "all rightful powers of legislation consistent
+with the Constitution," not excepting the question of slavery; and did
+provide that, when those Territories should be admitted into the Union,
+they should be received with or without slavery as the people thereof
+might determine at the date of their admission. These provisions were
+in direct conflict with a clause in the former enactment, declaring that
+slavery should be forever prohibited in any portion of said Territories,
+and hence rendered such clause inoperative and void to the extent of
+such conflict. This was an inevitable consequence, resulting from the
+provisions in those acts, which gave the people the right to decide the
+slavery question for themselves, in conformity with the Constitution.
+It was not necessary to go further and declare that certain previous
+enactments, which were incompatible with the exercise of the powers
+conferred in the bills, are hereby repealed. The very act of
+granting those powers and rights has the legal effect of removing all
+obstructions to the exercise of them by the people, as prescribed
+in those Territorial bills. Following that example, the Committee on
+Territories did not consider it necessary to declare the eighth section
+of the Missouri act repealed. We were content to organize Nebraska in
+the precise language of the Utah and New Mexico bills. Our object was
+to leave the people entirely free to form and regulate their domestic
+institutions and internal concerns in their own way, under the
+Constitution; and we deemed it wise to accomplish that object in the
+exact terms in which the same thing had been done in Utah and New Mexico
+by the acts of 1850. This was the principle upon which the committee
+voted; and our bill was supposed, and is now believed, to have been in
+accordance with it. When doubts were raised whether the bill did fully
+carry out the principle laid down in the report, amendments were made
+from time to time, in order to avoid all misconstruction, and make the
+true intent of the act more explicit. The last of these amendments was
+adopted yesterday, on the motion of the distinguished Senator from
+North Carolina (Mr. Badger), in regard to the revival of any laws or
+regulations which may have existed prior to 1820. That amendment was not
+intended to change the legal effect of the bill. Its object was to repel
+the slander which had been propagated by the enemies of the measure in
+the North--that the Southern supporters of the bill desired to legislate
+slavery into these Territories. The South denies the right of Congress
+either to legislate slavery into any Territory or State, or out of any
+Territory or State. Non-intervention by Congress with slavery in
+the States or Territories is the doctrine of the bill, and all the
+amendments which have been agreed to have been made with the view of
+removing all doubt and cavil as to the true meaning and object of the
+measure. * * *
+
+Well, sir, what is this Missouri compromise, of which we have heard
+so much of late? It has been read so often that it is not necessary
+to occupy the time of the Senate in reading it again. It was an act of
+Congress, passed on the 6th of March, 1820, to authorize the people of
+Missouri to form a constitution and a State government, preparatory to
+the admission of such State into the Union. The first section provided
+that Missouri should be received into the Union "on an equal footing
+with the original States in all respects whatsoever." The last and
+eighth section provided that slavery should be "forever prohibited" in
+all the territory which had been acquired from France north of 36 deg. 30',
+and not included within the limits of the State of Missouri. There
+is nothing in the terms of the law that purports to be a compact,
+or indicates that it was any thing more than an ordinary act of
+legislation. To prove that it was more than it purports to be on its
+face, gentlemen must produce other evidence, and prove that there was
+such an understanding as to create a moral obligation in the nature of a
+compact. Have they shown it?
+
+Now, if this was a compact, let us see how it was entered into. The bill
+originated in the House of Representatives, and passed that body without
+a Southern vote in its favor. It is proper to remark, however, that it
+did not at that time contain the eighth section, prohibiting slavery in
+the Territories; but in lieu of it, contained a provision prohibiting
+slavery in the proposed State of Missouri. In the Senate, the clause
+prohibiting slavery in the State was stricken out, and the eighth
+section added to the end of the bill, by the terms of which slavery was
+to be forever prohibited in the territory not embraced in the State of
+Missouri north of 36 deg. 30'. The vote on adding this section stood in the
+Senate, 34 in the affirmative, and 10 in the negative. Of the Northern
+Senators, 20 voted for it, and 2 against it. On the question of ordering
+the bill to a third reading as amended, which was the test vote on its
+passage, the vote stood 24 yeas and 20 nays. Of the Northern Senators,
+4 only voted in the affirmative, and 18 in the negative. Thus it will be
+seen that if it was intended to be a compact, the North never agreed to
+it. The Northern Senators voted to insert the prohibition of slavery in
+the Territories; and then, in the proportion of more than four to one,
+voted against the passage of the bill. The North, therefore, never
+signed the compact, never consented to it, never agreed to be bound by
+it. This fact becomes very important in vindicating the character of the
+North for repudiating this alleged compromise a few months afterward.
+The act was approved and became a law on the 6th of March, 1820. In the
+summer of that year, the people of Missouri formed a constitution and
+State government preparatory to admission into the Union in conformity
+with the act. At the next session of Congress the Senate passed a joint
+resolution declaring Missouri to be one of the States of the Union, on
+an equal footing with the original States. This resolution was sent to
+the House of Representatives, where it was rejected by Northern votes,
+and thus Missouri was voted out of the Union, instead of being received
+into the Union under the act of the 6th of March, 1820, now known as the
+Missouri compromise. Now, sir, what becomes of our plighted faith, if
+the act of the 6th of March, 1820, was a solemn compact, as we are now
+told? They have all rung the changes upon it, that it was a sacred and
+irrevocable compact, binding in honor, in conscience, and morals, which
+could not be violated or repudiated without perfidy and dishonor! * * *
+Sir, if this was a compact, what must be thought of those who violated
+it almost immediately after it was formed? I say it is a calumny upon
+the North to say that it was a compact. I should feel a flush of
+shame upon my cheek, as a Northern man, if I were to say that it was a
+compact, and that the section of the country to which I belong received
+the consideration, and then repudiated the obligation in eleven months
+after it was entered into. I deny that it was a compact, in any sense
+of the term. But if it was, the record proves that faith was not
+observed--that the contract was never carried into effect--that after
+the North had procured the passage of the act prohibiting slavery in the
+Territories, with a majority in the House large enough to prevent its
+repeal, Missouri was refused admission into the Union as a slave-holding
+State, in conformity with the act of March 6, 1820. If the proposition
+be correct, as contended for by the opponents of this bill--that
+there was a solemn compact between the North and the South that, in
+consideration of the prohibition of slavery in the Territories, Missouri
+was to be admitted into the Union, in conformity with the act of
+1820--that compact was repudiated by the North, and rescinded by the
+joint action of the two parties within twelve months from its date.
+Missouri was never admitted under the act of the 6th of March, 1820. She
+was refused admission under that act. She was voted out of the Union
+by Northern votes, notwithstanding the stipulation that she should
+be received; and, in consequence of these facts, a new compromise was
+rendered necessary, by the terms of which Missouri was to be admitted
+into the Union conditionally--admitted on a condition not embraced in
+the act of 1820, and, in addition, to a full compliance with all the
+provisions of said act. If, then, the act of 1820, by the eighth section
+of which slavery was prohibited in Missouri, was a compact, it is clear
+to the comprehension of every fair-minded man that the refusal of
+the North to admit Missouri, in compliance with its stipulations, and
+without further conditions, imposes upon us a high, moral obligation to
+remove the prohibition of slavery in the Territories, since it has been
+shown to have been procured upon a condition never performed. * * *
+
+Mr. President, I did not wish to refer to these things. I did not
+understand them fully in all their bearings at the time I made my first
+speech on this subject; and, so far as I was familiar with them, I made
+as little reference to them as was consistent with my duty; because it
+was a mortifying reflection to me, as a Northern man, that we had not
+been able, in consequence of the abolition excitement at the time, to
+avoid the appearance of bad faith in the observance of legislation,
+which has been denominated a compromise. There were a few men then, as
+there are now, who had the moral courage to perform their duty to the
+country and the Constitution, regardless of consequences personal to
+themselves. There were ten Northern men who dared to perform their duty
+by voting to admit Missouri into the Union on an equal footing with the
+original States, and with no other restriction than that imposed by the
+Constitution. I am aware that they were abused and denounced as we are
+now--that they were branded as dough-faces--traitors to freedom, and to
+the section of country whence they came. * * *
+
+I think I have shown that if the act of 1820, called the Missouri
+compromise, was a compact, it was violated and repudiated by a solemn
+vote of the House of Representatives in 1821, within eleven months after
+it was adopted. It was repudiated by the North by a majority vote, and
+that repudiation was so complete and successful as to compel Missouri to
+make a new compromise, and she was brought into the Union under the new
+compromise of 1821, and not under the act of 1820. This reminds me of
+another point made in nearly all the speeches against this bill, and, if
+I recollect right, was alluded to in the abolition manifesto; to which,
+I regret to say, I had occasion to refer so often. I refer to the
+significant hint that Mr. Clay was dead before any one dared to bring
+forward a proposition to undo the greatest work of his hands. The
+Senator from New York (Mr. Seward) has seized upon this insinuation and
+elaborated, perhaps, more fully than his compeers; and now the Abolition
+press, suddenly, and, as if by miraculous conversion, teems with
+eulogies upon Mr. Clay and his Missouri compromise of 1820.
+
+Now, Mr. President, does not each of these Senators know that Mr.
+Clay was not the author of the act of 1820? Do they not know that he
+disclaimed it in 1850 in this body? Do they not know that the Missouri
+restriction did not originate in the House, of which he was a member? Do
+they not know that Mr. Clay never came into the Missouri controversy as
+a compromiser until after the compromise of 1820 was repudiated, and it
+became necessary to make another? I dislike to be compelled to repeat
+what I have conclusively proven, that the compromise which Mr. Clay
+effected was the act of 1821, under which Missouri came into the Union,
+and not the act of 1820. Mr. Clay made that compromise after you had
+repudiated the first one. How, then, dare you call upon the spirit of
+that great and gallant statesman to sanction your charge of bad faith
+against the South on this question? * * *
+
+Now, Mr. President, as I have been doing justice to Mr. Clay on this
+question, perhaps I may as well do justice to another great man, who
+was associated with him in carrying through the great measures of 1850,
+which mortified the Senator from New York so much, because they defeated
+his purpose of carrying on the agitation. I allude to Mr. Webster. The
+authority of his great name has been quoted for the purpose of proving
+that he regarded the Missouri act as a compact, an irrepealable compact.
+Evidently the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Everett)
+supposed he was doing Mr. Webster entire justice when he quoted the
+passage which he read from Mr. Webster's speech of the 7th of March,
+1850, when he said that he stood upon the position that every part
+of the American continent was fixed for freedom or for slavery by
+irrepealable law. The Senator says that by the expression "irrepealable
+law," Mr. Webster meant to include the compromise of 1820. Now, I will
+show that that was not Mr. Webster's meaning--that he was never
+guilty of the mistake of saying that the Missouri act of 1820 was an
+irrepealable law. Mr. Webster said in that speech that every foot of
+territory in the United States was fixed as to its character for freedom
+or slavery by an irrepealable law. He then inquired if it was not so
+in regard to Texas? He went on to prove that it was; because, he said,
+there was a compact in express terms between Texas and the United
+States. He said the parties were capable of contracting and that there
+was a valuable consideration; and hence, he contended, that in that case
+there was a contract binding in honor and morals and law; and that it
+was irrepealable without a breach of faith.
+
+He went on to say:
+
+"Now, as to California and New Mexico, I hold slavery to be excluded
+from these Territories by a law even superior to that which admits
+and sanctions it in Texas--I mean the law of nature--of physical
+geography--the law of the formation of the earth."
+
+That was the irrepealable law which he said prohibited slavery in
+the Territories of Utah and New Mexico. He went on to speak of the
+prohibition of slavery in Oregon, and he said it was an "entirely
+useless and, in that connection, senseless proviso."
+
+He went further, and said:
+
+"That the whole territory of the States of the United States, or in the
+newly-acquired territory of the United States, has a fixed and settled
+character, now fixed and settled by law, which cannot be repealed in
+the case of Texas without a violation of public faith, and cannot be
+repealed by any human power in regard to California or New Mexico; that,
+under one or other of these laws, every foot of territory in the States
+or in the Territories has now received a fixed and decided character."
+
+What irrepealable laws? One or the other of those which he had stated.
+One was the Texas compact; the other, the law of nature and physical
+geography; and he contended that one or the other fixed the character
+of the whole American continent for freedom or for slavery. He never
+alluded to the Missouri compromise, unless it was by the allusion to
+the Wilmot proviso in the Oregon bill, and therein said it was a useless
+and, in that connection, senseless thing. Why was it a useless and
+senseless thing? Because it was reenacting the law of God; because
+slavery had already been prohibited by physical geography. Sir, that was
+the meaning of Mr. Webster's speech. * * *
+
+Mr. President, I have occupied a good deal of time in exposing the cant
+of these gentlemen about the sanctity of the Missouri compromise, and
+the dishonor attached to the violation of plighted faith. I have exposed
+these matters in order to show that the object of these men is to
+withdraw from public attention the real principle involved in the bill.
+They well know that the abrogation of the Missouri compromise is the
+incident and not the principle of the bill. They well understand that
+the report of the committee and the bill propose to establish the
+principle in all Territorial organizations, that the question of slavery
+shall be referred to the people to regulate for themselves, and that
+such legislation should be had as was necessary to remove all legal
+obstructions to the free exercise of this right by the people. The
+eighth section of the Missouri act standing in the way of this great
+principle must be rendered inoperative and void, whether expressly
+repealed or not, in order to give the people the power of regulating
+their own domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the
+Constitution.
+
+Now, sir, if these gentlemen have entire confidence in the correctness
+of their own position, why do they not meet the issue boldly and
+fairly, and controvert the soundness of this great principle of popular
+sovereignty in obedience to the Constitution? They know full well that
+this was the principle upon which the colonies separated from the crown
+of Great Britain, the principle upon which the battles of the Revolution
+were fought, and the principle upon which our republican system was
+founded. They cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Revolution grew
+out of the assertion of the right on the part of the imperial Government
+to interfere with the internal affairs and domestic concerns of the
+colonies. * * *
+
+The Declaration of Independence had its origin in the violation of that
+great fundamental principle which secured to the colonies the right to
+regulate their own domestic affairs in their own way; and the Revolution
+resulted in the triumph of that principle, and the recognition of the
+right asserted by it. Abolitionism proposes to destroy the right and
+extinguish the principle for which our forefathers waged a seven years'
+bloody war, and upon which our whole system of free government is
+founded. They not only deny the application of this principle to the
+Territories, but insist upon fastening the prohibition upon all the
+States to be formed out of those Territories. Therefore, the doctrine
+of the Abolitionists--the doctrine of the opponents of the Nebraska
+and Kansas bill, and the advocates of the Missouri restriction--demands
+Congressional interference with slavery not only in the Territories, but
+in all the new States to be formed therefrom. It is the same doctrine,
+when applied to the Territories and new States of this Union, which the
+British Government attempted to enforce by the sword upon the American
+colonies. It is this fundamental principle of self-government which
+constitutes the distinguishing feature of the Nebraska bill. The
+opponents of the principle are consistent in opposing the bill. I do
+not blame them for their opposition. I only ask them to meet the
+issue fairly and openly, by acknowledging that they are opposed to the
+principle which it is the object of the bill to carry into operation.
+It seems that there is no power on earth, no intellectual power, no
+mechanical power, that can bring them to a fair discussion of the true
+issue. If they hope to delude the people and escape detection for any
+considerable length of time under the catch-words "Missouri compromise"
+and "faith of compacts," they will find that the people of this country
+have more penetration and intelligence than they have given them credit
+for.
+
+Mr. President, there is an important fact connected with this slavery
+regulation, which should never be lost sight of. It has always arisen
+from one and the same cause. Whenever that cause has been removed,
+the agitation has ceased; and whenever the cause has been renewed, the
+agitation has sprung into existence. That cause is, and ever has been,
+the attempt on the part of Congress to interfere with the question of
+slavery in the Territories and new States formed therefrom. Is it not
+wise then to confine our action within the sphere of our legitimate
+duties, and leave this vexed question to take care of itself in each
+State and Territory, according to the wishes of the people thereof, in
+conformity to the forms, and in subjection to the provisions, of the
+Constitution?
+
+The opponents of the bill tell us that agitation is no part of their
+policy; that their great desire is peace and harmony; and they complain
+bitterly that I should have disturbed the repose of the country by the
+introduction of this measure! Let me ask these professed friends of
+peace, and avowed enemies of agitation, how the issue could have been
+avoided. They tell me that I should have let the question alone;
+that is, that I should have left Nebraska unorganized, the people
+unprotected, and the Indian barrier in existence, until the swelling
+tide of emigration should burst through, and accomplish by violence what
+it is the part of wisdom and statesmanship to direct and regulate by
+law. How long could you have postponed action with safety? How long
+could you maintain that Indian barrier, and restrain the onward march of
+civilization, Christianity, and free government by a barbarian wall? Do
+you suppose that you could keep that vast country a howling wilderness
+in all time to come, roamed over by hostile savages, cutting off all
+safe communication between our Atlantic and Pacific possessions? I tell
+you that the time for action has come, and cannot be postponed. It is
+a case in which the "let-alone" policy would precipitate a crisis which
+must inevitably result in violence, anarchy, and strife.
+
+You cannot fix bounds to the onward march of this great and growing
+country. You cannot fetter the limbs of the young giant. He will burst
+all your chains. He will expand, and grow, and increase, and extend
+civilization, Christianity, and liberal principles. Then, sir, if you
+cannot check the growth of the country in that direction, is it not the
+part of wisdom to look the danger in the face, and provide for an event
+which you cannot avoid? I tell you, sir, you must provide for lines of
+continuous settlement from the Mississippi valley to the Pacific ocean.
+And in making this provision, you must decide upon what principles the
+Territories shall be organized; in other words, whether the people shall
+be allowed to regulate their domestic institutions in their own way,
+according to the provisions of this bill, or whether the opposite
+doctrine of Congressional interference is to prevail. Postpone it,
+if you will; but whenever you do act, this question must be met and
+decided.
+
+The Missouri compromise was interference; the compromise of 1850 was
+non-interference, leaving the people to exercise their rights under the
+Constitution. The Committee on Territories were compelled to act on this
+subject. I, as their chairman, was bound to meet the question. I chose
+to take the responsibility regardless of consequences personal to
+myself. I should have done the same thing last year, if there had been
+time; but we know, considering the late period at which the bill
+then reached us from the House, that there was not sufficient time to
+consider the question fully, and to prepare a report upon the subject.
+
+I was, therefore, persuaded by my friends to allow the bill to be
+reported to the Senate, in order that such action might be taken as
+should be deemed wise and proper. The bill was never taken up for
+action--the last night of the session having been exhausted in debate on
+a motion to take up the bill. This session, the measure was introduced
+by my friend from Iowa (Mr. Dodge), and referred to the Territorial
+Committee during the first week of the session. We have abundance of
+time to consider the subject; it is a matter of pressing necessity,
+and there was no excuse for not meeting it directly and fairly. We were
+compelled to take our position upon the doctrine either of intervention
+or non-intervention. We chose the latter for two reasons: first, because
+we believed that the principle was right; and, second, because it was
+the principle adopted in 1850, to which the two great political parties
+of the country were solemnly pledged.
+
+There is another reason why I desire to see this principle recognized as
+a rule of action in all time to come. It will have the effect to destroy
+all sectional parties and sectional agitations. If, in the language of
+the report of the committee, you withdraw the slavery question from
+the halls of Congress and the political arena, and commit it to the
+arbitrament of those who are immediately interested in and alone
+responsible for its consequences, there is nothing left out of which
+sectional parties can be organized. It never was done, and never can
+be done on the bank, tariff, distribution, or any party issue which has
+existed, or may exist, after this slavery question is withdrawn from
+politics. On every other political question these have always supporters
+and opponents in every portion of the Union--in each State, county,
+village, and neighborhood--residing together in harmony and good
+fellowship, and combating each other's opinions and correcting each
+other's errors in a spirit of kindness and friendship. These differences
+of opinion between neighbors and friends, and the discussions that grow
+out of them, and the sympathy which each feels with the advocates of
+his own opinions in every portion of this widespread Republic, add
+an overwhelming and irresistible moral weight to the strength of
+the Confederacy. Affection for the Union can never be alienated or
+diminished by any other party issues than those which are joined upon
+sectional or geographical lines. When the people of the North shall
+all be rallied under one banner, and the whole South marshalled under
+another banner, and each section excited to frenzy and madness by
+hostility to the institutions of the other, then the patriot may well
+tremble for the perpetuity of the Union. Withdraw the slavery question
+from the political arena, and remove it to the States and Territories,
+each to decide for itself, such a catastrophe can never happen. Then
+you will never be able to tell, by any Senator's vote for or against any
+measure, from what State or section of the Union he comes.
+
+Why, then, can we not withdraw this vexed question from politics? Why
+can we not adopt the principle of this bill as a rule of action in all
+new Territorial organizations? Why can we not deprive these agitators of
+their vocation and render it impossible for Senators to come here upon
+bargains on the slavery question? I believe that the peace, the harmony,
+and perpetuity of the Union require us to go back to the doctrines of
+the Revolution, to the principles of the Constitution, to the principles
+of the Compromise of 1850, and leave the people, under the Constitution,
+to do as they may see proper in respect to their own internal affairs.
+
+Mr. President, I have not brought this question forward as a Northern
+man or as a Southern man. I am unwilling to recognize such divisions
+and distinctions. I have brought it forward as an American Senator,
+representing a State which is true to this principle, and which has
+approved of my action in respect to the Nebraska bill. I have brought it
+forward not as an act of justice to the South more than to the North. I
+have presented it especially as an act of justice to the people of those
+Territories and of the States to be formed therefrom, now and in all
+time to come. I have nothing to say about Northern rights or Southern
+rights. I know of no such divisions or distinctions under the
+Constitution. The bill does equal and exact justice to the whole Union,
+and every part of it; it violates the right of no State or Territory;
+but places each on a perfect equality, and leaves the people thereof to
+the free enjoyment of all their rights under the Constitution.
+
+Now, sir, I wish to say to our Southern friends that if they desire to
+see this great principle carried out, now is their time to rally around
+it, to cherish it, preserve it, make it the rule of action in all future
+time. If they fail to do it now, and thereby allow the doctrine of
+interference to prevail, upon their heads the consequences of that
+interference must rest. To our Northern friends, on the other hand,
+I desire to say, that from this day henceforward they must rebuke the
+slander which has been uttered against the South, that they desire to
+legislate slavery into the Territories. The South has vindicated her
+sincerity, her honor, on that point by bringing forward a provision
+negativing, in express terms, any such effect as a result of this bill.
+I am rejoiced to know that while the proposition to abrogate the eighth
+section of the Missouri act comes from a free State, the proposition to
+negative the conclusion that slavery is thereby introduced, comes from
+a slave-holding State. Thus, both sides furnish conclusive evidence that
+they go for the principle, and the principle only, and desire to take no
+advantage of any possible misconstruction.
+
+Mr. President, I feel that I owe an apology to the Senate for having
+occupied their attention so long, and a still greater apology for having
+discussed the question in such an incoherent and desultory manner. But
+I could not forbear to claim the right of closing this debate. I thought
+gentlemen would recognize its propriety when they saw the manner
+in which I was assailed and misrepresented in the course of this
+discussion, and especially by assaults still more disreputable in some
+portions of the country. These assaults have had no other effect upon me
+than to give me courage and energy for a still more resolute discharge
+of duty. I say frankly that, in my opinion, this measure will be as
+popular at the North as at the South, when its provisions and principles
+shall have been fully developed, and become well understood. The people
+at the North are attached to the principles of self-government, and
+you cannot convince them that that is self-government which deprives a
+people of the right of legislating for themselves, and compels them to
+receive laws which are forced upon them by a Legislature in which they
+are not represented. We are willing to stand upon this great principle
+of self-government every-where; and it is to us a proud reflection that,
+in this whole discussion, no friend of the bill has urged an argument
+in its favor which could not be used with the same propriety in a free
+State as in a slave State, and vice versed. No enemy of the bill has
+used an argument which would bear repetition one mile across Mason and
+Dixon's line. Our opponents have dealt entirely in sectional appeals.
+The friends of the bill have discussed a great principle of universal
+application, which can be sustained by the same reasons, and the same
+arguments, in every time and in every corner of the Union.
+
+
+
+
+CHARLES SUMNER,
+
+OF MASSACHUSETTS.' (BORN 1811, DIED 1874.)
+
+ON THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS;
+
+SENATE, MAY 19-20, 1856.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+You are now called to redress a great transgression. Seldom in the
+history of nations has such a question been presented. Tariffs, Army
+bills, Navy bills, Land bills, are important, and justly occupy your
+care; but these all belong to the course of ordinary legislation. As
+means and instruments only, they are necessarily subordinate to the
+conservation of government itself. Grant them or deny them, in greater
+or less degree, and you will inflict no shock. The machinery of
+government will continue to move. The State will not cease to exist. Far
+otherwise is it with the eminent question now before you, involving, as
+it does, Liberty in a broad territory, and also involving the peace of
+the whole country, with our good name in history forever more.
+
+Take down your map, sir, and you will find that the Territory of Kansas,
+more than any other region, occupies the middle spot of North America,
+equally distant from the Atlantic on the east, and the Pacific on the
+west; from the frozen waters of Hudson's Bay on the north, and the tepid
+Gulf Stream on the south, constituting the precise territorial centre of
+the whole vast continent. To such advantages of situation, on the very
+highway between two oceans, are added a soil of unsurpassed richness,
+and a fascinating, undulating beauty of surface, with a health-giving
+climate, calculated to nurture a powerful and generous people, worthy
+to be a central pivot of American institutions. A few short months only
+have passed since this spacious and mediterranean country was open only
+to the savage who ran wild in its woods and prairies; and now it has
+already drawn to its bosom a population of freemen larger than Athens
+crowded within her historic gates, when her sons, under Miltiades,
+won liberty for man-kind on the field of Marathon; more than Sparta
+contained when she ruled Greece, and sent forth her devoted children,
+quickened by a mother's benediction, to return with their shields, or on
+them; more than Rome gathered on her seven hills, when, under her kings,
+she commenced that sovereign sway, which afterward embraced the
+whole earth; more than London held, when, on the fields of Crecy
+and Agincourt, the English banner was carried victoriously over the
+chivalrous hosts of France.
+
+Against this Territory, thus fortunate in position and population, a
+crime has been committed, which is without example in the records of
+the past. Not in plundered provinces or in the cruelties of selfish
+governors will you find its parallel; and yet there is an ancient
+instance, which may show at least the path of justice. In the terrible
+impeachment by which the great Roman orator has blasted through all
+time the name of Verres, amidst charges of robbery and sacrilege, the
+enormity which most aroused the indignant voice of his accuser, and
+which still stands forth with strongest distinctness, arresting the
+sympathetic indignation of all who read the story, is, that away in
+Sicily he had scourged a citizen of Rome--that the cry, "I am a Roman
+citizen," had been interposed in vain against the lash of the tyrant
+governor. Other charges were, that he had carried away productions of
+art, and that he had violated the sacred shrines. It was in the presence
+of the Roman Senate that this arraignment proceeded; in a temple of
+the Forum; amidst crowds--such as no orator had ever before drawn
+together--thronging the porticos and colonnades, even clinging to
+the house-tops and neighboring slopes--and under the anxious gaze of
+witnesses summoned from the scene of crime. But an audience grander
+far--of higher dignity--of more various people, and of wider
+intelligence--the countless multitude of succeeding generations, in
+every land, where eloquence has been studied, or where the Roman name
+has been recognized,--has listened to the accusation, and throbbed with
+condemnation of the criminal. Sir, speaking in an age of light, and a
+land of constitutional liberty, where the safeguards of elections are
+justly placed among the highest triumphs of civilization, I fearlessly
+assert that the wrongs of much-abused Sicily, thus memorable in history,
+were small by the side of the wrongs of Kansas, where the very shrines
+of popular institutions, more sacred than any heathen altar, have been
+desecrated; where the ballot-box, more precious than any work, in ivory
+or marble, from the cunning hand of art, has been plundered; and where
+the cry, "I am an American citizen," has been interposed in vain against
+outrage of every kind, even upon life itself. Are you against sacrilege?
+I present it for your execration. Are you against;robbery? I hold it up
+to your scorn. Are you for the protection of American citizens? I show
+you how their dearest rights have been cloven down, while a Tyrannical
+Usurpation has sought to install itself on their very necks!
+
+But the wickedness which I now begin to expose is immeasurably
+aggravated by the motive which prompted it. Not in any common lust for
+power did this uncommon tragedy have its origin. It is the rape of a
+virgin Territory, compelling it to the hateful embrace of Slavery; and
+it may be clearly traced to a depraved longing for a new slave State,
+the hideous off-spring of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the
+power of slavery in the National Government. Yes, sir, when the whole
+world, alike Christian and Turk, is rising up to condemn this wrong, and
+to make it a hissing to the nations, here in our Republic, force--ay,
+sir, FORCE--has been openly employed in compelling Kansas to this
+pollution, and all for the sake of political power. There is the simple
+fact, which you will in vain attempt to deny, but which in itself
+presents an essential wickedness that makes other public crimes seem
+like public virtues.
+
+But this enormity, vast beyond comparison, swells to dimensions of
+wickedness which the imagination toils in vain to grasp, when it is
+understood that for this purpose are hazarded the horrors of intestine
+feud not only in this distant Territory, but everywhere throughout the
+country. Already the muster has begun. The strife is no longer local,
+but national. Even now, while I speak, portents hang on all the arches
+of the horizon threatening to darken the broad land, which already
+yawns with the mutterings of civil war. The fury of the propagandists of
+Slavery, and the calm determination of their opponents, are now diffused
+from the distant Territory over widespread communities, and the
+whole country, in all its extent--marshalling hostile divisions, and
+foreshadowing a strife which, unless happily averted by the triumph
+of Freedom, will become war--fratricidal, parricidal war--with an
+accumulated wickedness beyond the wickedness of any war in human annals;
+justly provoking the avenging judgment of Providence and the avenging
+pen of history, and constituting a strife, in the language of the
+ancient writer, more than foreign, more than social, more than civil;
+but something compounded of all these strifes, and in itself more than
+war; _sal potius commune quoddam ex omnibus, et plus quam bellum_.
+
+Such is the crime which you are to judge. But the criminal also must be
+dragged into day, that you may see and measure the power by which all
+this wrong is sustained. From no common source could it proceed. In
+its perpetration was needed a spirit of vaulting ambition which would
+hesitate at nothing; a hardihood of purpose which was insensible to the
+judgment of mankind; a madness for Slavery which would disregard the
+Constitution, the laws, and all the great examples of our history;
+also a consciousness of power such as comes from the habit of power;
+a combination of energies found only in a hundred arms directed by
+a hundred eyes; a control of public opinion through venal pens and a
+prostituted press; an ability to subsidize crowds in every vocation
+of life--the politician with his local importance, the lawyer with his
+subtle tongue, and even the authority of the judge on the bench; and
+a familiar use of men in places high and low, so that none, from the
+President to the lowest border postmaster, should decline to be its
+tool; all these things and more were needed, and they were found in
+the slave power of our Republic. There, sir, stands the criminal,
+all unmasked before you--heartless, grasping, and tyrannical--with an
+audacity beyond that of Verres, a subtlety beyond that of Machiavel, a
+meanness beyond that of Bacon, and an ability beyond that of Hastings.
+Justice to Kansas can be secured only by the prostration of this
+influence; for this the power behind--greater than any President--which
+succors and sustains the crime. Nay, the proceedings I now arraign
+derive their fearful consequences only from this connection.
+
+In now opening this great matter, I am not insensible to the austere
+demands of the occasion; but the dependence of the crime against Kansas
+upon the slave power is so peculiar and important, that I trust to be
+pardoned while I impress it with an illustration, which to some may
+seem trivial. It is related in Northern mythology that the god of Force,
+visiting an enchanted region, was challenged by his royal entertainer to
+what seemed an humble feat of strength--merely, sir, to lift a cat from
+the ground. The god smiled at the challenge, and, calmly placing his
+hand under the belly of the animal, with superhuman strength strove,
+while the back of the feline monster arched far up-ward, even beyond
+reach, and one paw actually forsook the earth, until at last the
+discomfited divinity desisted; but he was little surprised at his
+defeat when he learned that this creature, which seemed to be a cat, and
+nothing more, was not merely a cat, but that it belonged to and was a
+part of the great Terrestrial Serpent, which, in its innumerable folds,
+encircled the whole globe. Even so the creature, whose paws are now
+fastened upon Kansas, whatever it may seem to be, constitutes in reality
+a part of the slave power, which, in its loathsome folds, is now
+coiled about the whole land. Thus do I expose the extent of the present
+contest, where we encounter not merely local resistance, but also the
+unconquered sustaining arm behind. But out of the vastness of the crime
+attempted, with all its woe and shame, I derive a well-founded assurance
+of a commensurate vastness of effort against it by the aroused masses of
+the country, determined not only to vindicate Right against Wrong,
+but to redeem the Republic from the thraldom of that Oligarchy which
+prompts, directs, and concentrates the distant wrong.
+
+Such is the crime, and such the criminal, which it is my duty in this
+debate to expose, and, by the blessing of God, this duty shall be done
+completely to the end. * * *'
+
+But, before entering upon the argument, I must say something of a
+general character, particularly in response to what has fallen from
+Senators who have raised themselves to eminence on this floor in
+championship of human wrongs. I mean the Senator from South Carolina
+(Mr. Butler), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas), who, though
+unlike as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally
+forth together in the same adventure. I regret much to miss the elder
+Senator from his seat; but the cause, against which he has run a
+tilt, with such activity of animosity, demands that the opportunity of
+exposing him should not be lost; and it is for the cause that I speak.
+The Senator from South Carolina has read many books of chivalry, and
+believes himself a chivalrous knight, with sentiments of honor and
+courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made his
+vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though
+polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight--I mean the
+harlot, Slavery. For her, his tongue is always profuse in words. Let her
+be impeached in character, or any proposition made to shut her out
+from the extension of her wantonness, and no extravagance of manner or
+hardihood of assertion is then too great for this Senator. The frenzy
+of Don Quixote, in behalf of his wench, Dulcinea del Toboso, is all
+surpassed. The asserted rights of Slavery, which shock equality of all
+kinds, are cloaked by a fantastic claim of equality. If the slave States
+cannot enjoy what, in mockery of the great fathers of the Republic, he
+misnames equality under the Constitution--in other words, the full power
+in the National Territories to compel fellow-men to unpaid toil, to
+separate husband and wife, and to sell little children at the auction
+block--then, sir, the chivalric Senator will conduct the State of South
+Carolina out of the Union! Heroic knight! Exalted Senator! A second
+Moses come for a second exodus!!
+
+But not content with this poor menace, which we have been twice told was
+"measured," the Senator in the unrestrained chivalry of his nature, has
+undertaken to apply opprobrious words to those who differ from him on
+this floor. He calls them "sectional and fanatical;" and opposition to
+the usurpation in Kansas he denounces as "an uncalculating fanaticism."
+To be sure these charges lack all grace of originality, and all
+sentiment of truth; but the adventurous Senator does not hesitate. He
+is the uncompromising, unblushing representative on this floor of a
+flagrant sectionalism, which now domineers over the Republic, and yet
+with a ludicrous ignorance of his own position--unable to see himself
+as others see him--or with an effrontery which even his white head ought
+not to protect from rebuke, he applies to those here who resist his
+sectionalism the very epithet which designates himself. The men who
+strive to bring back the Government to its original policy, when Freedom
+and not Slavery was sectional, he arraigns as sectional. This will not
+do. It involves too great a perversion of terms. I tell that Senator
+that it is to himself, and to the "organization" of which he is the
+"committed advocate," that this epithet belongs. I now fasten it upon
+them. For myself, I care little for names; but since the question has
+been raised here, I affirm that the Republican party of the Union is in
+no just sense sectional, but, more than any other party, national;
+and that it now goes forth to dislodge from the high places of the
+Government the tyrannical sectionalism of which the Senator from South
+Carolina is one of the maddest zealots. * * *
+
+As the Senator from South Carolina, is the Don Quixote, the Senator from
+Illinois (Mr. Douglas) is the Squire of Slavery, its very Sancho Panza,
+ready to do all its humiliating offices. This Senator, in his labored
+address, vindicating his labored report--piling one mass of elaborate
+error upon another mass--constrained himself, as you will remember, to
+unfamiliar decencies of speech. Of that address I have nothing to say
+at this moment, though before I sit down I shall show something of its
+fallacies. But I go back now to an earlier occasion, when, true to his
+native impulses, he threw into this discussion, "for a charm of powerful
+trouble," personalities most discreditable to this body. I will not stop
+to repel the imputations which he cast upon myself; but I mention them
+to remind you of the "sweltered venom sleeping got," which, with other
+poisoned ingredients, he cast into the caldron of this debate. Of other
+things I speak. Standing on this floor, the Senator issued his rescript,
+requiring submission to the Usurped Power of Kansas; and this was
+accompanied by a manner--all his own--such as befits the tyrannical
+threat. Very well. Let the Senator try. I tell him now that he cannot
+enforce any such submission. The Senator, with the slave power at his
+back, is strong; but he is not strong enough for this purpose. He is
+bold. He shrinks from nothing. Like Danton, he may cry, "l'audace!
+l'audace! toujours l'au-dace!" but even his audacity cannot compass this
+work. The Senator copies the British officer who, with boastful swagger,
+said that with the hilt of his sword he would cram the "stamps" down the
+throats of the American people, and he will meet a similar failure. He
+may convulse this country with a civil feud. Like the ancient madman, he
+may set fire to this Temple of Constitutional Liberty, grander than
+the Ephesian dome; but he cannot enforce obedience to that Tyrannical
+Usurpation.
+
+The Senator dreams that he can subdue the North. He disclaims the open
+threat, but his conduct still implies it. How little that Senator knows
+himself or the strength of the cause which he persecutes! He is but a
+mortal man; against him is an immortal principle. With finite power he
+wrestles with the infinite, and he must fall. Against him are stronger
+battalions than any marshalled by mortal arm--the inborn, ineradicable,
+invincible sentiments of the human heart; against him is nature in all
+her subtle forces; against him is God. Let him try to subdue these. * * *
+
+With regret, I come again upon the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+Butler), who, omnipresent in this debate, overflowed with rage at the
+simple suggestion that Kansas had applied for admission as a State;
+and, with incoherent phrases, discharged the loose expectoration of his
+speech, now upon her representative, and then upon her people. There was
+no extravagance of the ancient parliamentary debate, which he did not
+repeat; nor was there any possible deviation from truth which he did not
+make, with so much of passion, I am glad to add, as to save him from
+the suspicion of intentional aberration. But the Senator touches
+nothing which he does not disfigure--with error, sometimes of principle,
+sometimes of fact. He shows an incapacity of accuracy, whether in
+stating the Constitution, or in stating the law, whether in the details
+of statistics or the diversions of scholarship. He cannot ope his mouth,
+but out there flies a blunder. Surely he ought to be familiar with the
+life of Franklin; and yet he referred to this household character, while
+acting as agent of our fathers in England, as above suspicion; and this
+was done that he might give point to a false contrast with the agent of
+Kansas--not knowing that, however they may differ in genius and fame, in
+this experience they are alike: that Franklin, when entrusted with the
+petition of Massachusetts Bay, was assaulted by a foul-mouthed speaker,
+where he could not be heard in defence, and denounced as a "thief," even
+as the agent of Kansas has been assaulted on this floor, and denounced
+as a "forger." And let not the vanity of the Senator be inspired by
+the parallel with the British statesman of that day; for it is only in
+hostility to Freedom that any parallel can be recognized.
+
+But it is against the people of Kansas that the sensibilities of the
+Senator are particularly aroused. Coming, as he announces, "from a
+State"--ay, sir, from South Carolina--he turns with lordly disgust from
+this newly-formed community, which he will not recognize even as a "body
+politic." Pray, sir, by what title does he indulge in this egotism? Has
+he read the history of "the State" which he represents? He cannot
+surely have forgotten its shameful imbecility from Slavery, confessed
+throughout the Revolution, followed by its more shameful assumptions for
+Slavery since. He cannot have forgotten its wretched persistence in
+the slave-trade as the very apple of its eye, and the condition of its
+participation in the Union. He cannot have forgotten its constitution,
+which is Republican only in name, confirming power in the hands of the
+few, and founding the qualifications of its legislators on "a settled
+freehold estate and ten negroes." And yet the Senator, to whom that
+"State" has in part committed the guardianship of its good name, instead
+of moving, with backward treading steps, to cover its nakedness, rushes
+forward in the very ecstasy of madness, to expose it by provoking a
+comparison with Kansas. South Carolina is old; Kansas is young. South
+Carolina counts by centuries; where Kansas counts by years. But a
+beneficent example may be born in a day; and I venture to say, that
+against the two centuries of the older "State," may be already set
+the two years of trial, evolving corresponding virtue, in the younger
+community. In the one, is the long wail of Slavery; in the other, the
+hymns of Freedom. And if we glance at special achievements, it will
+be difficult to find any thing in the history of South Carolina which
+presents so much of heroic spirit in an heroic cause as appears in that
+repulse of the Missouri invaders by the beleaguered town of Lawrence,
+where even the women gave their effective efforts to Freedom. The
+matrons of Rome, who poured their jewels into the treasury for the
+public defence--the wives of Prussia, who, with delicate fingers,
+clothed their defenders against French invasion--the mothers of our
+own Revolution, who sent forth their sons, covered with prayers and
+blessings, to combat for human rights, did nothing of self-sacrifice
+truer than did these women on this occasion. Were the whole history of
+South Carolina blotted out of existence, from its very beginning down to
+the day of the last election of the Senator to his present seat on this
+floor, civilization might lose--I do not say how little; but surely
+less than it has already gained by the example of Kansas, in its valiant
+struggle against oppression, and in the development of a new science
+of emigration. Already, in Lawrence alone, there are newspapers and
+schools, including a High School, and throughout this infant Territory
+there is more mature scholarship far, in proportion to its inhabitants,
+than in all South Carolina. Ah, sir, I tell the Senator that Kansas,
+welcomed as a free State, will be a "ministering angel" to the Republic,
+when South Carolina, in the cloak of darkness which she hugs, "lies
+howling."
+
+The Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) naturally joins the Senator from
+South Carolina in this warfare, and gives to it the superior intensity
+of his nature. He thinks that the National Government has not completely
+proved its power, as it has never hanged a traitor; but, if the occasion
+requires, he hopes there will be no hesitation; and this threat is
+directed at Kansas, and even at the friends of Kansas throughout the
+country. Again occurs the parallel with the struggle of our fathers,
+and I borrow the language of Patrick Henry, when, to the cry from the
+Senator, of "treason," "treason," I reply, "if this be treason, make
+the most of it." Sir, it is easy to call names; but I beg to tell the
+Senator that if the word "traitor" is in any way applicable to those
+who refuse submission to a Tyrannical Usurpation, whether in Kansas or
+elsewhere, then must some new word, of deeper color, be invented, to
+designate those mad spirits who could endanger and degrade the Republic,
+while they betray all the cherished sentiments of the fathers and the
+spirit of the Constitution, in order to give new spread to Slavery. Let
+the Senator proceed. It will not be the first time in history, that a
+scaffold erected for punishment has become a pedestal of honor. Out of
+death comes life, and the "traitor" whom he blindly executes will live
+immortal in the cause.
+
+     "For Humanity sweeps onward; where to-day the martyr stands,
+     On the morrow crouches Judas, with the silver in his hands;
+     While the hooting mob of yesterday in silent awe return,
+     To glean up the scattered ashes into History's golden urn."
+
+Among these hostile Senators, there is yet another, with all the
+prejudices of the Senator from South Carolina, but without his generous
+impulses, who, on account of his character before the country, and the
+rancor of his opposition, deserves to be named. I mean the Senator from
+Virginia (Mr. Mason), who, as the author of the Fugitive-Slave bill, has
+associated himself with a special act of inhumanity and tyranny. Of him
+I shall say little, for he has said little in this debate, though within
+that little was compressed the bitterness of a life absorbed in the
+support of Slavery. He holds the commission of Virginia; but he does not
+represent that early Virginia, so dear to our hearts, which gave to us
+the pen of Jefferson, by which the equality of men was declared, and
+the sword of Washington, by which Independence was secured; but he
+represents that other Virginia, from which Washington and Jefferson
+now avert their faces, where human beings are bred as cattle for the
+shambles, and where a dungeon rewards the pious matron who teaches
+little children to relieve their bondage by reading the Book of Life.
+It is proper that such a Senator, representing such a State, should rail
+against free Kansas.
+
+Senators such as these are the natural enemies of Kansas, and I
+introduce them with reluctance, simply that the country may understand
+the character of the hostility which must be overcome. Arrayed with
+them, of course, are all who unite, under any pretext or apology, in
+the propagandism of human Slavery. To such, indeed, the time-honored
+safeguards of popular rights can be a name only, and nothing more. What
+are trial by jury, habeas corpus, the ballot-box, the right of petition,
+the liberty of Kansas, your liberty, sir, or mine, to one who lends
+himself, not merely to the support at home, but to the propagandism
+abroad, of that preposterous wrong, which denies even the right of a
+man to himself! Such a cause can be maintained only by a practical
+subversion of all rights. It is, therefore, merely according to reason
+that its partisans should uphold the Usurpation in Kansas.
+
+To overthrow this Usurpation is now the special, importunate duty of
+Congress, admitting of no hesitation or postponement. To this end it
+must lift itself from the cabals of candidates, the machinations of
+party, and the low level of vulgar strife. It must turn from that Slave
+Oligarchy which now controls the Republic, and refuse to be its tool.
+Let its power be stretched forth toward this distant Territory, not to
+bind, but to unbind; not for the oppression of the weak, but for the
+subversion of the tyrannical; not for the prop and maintenance of a
+revolting Usurpation, but for the confirmation of Liberty.
+
+     "These are imperial arts and worthy thee!"
+
+Let it now take its stand between the living and dead, and cause this
+plague to be stayed. All this it can do; and if the interests of Slavery
+did not oppose, all this it would do at once, in reverent regard for
+justice, law, and order, driving away all the alarms of war; nor would
+it dare to brave the shame and punishment of this great refusal. But the
+slave power dares anything; and it can be conquered only by the united
+masses of the people. From Congress to the People I appeal. * * *
+
+The contest, which, beginning in Kansas, has reached us, will soon be
+transferred from Congress to a broader stage, where every citizen will
+be not only spectator, but actor; and to their judgment I confidently
+appeal. To the People, now on the eve of exercising the electoral
+franchise, in choosing a Chief Magistrate of the Republic, I appeal, to
+vindicate the electoral franchise in Kansas. Let the ballot-box of
+the Union, with multitudinous might, protect the ballot-box in that
+Territory. Let the voters everywhere, while rejoicing in their own
+rights, help to guard the equal rights of distant fellow-citizens; that
+the shrines of popular institutions, now desecrated, may be sanctified
+anew; that the ballot-box, now plundered, may be restored; and that the
+cry, "I am an American citizen," may not be sent forth in vain against
+outrage of every kind. In just regard for free labor in that Territory,
+which it is sought to blast by unwelcome association with slave labor;
+in Christian sympathy with the slave, whom it is proposed to task
+and sell there; in stern condemnation of the crime which has been
+consummated on that beautiful soil; in rescue of fellow-citizens now
+subjugated to a Tyrannical Usurpation; in dutiful respect for the early
+fathers, whose aspirations are now ignobly thwarted; in the name of the
+Constitution, which has been outraged--of the laws trampled down--of
+Justice banished--of Humanity degraded--of Peace destroyed--of Freedom
+crushed to earth; and, in the name of the Heavenly Father, whose service
+is perfect Freedom, I make this last appeal.
+
+
+May 20, 1856.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I shall not detain the Senate by a detailed reply to the
+speech of the Senator from Massachusetts. Indeed, I should not deem it
+necessary to say one word, but for the personalities in which he has
+indulged, evincing a depth of malignity that issued from every sentence,
+making it a matter of self-respect with me to repel the assaults which
+have been made.
+
+As to the argument, we have heard it all before. Not a position, not a
+fact, not an argument has he used, which has not been employed on the
+same side of the chamber, and replied to by me twice. I shall not follow
+him, therefore, because it would only be repeating the same answer which
+I have twice before given to each of his positions. He seems to get up
+a speech as in Yankee land they get up a bedquilt. They take all the old
+calico dresses of various colors, that have been in the house from
+the days of their grandmothers, and invite the young ladies of the
+neighborhood in the afternoon, and the young men to meet them at a dance
+in the evening. They cut up these pieces of old dresses and make pretty
+figures, and boast of what beautiful ornamental work they have made,
+although there was not a new piece of material in the whole quilt. Thus
+it is with the speech which we have had re-hashed here to-day, in regard
+to matters of fact, matters of law, and matters of argument--every thing
+but the personal assaults and the malignity. * * *
+
+His endeavor seems to be an attempt to whistle to keep up his courage
+by defiant assaults upon us all. I am in doubt as to what can be his
+object. He has not hesitated to charge three fourths of the Senate with
+fraud, with swindling, with crime, with infamy, at least one hundred
+times over in his speech. Is it his object to provoke some of us to kick
+him as we would a dog in the street, that he may get sympathy upon the
+just chastisement? What is the object of this denunciation against the
+body of which we are members? A hundred times he has called the Nebraska
+bill a "swindle," an act of crime, an act of infamy, and each time
+went on to illustrate the complicity of each man who voted for it in
+perpetrating the crime. He has brought it home as a personal charge to
+those who passed the Nebraska bill, that they were guilty of a crime
+which deserved the just indignation of heaven, and should make them
+infamous among men.
+
+Who are the Senators thus arraigned? He does me the honor to make me the
+chief. It was my good luck to have such a position in this body as to
+enable me to be the author of a great, wise measure, which the Senate
+has approved, and the country will endorse. That measure was sustained
+by about three fourths of all the members of the Senate. It was
+sustained by a majority of the Democrats and a majority of the Whigs
+in this body. It was sustained by a majority of Senators from the
+slave-holding States, and a majority of Senators from the free States.
+The Senator, by his charge of crime, then, stultifies three fourths
+of the whole body, a majority of the North, nearly the whole South, a
+majority of Whigs, and a majority of Democrats here. He says they are
+infamous. If he so believed, who could suppose that he would ever show
+his face among such a body of men? How dare he approach one of those
+gentlemen to give him his hand after that act? If he felt the courtesies
+between men he would not do it. He would deserve to have himself spit in
+the face for doing so. * * *
+
+The attack of the Senator from Massachusetts now is not on me alone.
+Even the courteous and the accomplished Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
+Butler) could not be passed by in his absence.
+
+MR. MASON:--Advantage was taken of it.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--It is suggested that advantage is taken of his absence.
+I think that this is a mistake. I think the speech was written and
+practised, and the gestures fixed; and, if that part had been stricken
+out the Senator would not have known how to repeat the speech. All that
+tirade of abuse must be brought down on the head of the venerable, the
+courteous, and the distinguished Senator from South Carolina. I shall
+not defend that gentleman here. Every Senator who knows him loves him.
+The Senator from Massachusetts may take every charge made against him in
+his speech, and may verify by his oath, and by the oath of every one
+of his confederates, and there is not an honest man in this chamber who
+will not repel it as a slander. Your oaths cannot make a Senator feel
+that it was not an outrage to assail that honorable gentleman in the
+terms in which he has been attacked. He, however, will be here in due
+time to speak for himself, and to act for himself too. I know what will
+happen. The Senator from Massachusetts will go to him, whisper a secret
+apology in his ear, and ask him to accept that as satisfaction for a
+public outrage on his character! I know the Senator from Massachusetts
+is in the habit of doing those things. I have had some experience of his
+skill in that respect. * * *
+
+Why these attacks on individuals by name, and two thirds of the Senate
+collectively? Is it the object to drive men here to dissolve social
+relations with political opponents? Is it to turn the Senate into a bear
+garden, where Senators cannot associate on terms which ought to prevail
+between gentlemen? These attacks are heaped upon me by man after man.
+When I repel them, it is intimated that I show some feeling on the
+subject. Sir, God grant that when I denounce an act of infamy I shall do
+it with feeling, and do it under the sudden impulses of feeling, instead
+of sitting up at night writing out my denunciation of a man whom I
+hate, copying it, having it printed, punctuating the proof-sheets, and
+repeating it before the glass, in order to give refinement to insult,
+which is only pardonable when it is the outburst of a just indignation.
+
+Mr. President, I shall not occupy the time of the Senate. I dislike to
+be forced to repel these attacks upon myself, which seem to be repeated
+on every occasion. It appears that gentlemen on the other side of the
+chamber think they would not be doing justice to their cause if they did
+not make myself a personal object of bitter denunciation and malignity.
+I hope that the debate on this bill may be brought to a close at as
+early a day as possible. I shall do no more in these side discussions
+than vindicate myself and repel unjust attacks, but I shall ask the
+Senate to permit me to close the debate, when it shall close, in a calm,
+kind summary of the whole question, avoiding personalities.
+
+
+MR. SUMNER: Mr. President, To the Senator from Illinois, I should
+willingly leave the privilege of the common scold--the last word; but I
+will not leave to him, in any discussion with me, the last argument, or
+the last semblance of it. He has crowned the audacity of this debate by
+venturing to rise here and calumniate me. He said that I came here, took
+an oath to support the Constitution, and yet determined not to support a
+particular clause in that Constitution. To that statement I give, to his
+face, the flattest denial. When it was made on a former occasion on this
+floor by the absent Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), I then
+repelled it. I will read from the debate of the 28th of June, 1854, as
+published in the Globe, to show what I said in response to that calumny
+when pressed at that hour. Here is what I said to the Senator from South
+Carolina:
+
+"This Senator was disturbed, when to his inquiry, personally, pointedly,
+and vehemently addressed to me, whether I would join in returning a
+fellow-man to slavery? I exclaimed, 'Is thy servant a dog, that he
+should do this thing?'"
+
+You will observe that the inquiry of the Senator from South Carolina,
+was whether I would join in returning a fellow-man to slavery. It was
+not whether I would support any clause of the Constitution of the United
+States--far from that. * * *
+
+Sir, this is the Senate of the United States, an important body, under
+the Constitution, with great powers. Its members are justly supposed,
+from age, to be above the intemperance of youth, and from character to
+be above the gusts of vulgarity. They are supposed to have something of
+wisdom, and something of that candor which is the handmaid of wisdom.
+Let the Senator bear these things in mind, and let him remember
+hereafter that the bowie-knife and bludgeon are not the proper emblems
+of Senatorial debate. Let him remember that the swagger of Bob Acres and
+the ferocity of the Malay cannot add dignity to this body. The
+Senator has gone on to infuse into his speech the venom which has been
+sweltering for months--ay, for years; and he has alleged facts that
+are entirely without foundation, in order to heap upon me some personal
+obloquy. I will not go into the details which have flowed out so
+naturally from his tongue. I only brand them to his face as false. I
+say, also, to that Senator, and I wish him to bear it in mind, that no
+person with the upright form of man can be allowed--(Hesitation.)
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--Say it.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--I will say it--no person with the upright form of man can
+be allowed, without violation to all decency, to switch out from his
+tongue the perpetual stench of offensive personality. Sir, that is not
+a proper weapon of debate, at least, on this floor. The noisome, squat,
+and nameless animal, to which I now refer, is not a proper model for an
+American Senator. Will the Senator from Illinois take notice?
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I will; and therefore will not imitate you, sir.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--I did not hear the Senator.
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I said if that be the case I would certainly never imitate
+you in that capacity, recognizing the force of the illustration.
+
+MR. SUMNER:--Mr. President, again the Senator has switched his tongue,
+and again he fills the Senate with its offensive odor. * * *
+
+MR. DOUGLAS:--I am not going to pursue this subject further. I will only
+say that a man who has been branded by me in the Senate, and convicted
+by the Senate of falsehood, cannot use language requiring a reply, and
+therefore I have nothing more to say.
+
+
+
+
+PRESTON S. BROOKS,
+
+OF SOUTH CAROLINA. (BORN 1819, DIED 1857.)
+
+ON THE SUMNER ASSAULT;
+
+HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JULY 14, 1856.
+
+
+MR. SPEAKER:
+
+Some time since a Senator from Massachusetts allowed himself, in an
+elaborately prepared speech, to offer a gross insult to my State, and to
+a venerable friend, who is my State representative, and who was absent
+at the time.
+
+Not content with that, he published to the world, and circulated
+extensively, this uncalled-for libel on my State and my blood. Whatever
+insults my State insults me. Her history and character have commanded my
+pious veneration; and in her defence I hope I shall always be prepared,
+humbly and modestly, to perform the duty of a son. I should have
+forfeited my own self-respect, and perhaps the good opinion of my
+countrymen, if I had failed to resent such an injury by calling the
+offender in question to a personal account. It was a personal affair,
+and in taking redress into my own hands I meant no disrespect to the
+Senate of the United States or to this House. Nor, sir, did I design
+insult or disrespect to the State of Massachusetts. I was aware of the
+personal responsibilities I incurred, and was willing to meet them. I
+knew, too, that I was amenable to the laws of the country, which afford
+the same protection to all, whether they be members of Congress or
+private citizens. I did not, and do not now believe, that I could be
+properly punished, not only in a court of law, but here also, at the
+pleasure and discretion of the House. I did not then, and do not now,
+believe that the spirit of American freemen would tolerate slander in
+high places, and permit a member of Congress to publish and circulate a
+libel on another, and then call upon either House to protect him against
+the personal responsibilities which he had thus incurred.
+
+But if I had committed a breach of privilege, it was the privilege of
+the Senate, and not of this House, which was violated. I was answerable
+there, and not here. They had no right, as it seems to me, to
+prosecute me in these Halls, nor have you the right in law or under
+the Constitution, as I respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over
+offences committed against them. The Constitution does not justify them
+in making such a request, nor this House in granting it. If, unhappily,
+the day should ever come when sectional or party feeling should run so
+high as to control all other considerations of public duty or justice,
+how easy it will be to use such precedents for the excuse of arbitrary
+power, in either House, to expel members of the minority who may have
+rendered themselves obnoxious to the prevailing spirit in the House to
+which they belong.
+
+Matters may go smoothly enough when one House asks the other to punish
+a member who is offensive to a majority of its own body; but how will it
+be when, upon a pretence of insulted dignity, demands are made of
+this House to expel a member who happens to run counter to its party
+predilections, or other demands which it may not be so agreeable to
+grant? It could never have been designed by the Constitution of the
+United States to expose the two Houses to such temptations to collision,
+or to extend so far the discretionary power which was given to either
+House to punish its own members for the violation of its rules and
+orders. Discretion has been said to be the law of the tyrant, and when
+exercised under the color of the law, and under the influence of party
+dictation, it may and will become a terrible and insufferable despotism.
+
+This House, however, it would seem, from the unmistakable tendency of
+its proceedings, takes a different view from that which I deliberately
+entertain in common with many others.
+
+So far as public interests or constitutional rights are involved, I have
+now exhausted my means of defence. I may, then, be allowed to take a
+more personal view of the question at issue. The further prosecution of
+this subject, in the shape it has now assumed, may not only involve my
+friends, but the House itself, in agitations which might be unhappy
+in their consequences to the country. If these consequences could be
+confined to myself individually, I think I am prepared and ready to meet
+them, here or elsewhere; and when I use this language I mean what I say.
+But others must not suffer for me. I have felt more on account of my two
+friends who have been implicated,than for myself, for they have proven
+that "there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother." I will
+not constrain gentlemen to assume a responsibility on my account, which
+possibly they would not run on their own.
+
+Sir, I cannot, on any own account, assume the responsibility, in the
+face of the American people, of commencing a line of conduct which in my
+heart of hearts I believe would result in subverting the foundations of
+this Government, and in drenching this Hall in blood. No act of mine,
+on my personal account, shall inaugurate revolution; but when you,
+Mr. Speaker, return to your own home, and hear the people of the great
+North--and they are a great people--speak of me as a bad man, you will
+do me the justice to say that a blow struck by me at this time would
+be followed by revolution--and this I know. (Applause and hisses in the
+gallery.)
+
+Mr. Brooks (resuming):--If I desired to kill the Senator, why did not I
+do it? You all admit that I had him in my power. Let me tell the member
+from New Jersey that it was expressly to avoid taking life that I used
+an ordinary cane, presented to me by a friend in Baltimore, nearly three
+months before its application to the "bare head" of the Massachusetts
+Senator. I went to work very deliberately, as I am charged--and this
+is admitted,--and speculated somewhat as to whether I should employ a
+horsewhip or a cowhide; but knowing that the Senator was my superior
+in strength, it occurred to me that he might wrest it from my hand, and
+then--for I never attempt anything I do not perform--I might have been
+compelled to do that which I would have regretted the balance of my
+natural life.
+
+The question has been asked in certain newspapers, why I did not invite
+the Senator to personal combat in the mode usually adopted. Well, sir,
+as I desire the whole truth to be known about the matter, I will for
+once notice a newspaper article on the floor of the House, and answer
+here.
+
+My answer is, that the Senator would not accept a message; and having
+formed the unalterable determination to punish him, I believed that the
+offence of "sending a hostile message," superadded to the indictment
+for assault and battery, would subject me to legal penalties more severe
+than would be imposed for a simple assault and battery. That is my
+answer.
+
+Now, Mr. Speaker, I have nearly finished what I intended to say. If
+my opponents, who have pursued me with unparalleled bitterness, are
+satisfied with the present condition of this affair, I am. I return
+my thanks to my friends, and especially to those who are from
+nonslave-owning States, who have magnanimously sustained me, and felt
+that it was a higher honor to themselves to be just in their judgment
+of a gentleman than to be a member of Congress for life. In taking my
+leave, I feel that it is proper that I should say that I believe that
+some of the votes that have been cast against me have been extorted by
+an outside pressure at home, and that their votes do not express the
+feelings or opinions of the members who gave them.
+
+To such of these as have given their votes and made their speeches
+on the constitutional principles involved, and without indulging in
+personal vilification, I owe my respect. But, sir, they have written me
+down upon the history of the country as worthy of expulsion, and in no
+unkindness I must tell them that for all future time my self-respect
+requires that I shall pass them as strangers.
+
+And now, Mr. Speaker, I announce to you and to this House, that I am no
+longer a member of the Thirty-Fourth Congress.
+
+(Mr. Brooks then walked out of the House of Representatives.)
+
+
+
+
+JUDAH P. BENJAMIN,
+
+OF LOUISIANA. (BORN 1811, DIED 1864.)
+
+ON THE PROPERTY DOCTRINE, OR THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY IN SLAVES;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 11, 1858.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT, the whole subject of slavery, so far as it is involved
+in the issue now before the country, is narrowed down at last to a
+controversy on the solitary point, whether it be competent for the
+Congress of the United States, directly or indirectly, to exclude
+slavery from the Territories of the Union. The Supreme Court of the
+United States have given a negative answer to this proposition, and
+it shall be my first effort to support that negation by argument,
+independently of the authority of the decision.
+
+It seems to me that the radical, fundamental error which underlies the
+argument in affirmation of this power, is the assumption that slavery
+is the creature of the statute law of the several States where it is
+established; that it has no existence outside of the limits of those
+States; that slaves are not property beyond those limits; and
+that property in slaves is neither recognized nor protected by
+the Constitution of the United States, nor by international law. I
+controvert all these propositions, and shall proceed at once to my
+argument.
+
+Mr. President, the thirteen colonies, which on the 4th of July, 1776,
+asserted their independence, were British colonies, governed by British
+laws. Our ancestors in their emigration to this country brought with
+them the common law of England as their birthright. They adopted its
+principles for their government so far as it was not incompatible with
+the peculiarities of their situation in a rude and unsettled country.
+Great Britain then having the sovereignty over the colonies, possessed
+undoubted power to regulate their institutions, to control their
+commerce, and to give laws to their intercourse, both with the mother
+and the other nations of the earth. If I can show, as I hope to be able
+to establish to the satisfaction of the Senate, that the nation thus
+exercising sovereign power over these thirteen colonies did establish
+slavery in them, did maintain and protect the institution, did originate
+and carry on the slave trade, did support and foster that trade, that
+it forbade the colonies permission either to emancipate or export their
+slaves, that it prohibited them from inaugurating any legislation in
+diminution or discouragement of the institution--nay, sir, more, if, at
+the date of our Revolution I can show that African slavery existed in
+England as it did on this continent, if I can show that slaves were sold
+upon the slave mart, in the Exchange and other public places of resort
+in the city of London as they were on this continent, then I shall not
+hazard too much in the assertion that slavery was the common law of the
+thirteen States of the Confederacy at the time they burst the bonds that
+united them to the mother country.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+This legislation, Mr. President, as I have said before, emanating from
+the mother country, fixed the institution upon the colonies. They could
+not resist it. All their right was limited to petition, to remonstrance,
+and to attempts at legislation at home to diminish the evil. Every
+such attempt was sternly repressed by the British Crown. In 1760, South
+Carolina passed an act prohibiting the further importation of African
+slaves. The act was rejected by the Crown; the Governor was reprimanded;
+and a circular was sent to all the Governors of all the colonies,
+warning them against presuming to countenance such legislation. In
+1765, a similar bill was twice read in the Assembly of Jamaica. The news
+reached Great Britain before its final passage. Instructions were sent
+out to the royal Governor; he called the House of Assembly before him,
+communicated his instructions, and forbade any further progress of the
+bill. In 1774, in spite of this discountenancing action of the mother
+Government, two bills passed the Legislative Assembly of Jamaica; and
+the Earl of Dartmouth, then Secretary of State, wrote to Sir Basil
+Keith, the Governor of the colony, that "these measures had created
+alarm to the merchants of Great Britain engaged in that branch of
+commerce;" and forbidding him, "on pain of removal from his Government,
+to assent to such laws."
+
+Finally, in 1775--mark the date--1775--after the revolutionary struggle
+had commenced, whilst the Continental Congress was in session, after
+armies had been levied, after Crown Point and Ticonderoga had been taken
+possession of by the insurgent colonists, and after the first blood
+shed in the Revolution had reddened the spring sod upon the green at
+Lexington, this same Earl of Dartmouth, in remonstrance from the agent
+of the colonies, replied:
+
+"We cannot allow the colonies to check or discourage in any degree a
+traffic so beneficial to the nation."
+
+I say, then, that down to the very moment when our independence was won,
+slavery, by the statute law of England, was the common law of the old
+thirteen colonies. But, sir, my task does not end here. I desire to show
+you that by her jurisprudence, that by the decisions of her judges, and
+the answers of her lawyers to questions from the Crown and from public
+bodies, this same institution was declared to be recognized by the
+common law of England; and slaves were declared to be, in their
+language, merchandise, chattels, just as much private property as any
+other merchandise or any other chattel.
+
+A short time prior to the year 1713, a contract had been formed between
+Spain and a certain company, called the Royal Guinea Company, that had
+been established in France. This contract was technically called in
+those days an _assiento_. By the treaty of Utrecht of the 11th of April,
+1713, Great Britain, through her diplomatists, obtained a transfer of
+that contract. She yielded considerations for it. The obtaining of that
+contract was greeted in England with shouts of joy. It was considered
+a triumph of diplomacy. It was followed in the month of May, 1713, by a
+new contract in form, by which the British Government undertook, for
+the term of thirty years then next to come, to transport annually
+4800 slaves to the Spanish American colonies, at a fixed price. Almost
+immediately after this new contract, a question arose in the English
+Council as to what was the true legal character of the slaves thus to be
+exported to the Spanish American colonies; and, according to the forms
+of the British constitution, the question was submitted by the Crown in
+council to the twelve judges of England. I have their answer here; it is
+in these words:
+
+"In pursuance of His Majesty's order in council, hereunto annexed, we do
+humbly certify our opinion to be that negroes are merchandise."
+
+Signed by Lord Chief-Justice Holt, Judge Pollexfen, and eight other
+judges of England.
+
+Mr. Mason. What is the date of that?
+
+Mr. Benjamin. It was immediately after the treaty of Utrecht, in 1713.
+Very soon afterwards the nascent spirit of fanaticism began to obtain
+a foothold in England; and although large numbers of negro slaves were
+owned in Great Britain, and, as I said before, were daily sold on the
+public exchange in Lon-don, questions arose as to the right of the
+owners to retain property in their slaves; and the merchants of London,
+alarmed, submitted the question to Sir Philip Yorke, who afterwards
+became Lord Hardwicke, and to Lord Talbot, who were then the solicitor
+and attorney-general of the kingdom. The question was propounded to
+them, "What are the rights of a British owner of a slave in England?"
+and this is the answer of those two legal functionaries. They certified
+that "a slave coming from the West Indies to England with or without his
+master, doth not become free; and his master's property in him is not
+thereby determined nor varied, and the master may legally compel him to
+return to the plantations."
+
+And, in 1749, the same question again came up before Sir Philip Yorke,
+then Lord Chancellor of England, under the title of Lord Hardwicke, and,
+by a decree in chancery in the case before him, he affirmed the doctrine
+which he had uttered when he was attorney-general of Great Britain.
+
+Things thus stood in England until the year 1771, when the spirit
+of fanaticism, to which I have adverted, acquiring strength, finally
+operated upon Lord Mansfield, who, by a judgment rendered in a case
+known as the celebrated Sommersett case, subverted the common law of
+England by judicial legislation, as I shall prove in an instant. I say
+it not on my own authority. I would not be so presumptuous. The Senator
+from Maine (Mr. Fessenden) need not smile at my statement. I will give
+him higher authority than anything I can dare assert. I say that in 1771
+Lord Mansfield subverted the common law of England in the Sommersett
+case, and decided, not that a slave carried to England from the West
+Indies by his master thereby became free, but that by the law of
+England, if the slave resisted the master, there was no remedy by which
+the master could exercise his control; that the colonial legislation
+which afforded the master means of controlling his property had no
+authority in England, and that England by her laws had provided no
+substitute for that authority. That was what Lord Mansfield decided.
+I say this was judicial legislation. I say it subverted the entire
+previous jurisprudence of Great Britain. I have just adverted to the
+authorities for that position. Lord Mansfield felt it. The case was
+argued before him over and over again, and he begged the parties to
+compromise. They said they would not. "Why," said he, "I have known
+six of these cases already, and in five out of the six there was a
+compromise; you had better compromise this matter"; but the parties said
+no, they would stand on the law; and then, after holding the case up
+two terms, Lord Mansfield mustered up courage to say just what I have
+asserted to be his decision; that there was no law in England affording
+the master control over his slave; and that therefore the master's
+putting him on board of a vessel in irons, being unsupported by
+authority derived from English law, and the colonial law not being in
+force in England, he would discharge the slave from custody on _habeas
+corpus_, and leave the master to his remedy as best he could find one.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. Decided so unwillingly.
+
+Mr. Benjamin. The gentleman is right--very unwillingly. He was driven
+to the decision by the paramount power which is now perverting the
+principles, and obscuring the judgment of the people of the North; and
+of which I must say there is no more striking example to be found than
+its effect on the clear and logical intellect of my friend from Maine.
+
+Mr. President, I make these charges in relation to that judgment,
+because in them I am supported by an intellect greater than Mansfield's;
+by a judge of resplendent genius and consummate learning; one who, in
+all questions of international law, on all subjects not dependent upon
+the peculiar municipal technical common law of England, has won for
+himself the proudest name in the annals of her jurisprudence--the
+gentleman knows well that I refer to Lord Stowell. As late as 1827,
+twenty years after Great Britain had abolished the slave trade, six
+years before she was brought to the point of confiscating the property
+of her colonies which she had forced them to buy, a case was brought
+before that celebrated judge; a case known to all lawyers by the name of
+the slave Grace. It was pretended in the argument that the slave Grace
+was free, because she had been carried to England, and it was said,
+under the authority of Lord Mansfield's decision in the Sommersett
+case, that, having once breathed English air, she was free; that the
+atmosphere of that favored kingdom was too pure to be breathed by a
+slave. Lord Stowell, in answering that legal argument, said that after
+painful and laborious research into historical records, he did not find
+anything touching the peculiar fitness of the English atmosphere for
+respiration during the ten centuries that slaves had lived in England.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+After that decision had been rendered, Lord Stowell, who was at that
+time in correspondence with Judge Story, sent him a copy of it, and
+wrote to him upon the subject of his judgment. No man will doubt the
+anti-slavery feelings and proclivities of Judge Story. He was asked to
+take the decision into consideration and give his opinion about it. Here
+is his answer:
+
+"I have read, with great attention, your judgment in the slave case.
+Upon the fullest consideration which I have been able to give the
+subject, I entirely concur in your views. If I had been called upon to
+pronounce a judgment in a like case, I should have certainly arrived at
+the same result."
+
+That was the opinion of Judge Story in 1827; but, sir, whilst
+contending, as I here contend, as a proposition, based in history,
+maintained by legislation, supported by judicial authority of the
+greatest weight, that slavery, as an institution, was protected by
+the common law of these colonies at the date of the Declaration of
+Independence, I go further, though not necessary to my argument, and
+declare that it was the common law of North and South America alike.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Thus, Mr. President, I say that even if we admit for the moment that
+the common law of the nations which colonized this continent, the
+institution of slavery at the time of our independence, was dying away
+by the manumissions either gratuitous or for a price of those who
+held the people as slaves, yet, so far as the continent of America was
+concerned, North and South, there did not breathe a being who did
+not know that a negro, under the common law of the continent, was
+merchandise, was property, was a slave, and that he could only extricate
+himself from that status, stamped upon him by the common law of the
+country, by positive proof of manumission. No man was bound to show
+title to his negro slave. The slave was bound to show manumission under
+which he had acquired his freedom, by the common law of every colony.
+Why, sir, can any man doubt, is there a gentleman here, even the Senator
+from Maine, who doubts that if, after the Revolution, the different
+States of this Union had not passed laws upon the subject to abolish
+slavery, to subvert this common law of the continent, every one of these
+States would be slave States yet? How came they free States? Did not
+they have this institution of slavery imprinted upon them by the power
+of the mother country? How did they get rid of it? All, all must admit
+that they had to pass positive acts of legislation to accomplish this
+purpose. Without that legislation they would still be slave States.
+What, then, becomes of the pretext that slavery only exists in those
+States where it was established by positive legislation, that it has
+no inherent vitality out of those States, and that slaves are not
+considered as property by the Constitution of the United States?
+
+When the delegates of the several colonies which had thus asserted their
+independence of the British Crown met in convention, the decision of
+Lord Mansfield in the Sommersett case was recent, was known to all. At
+the same time, a number of the northern colonies had taken incipient
+steps for the emancipation of their slaves. Here permit me to say, sir,
+that, with a prudent regard to what the Senator from Maine (Mr. Hamlin)
+yesterday called the "sensitive pocket-nerve," they all made these
+provisions prospective. Slavery was to be abolished after a certain
+future time--just enough time to give their citizens convenient
+opportunity for selling the slaves to southern planters, putting the
+money in their pockets, and then sending to us here, on this floor,
+representatives who flaunt in robes of sanctimonious holiness; who make
+parade of a cheap philanthropy, exercised at our expense; and who say
+to all men: "Look ye now, how holy, how pure we are; you are polluted by
+the touch of slavery; we are free from it."
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, sir, because the Supreme Court of the United States says--what
+is patent to every man who reads the Constitution of the United
+States--that it does guaranty property in slaves,it has been attacked
+with vituperation here, on this floor, by Senators on all sides. Some
+have abstained from any indecent, insulting remarks in relation to the
+Court. Some have confined themselves to calm and legitimate argument. To
+them I am about to reply. To the others, I shall have something to say a
+little later. What says the Senator from Maine (Mr. Fessenden)? He says:
+
+"Had the result of that election been otherwise, and had not the
+(Democratic) party triumphed on the dogma which they had thus
+introduced, we should never have heard of a doctrine so utterly at
+variance with all truth; so utterly destitute of all legal logic; so
+founded on error, and unsupported by anything like argument, as is the
+opinion of the Supreme Court."
+
+He says, further:
+
+"I should like, if I had time, to attempt to demonstrate the fallacy
+of that opinion. I have examined the view of the Supreme Court of the
+United States on the question of the power of the Constitution to carry
+slavery into free territory belonging to the United States, and I tell
+you that I believe any tolerably respectable lawyer in the United States
+can show, beyond all question, to any fair and unprejudiced mind, that
+the decision has nothing to stand upon except assumption, and bad logic
+from the assumptions made. The main proposition on which that decision
+is founded, the corner-stone of it, without which it is nothing, without
+which it fails entirely to satisfy the mind of any man, is this: that
+the Constitution of the United States recognizes property in slaves,
+and protects it as such. I deny it. It neither recognizes slaves as
+property, nor does it protect slaves as property."
+
+The Senator here, you see, says that the whole decision is based on
+that assumption, which is false. He says that the Constitution does
+not recognize slaves as property, nor protect them as property, and his
+reasoning, a little further on, is somewhat curious. He says:
+
+"On what do they found the assertion that the Constitution recognizes
+slavery as property? On the provision of the Constitution by which
+Congress is prohibited from passing a law to prevent the African
+slave trade for twenty years; and therefore they say the Constitution
+recognizes slaves as property."
+
+I should think that was a pretty fair recognition of it. On this point
+the gentleman declares:
+
+"Will not anybody see that this constitutional provision, if it works
+one way, must work the other? If, by allowing the slave trade for twenty
+years, we recognize slaves as property, when we say that at the end of
+twenty years we will cease to allow it, or may cease to do so, is not
+that denying them to be property after that period elapses?"
+
+That is the argument. Nothing but my respect for the logical intellect
+of the Senator from Maine could make me treat this argument as serious,
+and nothing but having heard it myself would make me believe that he
+ever uttered it. What, sir! The Constitution of our country says to the
+South, "you shall count as the basis of your representation five slaves
+as being three white men; you may be protected in the natural increase
+of your slaves; nay, more, as a matter of compromise you may increase
+their number if you choose, for twenty years, by importation; when these
+twenty years are out, you shall stop." The Supreme Court of the United
+States says, "well; is not this a recognition of slavery, of property
+in slaves?" "Oh, no," says the gentleman, "the rule must work both
+ways; there is a converse to the proposition." Now, sir, to an
+ordinary, uninstructed intellect, it would seem that the converse of the
+proposition was simply that at the end of twenty years you should not
+any longer increase your numbers by importation; but the gentleman says
+the converse of the proposition is that at the end of the twenty years,
+after you have, under the guarantee of the Constitution, been adding by
+importation to the previous number of your slaves, then all those that
+you had before, and all those that, under that Constitution, you have
+imported, cease to be recognized as property by the Constitution, and
+on this proposition he assails the Supreme Court of the United States--a
+proposition which he says will occur to anybody.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. Will the Senator allow me?
+
+Mr. Benjamin. I should be very glad to enter into this debate now, but I
+fear it is so late that I shall not be able to get through to-day.
+
+Mr. Fessenden. I suppose it is of no consequence.
+
+Mr. Benjamin. What says the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Collamer), who
+also went into this examination somewhat extensively. I read from his
+printed speech:
+
+"I do not say that slaves are never property. I do not say that they
+are, or are not. Within the limits of a State which declares them to be
+property, they are property, because they are within the jurisdiction of
+that government which makes the declaration; but I should wish to speak
+of it in the light of a member of the United States Senate, and in the
+language of the United States Constitution. If this be property in the
+States, what is the nature and extent of it? I insist that the Supreme
+Court has often decided, and everybody has understood, that slavery is
+a local institution, existing by force of State law; and of course that
+law can give it no possible character beyond the limits of that State."
+I shall no doubt find the idea better expressed in the opinion of Judge
+Nelson, in this same Dred Scott decision. I prefer to read his language.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+"Here is the law; and under it exists the law of slavery in the
+different States. By virtue of this very principle it cannot extend
+one inch beyond its own territorial limits. A State cannot regulate
+the relation of master and slave, of owner and property, the manner and
+title of descent, or anything else, one inch beyond its territory. Then
+you cannot, by virtue of the law of slavery, if it makes slaves property
+in a State, if you please, move that property out of the State. It ends
+whenever you pass from that State. You may pass into another State that
+has a like law; and if you do, you hold it by virtue of that law; but
+the moment you pass beyond the limits of the slaveholding States, all
+title to the property called property in slaves, there ends. Under such
+a law slaves cannot be carried as property into the Territories, or
+anywhere else beyond the States authorizing it. It is not property
+anywhere else. If the Constitution of the United States gives any other
+and further character than this to slave property, let us acknowledge it
+fairly and end all strife about it. If it does not, I ask in all candor,
+that men on the other side shall say so, and let this point be
+settled. What is the point we are to inquire into? It is this: does
+the Constitution of the United States make slaves property beyond the
+jurisdiction of the States authorizing slavery? If it only acknowledges
+them as property within that jurisdiction, it has not extended the
+property one inch beyond the State line; but if, as the Supreme Court
+seems to say, it does recognize and protect them as property further
+than State limits, and more than the State laws do, then, indeed, it
+becomes like other property. The Supreme Court rests this claim upon
+this clause of the Constitution: 'No person held to service or labor in
+one State, under the laws thereof, shall, in consequence of any law or
+regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall
+be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may
+be due.' Now the question is, does that guaranty it? Does that make
+it the same as other property? The very fact that this clause makes
+provision on the subject of persons bound to service, shows that the
+framers of the Constitution did not regard it as other property. It
+was a thing that needed some provision; other property did not. The
+insertion of such a provision shows that it was not regarded as other
+property. If a man's horse stray from Delaware into Pennsylvania, he can
+go and get it. Is there any provision in the Constitution for it? No.
+How came this to be there, if a slave is property? If it is the same as
+other property, why have any provision about it?'"
+
+It will undoubtedly have struck any person, in hearing this passage read
+from the speech of the Senator from Vermont, whom I regret not to see
+in his seat to-day, that the whole argument, ingeniously as it is put,
+rests upon this fallacy--if I may say so with due respect to him--that
+a man cannot have title in property wherever the law does not give him
+a remedy or process for the assertion of his title; or, in other words,
+his whole argument rests upon the old confusion of ideas which considers
+a man's right and his remedy to be one and the same thing. I have
+already shown to you, by the passages I have cited from the opinions of
+Lord Stowell and of Judge Story, how they regard this subject. They say
+that the slave who goes to England, or goes to Massachusetts, from a
+slave State, is still a slave, that he is still his master's property;
+but that his master has lost control over him, not by reason of the
+cessation of his property, but because those States grant no remedy to
+the master by which he can exercise his control.
+
+There are numerous illustrations upon this point--illustrations
+furnished by the copyright laws, illustrations furnished by patent laws.
+Let us take a case, one that appeals to us all. There lives now a man
+in England who from time to time sings to the enchanted ear of the
+civilized world strains of such melody that the charmed senses seem to
+abandon the grosser regions of earth, and to rise to purer and serener
+regions above. God has created that man a poet. His inspiration is his;
+his songs are his by right divine; they are his property so recognized
+by human law; yet here in these United States men steal Tennyson's works
+and sell his property for their profit; and this because, in spite of
+the violated conscience of the nation, we refuse to give him protection
+for his property. Examine your Constitution; are slaves the only species
+of property there recognized as requiring peculiar protection? Sir, the
+inventive genius of our brethren of the North is a source of vast wealth
+to them and vast benefit to the nation. I saw a short time ago in one of
+the New York journals, that the estimated value of a few of the patents
+now before us in this Capital for renewal, was $40,000,000. I cannot
+believe that the entire capital, invested in inventions of this
+character in the United States can fall short of one hundred and fifty
+or two hundred million dollars. On what protection does this vast
+property rest? Just upon that same constitutional protection which gives
+a remedy to the slave owner when his property is, also found outside of
+the limits of the State in which he lives.
+
+Without this protection, what would be the condition of the northern
+inventor? Why, sir, the Vermont inventor protected by his own law would
+come to Massachusetts, and there say to the pirate who had stolen his
+property, "Render me up my property or pay me value for its use." The
+Senator from Vermont would receive for answer, if he were the counsel of
+the Vermont inventor, "Sir, if you want protection for your property go
+to your own State; property is governed by the laws of the State within
+whose jurisdiction it is found; you have no property in your invention
+outside of the limits of your State; you cannot go an inch beyond it."
+Would not this be so? Does not every man see at once that the right
+of the inventor to his discovery, that the right of the poet to his
+inspiration, depends upon those principles of eternal justice which God
+has implanted in the heart of man, and that wherever he cannot exercise
+them it is because man, faithless to the trust that he has received from
+God, denies them the protection to which they are entitled?'
+
+Sir, follow out the illustration which the Senator from Vermont himself
+has given; take his very case of the Delaware owner of a horse riding
+him across the line into Pennsylvania. The Senator says: "Now, you
+see that slaves are not property like other property; if slaves were
+property like other property, why have you this special clause in your
+Constitution to protect a slave? You have no clause to protect the
+horse, because horses are recognized as property everywhere." Mr.
+President, the same fallacy lurks at the bottom of this argument, as of
+all the rest. Let Pennsylvania exercise her undoubted jurisdiction over
+persons and things within her own boundary; let her do as she has
+a perfect right to do--declare that hereafter, within the State of
+Pennsylvania, there shall be no property in horses, and that no man
+shall maintain a suit in her courts for the recovery of property in a
+horse; and where will your horse-owner be then? Just where the English
+poet is now; just where the slaveholder and the inventor would be if the
+Constitution, foreseeing a difference of opinion in relation to rights
+in these subject-matters, had not provided the remedy in relation to
+such property as might easily be plundered. Slaves, if you please, are
+not property like other property in this: that you can easily rob us of
+them; but as to the right in them, that man has to overthrow the
+whole history of the world, he has to overthrow every treatise on
+jurisprudence, he has to ignore the common sentiment of mankind, he has
+to repudiate the authority of all that is considered sacred with man,
+ere he can reach the conclusion that the person who owns a slave, in
+a country where slavery has been established for ages, has no other
+property in that slave than the mere title which is given by the statute
+law of the land where it is found. * * *
+
+
+
+
+ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON THE DRED SCOTT DECISION,
+
+SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, JUNE 26, 1857.
+
+
+And now as to the Dred Scott decision. That decision declares two
+propositions--first, that a negro cannot sue in the United States
+courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the
+Territories. It was made by a divided court--dividing differently on
+the different points. Judge Douglas does not discuss the merits of the
+decision, and in that respect I shall follow his example, believing I
+could no more improve on McLean and Curtis than he could on Taney.
+
+He denounces all who question the correctness of that decision, as
+offering violent resistance to it. But who resists it? Who has, in spite
+of the decision, declared Dred Scott free, and resisted the authority of
+his master over him?
+
+Judicial decisions have two uses,--first, to absolutely determine the
+case decided; and secondly, to indicate to the public how other similar
+cases will be decided when they arise. For the latter use they are
+called "precedents" and "authorities."
+
+We believe as much as Judge Douglas (perhaps more) in obedience to,
+and respect for, the judicial department of government. We think its
+decisions on constitutional questions, when fully settled, should
+control not only the particular cases decided, but the general policy
+of the country, subject to be disturbed only by amendments to the
+Constitution as provided in that instrument itself. More than this would
+be revolution. But we think the Dred Scott decision is erroneous. We
+know the court that made it has often overruled its own decisions,
+and we shall do what we can to have it to overrule this. We offer no
+resistance to it.
+
+Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents
+according to circumstances. That this should be so accords both with
+common sense and the customary understanding of the legal profession.
+
+If this important decision had been made by the unanimous concurrence
+of the judges, and without any apparent partisan bias, and in accordance
+with legal public expectation and with the steady practice of the
+departments throughout our history, and had been in no part based on
+assumed historical facts which are not really true; or, if wanting in
+some of these, it had been before the court more than once, and had
+there been affirmed and reaffirmed through a course of years, it then
+might be, perhaps would be, factious, nay, even revolutionary, not to
+acquiesce in it as a precedent.
+
+But when, as is true, we find it wanting in all these claims to the
+public confidence, it is not factious, it is not even disrespectful, to
+treat it as not having yet quite established a settled doctrine for the
+country. But Judge Douglas considers this view awful. Hear him:
+
+"The courts are the tribunals prescribed by the Constitution and created
+by the authority of the people to determine, expound, and enforce the
+law. Hence, whoever resists the final decision of the highest
+judicial tribunal aims a deadly blow at our whole republican system of
+government--a blow which, if successful, would place all our rights
+and liberties at the mercy of passion, anarchy, and violence. I repeat,
+therefore, that if resistance to the decisions of the Supreme Court of
+the United States, in a matter like the points decided in the Dred Scott
+case, clearly within their jurisdiction as defined by the Constitution,
+shall be forced upon the country as a political issue, it will become
+a distinct and naked issue between the friends and enemies of the
+Constitution--the friends and the enemies of the supremacy of the laws."
+
+I have said, in substance, that the Dred Scott decision was in part
+based on assumed historical facts which were not really true, and I
+ought not to leave the subject without giving some reasons for saying
+this; I therefore give an instance or two, which I think fully sustain
+me. Chief-Justice Taney, in delivering the opinion of the majority of
+the court, insists at great length that the negroes were no part of the
+people who made, or for whom was made, the Declaration of Independence,
+or the Constitution of the United States.
+
+On the contrary, Judge Curtis, in his dissenting opinion, shows that in
+five of the then thirteen States--to wit, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
+New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina--free negroes were voters,
+and in proportion to their numbers had the same part in making the
+Constitution that the white people had. He shows this with so much
+particularity as to leave no doubt of its truth; and as a sort of
+conclusion on that point, holds the following language:
+
+"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the
+United States, through the action in each State, of those persons who
+were qualified by its laws to act thereon in behalf of themselves and
+all other citizens of the State. In some of the States, as we have seen,
+colored persons were among those qualified by law to act on the subject.
+These colored persons were not only included in the body of 'the
+people of the United States' by whom the Constitution was ordained and
+established; but in at least five of the States they had the power to
+act, and doubtless, did act, by their suffrages, upon the question of
+its adoption."
+
+Again, Chief-Justice Taney says:
+
+"It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion, in
+relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and
+enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of
+Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed
+and adopted."
+
+And again, after quoting from the Declaration, he says:
+
+"The general words above quoted would seem to include the whole human
+family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day,
+would be so understood."
+
+In these the Chief-Justice does not directly assert, but plainly
+assumes, as a fact, that the public estimate of the black man is more
+favorable now than it was in the days of the Revolution. This assumption
+is a mistake. In some trifling particulars the condition of that race
+has been ameliorated; but as a whole, in this country, the change
+between then and now is decidedly the other way; and their ultimate
+destiny has never appeared so hopeless as in the last three or four
+years. In two of the five States--New Jersey and North Carolina--that
+then gave the free negro the right of voting, the right has since been
+taken away, and in the third--New York--it has been greatly abridged;
+while it has not been extended, so far as I know, to a single additional
+State, though the number of the States has more than doubled. In those
+days, as I understand, masters could, at their own pleasure, emancipate
+their slaves; but since then such legal restraints have been made
+upon emancipation as to amount almost to prohibition. In those days
+legislatures held the unquestioned power to abolish slavery in their
+respective States, but now it is becoming quite fashionable for State
+constitutions to withhold that power from the legislatures. In those
+days, by common consent, the spread of the black man's bondage to the
+new countries was prohibited, but now Congress decides that it will not
+continue the prohibition, and the Supreme Court decides that it could
+not if it would. In those days our Declaration of Independence was held
+sacred by all, and thought to include all; but now, to aid in making the
+bondage of the negro universal and eternal, it is assailed and sneered
+at and construed, and hawked at and torn, till, if its framers could
+rise from their graves, they could not at all recognize it. All the
+powers of earth seem rapidly combining against him. Mammon is after him,
+ambition follows, philosophy follows, and the theology of the day is
+fast joining the cry. They have him in his prison-house; they have
+searched his person, and left no prying instrument with him. One after
+another they have closed the heavy iron doors upon him; and now they
+have him, as it were, bolted in with a lock of a hundred keys, which can
+never be unlocked without the concurrence of every key--the keys in
+the hands of a hundred different men, and they scattered to a hundred
+different and distant places; and they stand musing as to what
+invention, in all the dominions of mind and matter, can be produced to
+make the impossibility of his escape more complete than it is.
+
+It is grossly incorrect to say or assume that the public estimate of the
+negro is more favorable now than it was at the origin of the government.
+
+Three years and a half ago, Judge Douglas brought forward his famous
+Nebraska bill. The country was at once in a blaze. He scorned all
+opposition, and carried it through Congress. Since then he has seen
+himself superseded in a presidential nomination by one indorsing the
+general doctrine of his measure, but at the same time standing clear
+of the odium of its untimely agitation and its gross breach of national
+faith; and he has seen that successful rival constitutionally elected,
+not by the strength of friends, but by the division of adversaries,
+being in a popular minority of nearly four hundred thousand votes.
+He has seen his chief aids in his own State, Shields and Richardson,
+politically speaking, successively tried, convicted, and executed, for
+an offense not their own, but his. And now he sees his own case standing
+next on the docket for trial.
+
+There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people at
+the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races;
+and Judge Douglas evidently is basing his chief hope upon the chances of
+his being able to appropriate the benefit of this disgust to himself.
+If he can, by much drumming and repeating, fasten the odium of that idea
+upon his adversaries, he thinks he can struggle through the storm. He
+therefore clings to this hope, as a drowning man to the last plank.
+He makes an occasion for lugging it in from the opposition to the Dred
+Scott decision. He finds the Republicans insisting that the Declaration
+of Independence includes all men, black as well as white, and forthwith
+he boldly denies that it includes negroes at all, and proceeds to argue
+gravely that all who contend it does, do so only because they want to
+vote, and eat, and sleep, and marry with negroes. He will have it that
+they cannot be consistent else. Now I protest against the counterfeit
+logic which concludes that, because I do not want a black woman for a
+slave I must necessarily want her for a wife. I need not have her for
+either. I can just leave her alone. In some respects she certainly is
+not my equal; but in her natural right to eat the bread she earns with
+her own hands without asking leave of any one else, she is my equal, and
+the equal of all others.
+
+Chief-Justice Taney, in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, admits that
+the language of the Declaration is broad enough to include the whole
+human family, but he and Judge Douglas argue that the authors of that
+instrument did not intend to include negroes, by the fact that they did
+not at once actually place them on an equality with the whites. Now this
+grave argument comes to just nothing at all, by the other fact that they
+did not at once, or ever afterward, actually place all white people on
+an equality with one another. And this is the staple argument of both
+the Chief-Justice and the Senator for doing this obvious violence to the
+plain, unmistakable language of the Declaration.
+
+I think the authors of that notable instrument intended to include all
+men, but they did not intend to declare all men equal in all respects.
+They did not mean to say all were equal in color, size, intellect,
+moral developments, or social capacity. They defined with tolerable
+distinctness in what respects they did consider all men created
+equal--equal with "certain inalienable rights, among which are life,
+liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This they said, and this they
+meant. They did not mean to assert the obvious untruth that all were
+then actually enjoying that equality, nor yet that they were about to
+confer it immediately upon them. In fact, they had no power to confer
+such a boon. They meant simply to declare the right, so that enforcement
+of it might follow as fast as circumstances should permit.
+
+They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should be
+familiar to all, and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly
+labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly
+approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its
+influence and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people
+of all colors everywhere. The assertion that "all men are created equal"
+was of no practical use in effecting our separation from Great Britain;
+and it was placed in the Declaration not for that, but for future use.
+Its authors meant it to be--as, thank God, it is now proving itself--a
+stumbling-block to all those who in after times might seek to turn a
+free people back into the hateful paths of despotism. They knew the
+proneness of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant when such
+should reappear in this fair land and commence their vocation, they
+should find left for them at least one hard nut to crack.
+
+I have now briefly expressed my view of the meaning and object of that
+part of the Declaration of Independence which declares that "all men are
+created equal."
+
+Now let us hear Judge Douglas's view of the same subject as I find it in
+the printed report of his late speech. Here it is:
+
+"No man can vindicate the character, motives, and conduct of the signers
+of the Declaration of Independence, except upon the hypothesis that
+they referred to the white race alone, and not to the African, when they
+declared all men to have been created equal; that they were speaking of
+British subjects on this continent being equal to British subjects
+born and residing in Great Britain; that they were entitled to the same
+inalienable rights, and among them were enumerated life, liberty, and
+the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration was adopted for the purpose
+of justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized world in
+withdrawing their allegiance from the British crown, and dissolving
+their connection with the mother country."
+
+My good friends, read that carefully over in some leisure hour, and
+ponder well upon it; see what a mere wreck--mangled ruin--it makes of
+our once glorious Declaration.
+
+"They were speaking of British subjects on this continent being equal to
+British subjects born and residing in Great Britain." Why, according
+to this, not only negroes but white people outside of Great Britain and
+America were not spoken of in that instrument. The English, Irish, and
+Scotch, along with white Americans, were included, to be sure, but the
+French, Germans, and other white people of the world are all gone to pot
+along with the Judge's inferior races.
+
+I had thought the Declaration promised something better than the
+condition of British subjects; but no, it only meant that we should be
+equal to them in their own oppressed and unequal condition. According to
+that, it gave no promise that, having kicked off the king and lords of
+Great Britain, we should not at once be saddled with a king and lords of
+our own.
+
+I had thought the Declaration contemplated the progressive improvement
+in the condition of all men everywhere; but no, it merely "was adopted
+for the purpose of justifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized
+world, in withdrawing their allegiance from the British crown, and
+dissolving their connection with the mother country." Why, that object
+having been effected some eighty years ago, the Declaration is of
+no practical use now--mere rubbish--old wadding left to rot on the
+battle-field after the victory is won.
+
+I understand you are preparing to celebrate the "Fourth," to-morrow
+week. What for? The doings of that day had no reference to the present;
+and quite half of you are not even descendants of those who were
+referred to at that day. But I suppose you will celebrate, and will even
+go so far as to read the Declaration. Suppose, after you read it once
+in the old-fashioned way, you read it once more with Judge Douglas's
+version. It will then run thus: "We hold these truths to be
+self-evident, that all British subjects who were on this continent
+eighty-one years ago, were created equal to all British subjects born
+and then residing in Great Britain."
+
+And now I appeal to all--to Democrats as well as others--are you really
+willing that the Declaration shall thus be frittered away?--thus left
+no more, at most, than an interesting memorial of the dead past?--thus
+shorn of its vitality and practical value, and left without the germ or
+even the suggestion of the individual rights of man in it?
+
+
+
+
+ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1809, DIED 1865.)
+
+ON HIS NOMINATION TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE,
+
+AT THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION, SPRINGFIELD, ILLS., JUNE 16, 1858.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONVENTION:
+
+If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we
+could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into
+the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and
+confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the
+operation of that policy, that agitation not only has not ceased, but
+has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a
+crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against
+itself cannot stand." I believe this Government cannot endure
+permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be
+dissolved; I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect that
+it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the
+other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of
+it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it
+is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it
+forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as
+well as new, North as well as South. Have we no tendency to the latter
+condition? Let any one who doubts carefully contemplate that now almost
+complete legal combination piece of machinery, so to speak--compounded
+of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider
+not only what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted,
+but also let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if
+he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design and
+concert of action among its chief architects from the beginning.
+
+The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more than half the
+States by State constitutions, and from most of the national territory
+by Congressional prohibition. Four days later commenced the struggle
+which ended in repealing that Congressional prohibition. This opened all
+the national territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. But,
+so far, Congress only had acted, and an indorsement, by the people, real
+or apparent, was indispensable, to save the point already gained and
+give chance for more. This necessity had not been overlooked, but had
+been provided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument
+of "squatter sovereignty," otherwise called "sacred right of
+self-government";--which latter phrase though expressive of the only
+rightful basis of any government, was so perverted in this attempted use
+of it as to amount to just this: That, if any one man choose to enslave
+another, no third man shall be allowed to object. That argument was
+incorporated with the Nebraska bill itself, in the language which
+follows: "It being the true intent and meaning of this act, not to
+legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it
+therefrom; but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and
+regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to
+the Constitution of the United States." Then opened the roar of loose
+declamation in favor of "squatter sovereignty," and "sacred right of
+self-government." "But," said opposition members, "let us amend the bill
+so as to expressly declare that the people of the Territory may exclude
+slavery." "Not we," said the friends of the measure; and down they voted
+the amendment.
+
+While the Nebraska bill was passing through Congress, a law-case,
+involving the question of a negro's freedom, by reason of his owner
+having voluntarily taken him first into a free State, and then into a
+Territory covered by the Congressional prohibition, and held him as a
+slave for a long time in each, was passing through the United States
+Circuit Court for the District of Missouri; and both Nebraska bill and
+lawsuit were brought to a decision in the same month of May, 1854. The
+negro's name was Dred Scott, which name now designates the decision
+finally made in the case. Before the then next Presidential election,
+the law-case came to, and was argued in, the Supreme Court of the United
+States; but the decision of it was deferred until after the election.
+Still, before the election, Senator Trumbull, on the floor of the
+Senate, requested the leading advocate of the Nebraska bill to state his
+opinion whether the people of a Territory can constitutionally exclude
+slavery from their limits; and the latter answers: "That is a question
+for the Supreme Court."
+
+The election came, Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the indorsement, such
+as it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement,
+however, fell short of a clear popular majority by nearly four hundred
+thousand votes, and so, perhaps, was not overwhelmingly reliable and
+satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his last annual message, as
+impressively as possible, echoed back upon the people the weight and
+authority of the indorsement. The Supreme Court met again, did not
+announce their decision, but ordered a re-argument. The Presidential
+inauguration came, and still no decision of the court; but the incoming
+President, in his inaugural address, fervently exhorted the people to
+abide by the forthcoming decision, whatever it might be. Then, in a few
+days, came the decision. The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds
+an early occasion to make a speech at this capital, indorsing the Dred
+Scott decision, and vehemently denouncing all opposition to it. The
+new President, too, seizes the early occasion of the Silliman letter
+to indorse and strongly construe that decision, and to express his
+astonishment that any different view had ever been entertained.
+
+At length a squabble springs up between the President and the author of
+the Nebraska bill, on the mere question of fact, whether the Lecompton
+constitution was, or was not, in any just sense, made by the people of
+Kansas; and in that quarrel the latter declares that all he wants is a
+fair vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery be voted
+down or voted up.' I do not understand his declaration, that he cares
+not whether slavery be voted _down_ or voted _up_, to be intended by him
+other than as an apt definition of the policy he would impress upon
+the public mind--the principle for which he declares he has suffered so
+much, and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling to that
+principle. If he has any parental feeling, well may he cling to it.
+That principle is the only shred left of his original Nebraska doctrine.
+Under the Dred Scott decision, squatter sovereignty squatted out of
+existence--tumbled down like temporary scaffolding--like the mould
+at the foundry, served through one blast, and fell back into loose
+sand,--helped to carry an election, and then was kicked to the winds.
+His late joint struggle with the Republicans against the Lecompton
+constitution involves nothing of the original Nebraska doctrine. That
+struggle was made on a point--the right of a people to make their own
+constitution--upon which he and the Republicans have never differed.
+
+The several points of the Dred Scott decision, in connection with
+Senator Douglas's "care-not" policy, constitute the piece of machinery
+in its present state of advancement. This was the third point gained.
+The working points of that machinery are: (1) That no negro slave,
+imported as such from Africa, and no descendant of such slave, can ever
+be a citizen of any State, in the sense of that term as used in the
+Constitution of the United States. This point is made in order to
+deprive the negro, in every possible event, of the benefit of that
+provision of the United States Constitution, which declares that
+"the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and
+immunities of citizens in the several States." (2) That, "subject to the
+Constitution of the United States," neither Congress nor a Territorial
+Legislature can exclude slavery from any United States Territory. This
+point is made in order that individual men may fill up the Territories
+with slaves, without danger of losing them as property, and thus to
+enhance the chances of permanency to the institution through all the
+future. (3) That whether the holding a negro in actual slavery in a free
+State makes him free, as against the holder, the United States courts
+will not decide, but will leave to be decided by the courts of any slave
+State the negro may be forced into by the master. This point is made,
+not to be pressed immediately; but, if acquiesced in for a while, and
+apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to sustain the
+logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with
+Dred Scott, in the State of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do
+with any other one or one thousand slaves, in Illinois, or in any other
+free State.
+
+Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska
+doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mould public opinion,
+at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted
+down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are, and partially,
+also, whither we are tending.
+
+It will throw additional light on the latter to go back, and run the
+mind over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things
+will now appear less dark and mysterious than they did when they were
+transpiring. The people were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only
+to the Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders
+could not then see. Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche
+for the Dred Scott decision to come in afterward, and declare the
+perfect freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all. Why was
+the amendment expressly declaring the right of the people voted down?
+Plainly enough now, the adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for
+the Dred Scott decision. Why was the court decision held up? Why even
+a Senator's individual opinion withheld till after the Presidential
+election? Plainly enough now: the speaking out then would have damaged
+the "perfectly free" argument upon which the election was to be carried.
+Why the outgoing President's felicitation on the indorsement? Why the
+delay of a re-argument? Why the incoming President's advance exhortation
+in favor of the decision? These things look like the cautious patting
+and petting of a spirited horse preparatory to mounting him, when it
+is dreaded that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after
+indorsement of the decision by the President and others?
+
+We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations are the
+result of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed timbers, different
+portions of which we know have been gotten out at different times and
+places, and by different workmen--Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James,
+for instance,--and when we see these timbers joined together, and see
+that they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons
+and mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and proportions of the
+different pieces exactly adapted to their respective places, and not
+a piece too many or too few--not omitting even scaffolding,--or, if a
+single piece be lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted
+and prepared yet to bring such piece in,--in such a case, we find it
+impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James
+all understood one another from the beginning, and all worked upon a
+common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was struck.
+
+It should not be overlooked that, by the Nebraska bill, the people of a
+State, as well as Territory, were to be left "perfectly free," "subject
+only to the Constitution." Why mention a State? They were legislating
+for Territories, and not for or about States. Certainly, the people of
+a State are and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United
+States; but why is mention of this lugged into this merely Territorial
+law? Why are the people of a Territory and the people of a State therein
+lumped together, and their relation to the Constitution therein
+treated as being precisely the same? While the opinion of the court, by
+Chief-Justice Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions
+of all the concurring judges, expressly declare that the Constitution of
+the United States permits neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature
+to exclude slavery from any United States Territory, they all omit to
+declare whether or not the same Constitution permits a State, or the
+people of a State, to exclude it. Possibly, this is a mere omission; but
+who can be quite sure, if McLean or Curtis had sought to get into the
+opinion a declaration of unlimited power in the people of a State to
+exclude slavery from their limits, just as Chase and Mace sought to
+get such declaration, in behalf of the people of a territory, into the
+Nebraska bill--I ask, who can be quite sure that it would not have been
+voted down in the one case as it had been in the other? The nearest
+approach to the point of declaring the power of a State over slavery is
+made by Judge Nelson. He approaches it more than once, using the
+precise idea, and almost the language, too, of the Nebraska act. On
+one occasion, his exact language is: "Except in cases when the power
+is restrained by the Constitution of the United States, the law of the
+State is supreme over the subjects of slavery within its jurisdiction."
+In what cases the power of the States is so restrained by the United
+States Constitution is left an open question, precisely as the same
+question, as to the restraint on the power of the Territories, was
+left open in the Nebraska act. Put this and that together, and we have
+another nice little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with
+another Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution of
+the United States does not permit a State to exclude slavery from its
+limits. And this may especially be expected if the doctrine of "care not
+whether slavery be voted down or voted up," shall gain upon the public
+mind sufficiently to give promise that such a decision can be maintained
+when made.
+
+Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being alike lawful in
+all the States. Welcome or unwelcome, such decision is probably coming,
+and will soon be upon us, unless the power of the present political
+dynasty shall be met and overthrown. We shall lie down pleasantly
+dreaming that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their
+State free, and we shall awake to the reality, instead, that the Supreme
+Court has made Illinois a slave State. To meet and overthrow
+that dynasty is the work before all those who would prevent that
+consummation. That is what we have to do. How can we best do it?
+
+There are those who denounce us openly to their own friends, and yet
+whisper us softly that Senator Douglas is the aptest instrument there
+is with which to effect that object. They wish us to infer all, from
+the fact that he now has a little quarrel with the present head of the
+dynasty; and that he has regularly voted with us on a single point, upon
+which he and we have never differed. They remind us that he is a
+great man, and that the largest of us are very small ones. Let this be
+granted. "But a living dog is better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas,
+if not a dead lion, for this work, is at least a caged and toothless
+one. How can he oppose the advances of slavery? He don't care anything
+about it. His avowed mission is impressing the "public heart" to
+care nothing about it. A leading Douglas Democratic newspaper thinks
+Douglas's superior talent will be needed to resist the revival of the
+African slave-trade. Does Douglas believe an effort to revive that trade
+is approaching? He has not said so. Does he really think so? But if it
+is, how can he resist it? For years he has labored to prove it a sacred
+right of white men to take negro slaves into the new Territories. Can he
+possibly show that it is less a sacred right to buy them where they can
+be bought cheapest? And unquestionably they can be bought cheaper in
+Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in his power to reduce the
+whole question of slavery to one of a mere right of property; and as
+such, how can he oppose the foreign slave-trade? How can he refuse that
+trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free," unless he does it
+as a protection to the home production? And as the home producers will
+probably ask the protection, he will be wholly without a ground of
+opposition. Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may rightfully be
+wiser to-day than he was yesterday--that he may rightfully change when
+he finds himself wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and
+infer that he will make any particular change, of which he himself has
+given no intimation? Can we safely base our action upon any such vague
+inference? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's
+position, question his motives, or do aught that can be personally
+offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and we can come together on
+principle, so that our cause may have assistance from his great ability,
+I hope to have interposed no adventitious obstacle. But, clearly, he is
+not now with us--he does not pretend to be, he does not promise ever to
+be.
+
+Our cause, then, must be entrusted to, and conducted by its own
+undoubted friends--those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the
+work--who do care for the result. Two years ago the Republicans of the
+nation mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under
+the single impulse of resistance to a common danger. With every external
+circumstance against us, of strange, discordant, and even hostile
+elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the
+battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and
+pampered enemy. Did we brave all then, to falter now?--now, when that
+same enemy is wavering, dissevered, and belligerent! The result is not
+doubtful. We shall not fail--if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise
+counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay it; but, sooner or later, the
+victory is sure to come.
+
+
+
+
+STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS,
+
+OF ILLINOIS. (BORN 1813, DIED 1861.)
+
+IN REPLY TO MR. LINCOLN;
+
+FREEPORT, ILLS., AUGUST 27, 1858.
+
+
+LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:
+
+I am glad that at last I have brought Mr. Lincoln to the conclusion
+that he had better define his position on certain political questions
+to which I called his attention at Ottawa. * * * In a few moments I
+will proceed to review the answers which he has given to these
+interrogatories; but, in order to relieve his anxiety, I will first
+respond to those which he has presented to me. Mark you, he has not
+presented interrogatories which have ever received the sanction of the
+party with which I am acting, and hence he has no other foundation for
+them than his own curiosity.
+
+First he desires to know, if the people of Kansas shall form a
+constitution by means entirely proper and unobjectionable, and ask
+admission as a State, before they have the requisite population for a
+member of Congress, whether I will vote for that admission. Well, now,
+I regret exceedingly that he did not answer that interrogatory himself
+before he put it to me, in order that we might understand, and not
+be left to infer, on which side he is. Mr. Trumbull, during the last
+session of Congress, voted from the beginning to the end against the
+admission of Oregon, although a free State, because she had not the
+requisite population for a member of Congress. Mr. Trumbull would not
+consent, under any circumstances, to let a State, free or slave, come
+into the Union until it had the requisite population. As Mr. Trumbull is
+in the field fighting for Mr. Lincoln, I would like to have Mr. Lincoln
+answer his own question and tell me whether he is fighting Trumbull on
+that issue or not. But I will answer his question. * * * Either Kansas
+must come in as a free State, with whatever population she may have, or
+the rule must be applied to all the other Territories alike. I therefore
+answer at once that, it having been decided that Kansas has people
+enough for a slave State, I hold that she has enough for a free State.
+I hope Mr. Lincoln is satisfied with my answer; and now I would like to
+get his answer to his own interrogatory--whether or not he will vote
+to admit Kansas before she has the requisite population. I want to
+know whether he will vote to admit Oregon before that Territory has the
+requisite population. Mr. Trumbull will not, and the same reason that
+commits Mr. Trumbull against the admission of Oregon commits him against
+Kansas, even if she should apply for admission as a free State. If there
+is any sincerity, any truth, in the argument of Mr. Trumbull in the
+Senate against the admission of Oregon, because she had not 93,420
+people, although her population was larger than that of Kansas, he
+stands pledged against the admission of both Oregon and Kansas until
+they have 93,420 inhabitants. I would like Mr. Lincoln to answer this
+question. I would like him to take his own medicine. If he differs
+with Mr. Trumbull, let him answer his argument against the admission of
+Oregon, instead of poking questions at me.
+
+The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln is, Can the people of
+the Territory in any lawful way, against the wishes of any citizen
+of the United States, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the
+formation of a State Constitution? I answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln
+has heard me answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that
+in my opinion the people of a Territory can, by lawful means,
+exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State
+Constitution. Mr. Lincoln knew that I had answered that question over
+and over again. He heard me argue the Nebraska bill on that principle
+all over the State in 1854, in 1855, and in 1856; and he has no excuse
+for pretending to be in doubt as to my position on that question. It
+matters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide as to the
+abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a Territory
+under the Constitution; the people have the lawful means to introduce it
+or exclude it as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist
+a day or an hour anywhere unless it is supported by local police
+regulations. Those police regulations can only be established by the
+local Legislature; and, if the people are opposed to slavery, they will
+elect representatives to that body who will by unfriendly legislation
+effectually prevent the introduction of it into their midst. If, on the
+contrary, they are for it, their legislation will favor its extension.
+Hence, no matter what the decision of the Supreme Court may be on
+that abstract question, still the right of the people to make a slave
+Territory or a free Territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska
+bill. I hope Mr. Lincoln deems my answer satisfactory on that point.
+
+In this connection, I will notice the charge which he has introduced
+in relation to Mr. Chase's amendment. I thought that I had chased that
+amendment out of Mr. Lincoln's brain at Ottawa; but it seems that it
+still haunts his imagination, and that he is not yet satisfied. I had
+supposed that he would be ashamed to press that question further. He is
+a lawyer, and has been a member of Congress, and has occupied his time
+and amused you by telling you about parliamentary proceedings. He ought
+to have known better than to try to palm off his miserable impositions
+upon this intelligent audience. The Nebraska bill provided that the
+legislative power and authority of the said Territory should extend to
+all rightful subjects of legislation, consistent with the organic act
+and the Constitution of the United States. It did not make any exception
+as to slavery, but gave all the power that it was possible for Congress
+to give, without violating the Constitution, to the Territorial
+Legislature, with no exception or limitation on the subject of slavery
+at all. The language of that bill, which I have quoted, gave the
+full power and the fuller authority over the subject of slavery,
+affirmatively and negatively, to introduce it or exclude it, so far as
+the Constitution of the United States would permit. What more could Mr.
+Chase give by his amendment? Nothing! He offered his amendment for
+the identical purpose for which Mr. Lincoln is using it, to enable
+demagogues in the country to try and deceive the people. His amendment
+was to this effect. It provided that the Legislature should have power
+to exclude slavery; and General Cass suggested: "Why not give the power
+to introduce as well as to exclude?" The answer was--they have the power
+already in the bill to do both. Chase was afraid his amendment would be
+adopted if he put the alternative proposition, and so made it fair both
+ways, and would not yield. He offered it for the purpose of having it
+rejected. He offered it, as he has himself avowed over and over again,
+simply to make capital out of it for the stump. He expected that it
+would be capital for small politicians in the country, and that they
+would make an effort to deceive the people with it; and he was not
+mistaken, for Lincoln is carrying out the plan admirably. * * *
+
+The third question which Mr. Lincoln presented is--If the Supreme Court
+of the United States shall decide that a State of this Union cannot
+exclude slavery from its own limits, will I submit to it? I am amazed
+that Mr. Lincoln should ask such a question. Mr. Lincoln's object is to
+cast an imputation upon the Supreme Court. He knows that there never was
+but one man in America, claiming any degree of intelligence or decency,
+who ever for a moment pretended such a thing. It is true that the
+_Washington Union_, in an article published on the 17th of last
+December, did put forth that doctrine, and I denounced the article on
+the floor of the Senate. * * * Lincoln's friends, Trumbull, and Seward,
+and Hale, and Wilson, and the whole Black Republican side of the Senate
+were silent. They left it to me to denounce it. And what was the
+reply made to me on that occasion? Mr. Toombs, of Georgia, got up and
+undertook to lecture me on the ground that I ought not to have deemed
+the article worthy of notice, and ought not to have replied to it; that
+there was not one man, woman, or child south of the Potomac, in any
+slave State, who did not repudiate any such pretension. Mr. Lincoln
+knows that reply was made on the spot, and yet now he asks this
+question! He might as well ask me--Suppose Mr. Lincoln should steal a
+horse, would I sanction it; and it would be as genteel in me to ask him,
+in the event he stole a horse, what ought to be done with him. He casts
+an imputation upon the Supreme Court of the United States, by supposing
+that they would violate the Constitution of the United States. I tell
+him that such a thing is not possible. It would be an act of moral
+treason that no man on the bench could ever descend to. Mr. Lincoln
+himself would never, in his partisan feelings, so far forget what was
+right as to be guilty of such an act.
+
+The fourth question of Mr. Lincoln is--Are you in favor of acquiring
+additional territory in disregard as to how such acquisition may affect
+the Union on the slavery question? This question is very ingeniously and
+cunningly put. The Black Republican crowd lays it down expressly that
+under no circumstances shall we acquire any more territory unless
+slavery is first prohibited in the country. I ask Mr. Lincoln whether he
+is in favor of that proposition? Are you opposed to the acquisition
+of any more territory, under any circumstances, unless slavery is
+prohibited in it? That he does not like to answer. When I ask him
+whether he stands up to that article in the platform of his party, he
+turns, Yankee fashion, and, without answering it, asks me whether I am
+in favor of acquiring territory without regard to how it may affect
+the Union on the slavery question. I answer that, whenever it becomes
+necessary, in our growth and progress, to acquire more territory, I am
+in favor of it without reference to the question of slavery, and when
+we have acquired it, I will leave the people free to do as they please,
+either to make it slave or free territory, as they prefer. It is idle
+to tell me or you that we have territory enough. * * * With our natural
+increase, growing with a rapidity unknown in any other part of the
+globe, with the tide of emigration that is fleeing from despotism in the
+old world to seek refuge in our own, there is a constant torrent pouring
+into this country that requires more land, more territory upon which
+to settle; and just as fast as our interest and our destiny require
+additional territory in the North, in the South, or in the islands of
+the ocean, I am for it, and, when we acquire it, will leave the people,
+according to the Nebraska bill, free to do as they please on the subject
+of slavery and every other question.
+
+I trust now that Mr. Lincoln will deem him-self answered on his four
+points. He racked his brain so much in devising these four questions
+that he exhausted himself, and had not strength enough to invent the
+others. As soon as he is able to hold a council with his advisers,
+Love-joy, Farnsworth, and Fred Douglas, he will frame and propound
+others ("Good," "good!"). You Black Republicans who say "good," I have
+no doubt, think that they are all good men. I have reason to recollect
+that some people in this country think that Fred Douglas is a very good
+man. The last time I came here to make a speech, while talking from
+a stand to you, people of Freeport, as I am doing to-day, I saw a
+carriage, and a magnificent one it was, drive up and take a position on
+the outside of the crowd; a beautiful young lady was sitting on the box
+seat, whilst Fred Douglas and her mother reclined inside, and the owner
+of the carriage acted as driver. I saw this in your own town. ("What
+of it?") All I have to say of it is this, that if you Black Republicans
+think that the negro ought to be on a social equality with your wives
+and daughters, and ride in a carriage with your wife, whilst you drive
+the team, you have a perfect right to do so. I am told that one of Fred
+Douglas' kinsmen, another rich black negro, is now travelling in this
+part of the State making speeches for his friend Lincoln as the champion
+of black men. ("What have you to say against it?") All I have to say on
+that subject is, that those of you who believe that the negro is your
+equal, and ought to be on an equality with you socially, politically,
+and legally, have a right to entertain those opinions, and of course
+will vote for Mr. Lincoln.
+
+
+
+
+WM. H. SEWARD,
+
+OF NEW YORK. (BORN 1801, DIED 1872.)
+
+ON THE IRREPRESSIBLE CONFLICT;
+
+ROCHESTER, OCTOBER 25, 1858.
+
+
+THE unmistakable outbreaks of zeal which occur all around me, show that
+you are earnest men--and such a man am I. Let us therefore, at least
+for a time, pass all secondary and collateral questions, whether of a
+personal or of a general nature, and consider the main subject of the
+present canvass. The Democratic party, or, to speak more accurately, the
+party which wears that attractive name--is in possession of the Federal
+Government. The Republicans propose to dislodge that party, and dismiss
+it from its high trust.
+
+The main subject, then, is, whether the Democratic party deserves to
+retain the confidence of the American people. In attempting to prove
+it unworthy, I think that I am not actuated by prejudices against that
+party, or by pre-possessions in favor of its adversary; for I have
+learned, by some experience, that virtue and patriotism, vice and
+selfishness, are found in all parties, and that they differ less in
+their motives than in the policies they pursue.
+
+Our country is a theatre, which exhibits, in full operation, two
+radically different political systems; the one resting on the basis of
+servile or slave labor, the other on voluntary labor of freemen. The
+laborers who are enslaved are all negroes, or persons more or less
+purely of African derivation. But this is only accidental. The principle
+of the system is, that labor in every society, by whomsoever performed,
+is necessarily unintellectual, grovelling and base; and that the
+laborer, equally for his own good and for the welfare of the State,
+ought to be enslaved. The white laboring man, whether native or
+foreigner, is not enslaved, only because he cannot, as yet, be reduced
+to bondage.
+
+You need not be told now that the slave system is the older of the two,
+and that once it was universal. The emancipation of our own ancestors,
+Caucasians and Europeans as they were, hardly dates beyond a period of
+five hundred years. The great melioration of human society which modern
+times exhibit, is mainly due to the incomplete substitution of the
+system of voluntary labor for the one of servile labor, which has
+already taken place. This African slave system is one which, in its
+origin and in its growth, has been altogether foreign from the habits
+of the races which colonized these States, and established civilization
+here. It was introduced on this continent as an engine of conquest, and
+for the establishment of monarchical power, by the Portuguese and the
+Spaniards, and was rapidly extended by them all over South America,
+Central America, Louisiana, and Mexico. Its legitimate fruits are seen
+in the poverty, imbecility, and anarchy which now pervade all Portuguese
+and Spanish America. The free-labor system is of German extraction, and
+it was established in our country by emigrants from Sweden, Holland,
+Germany, Great Britain and Ireland. We justly ascribe to its influences
+the strength, wealth, greatness, intelligence, and freedom, which the
+whole American people now enjoy. One of the chief elements of the value
+of human life is freedom in the pursuit of happiness. The slave system
+is not only intolerable, unjust, and inhuman, toward the laborer, whom,
+only because he is a laborer, it loads down with chains and converts
+into merchandise, but is scarcely less severe upon the freeman, to whom,
+only because he is a laborer from necessity, it denies facilities for
+employment, and whom it expels from the community because it cannot
+enslave and convert into merchandise also. It is necessarily improvident
+and ruinous, because, as a general truth, communities prosper and
+flourish, or droop and decline, in just the degree that they practise
+or neglect to practise the primary duties of justice and humanity.
+The free-labor system conforms to the divine law of equality, which is
+written in the hearts and consciences of man, and therefore is always
+and everywhere beneficent.
+
+The slave system is one of constant danger, distrust, suspicion, and
+watchfulness. It debases those whose toil alone can produce wealth and
+resources for defence, to the lowest degree of which human nature is
+capable, to guard against mutiny and insurrection, and thus wastes
+energies which otherwise might be employed in national development and
+aggrandizement.
+
+The free-labor system educates all alike, and by opening all the fields
+of industrial employment and all the departments of authority, to the
+unchecked and equal rivalry of all classes of men, at once secures
+universal contentment, and brings into the highest possible activity all
+the physical, moral, and social energies of the whole state. In states
+where the slave system prevails, the masters, directly or indirectly,
+secure all political power, and constitute a ruling aristocracy.
+In states where the free-labor system prevails, universal suffrage
+necessarily obtains, and the state inevitably becomes, sooner or later,
+a republic or democracy.
+
+Russia yet maintains slavery, and is a despotism. Most of the other
+European states have abolished slavery, and adopted the system of free
+labor. It was the antagonistic political tendencies of the two systems
+which the first Napoleon was contemplating when he predicted that Europe
+would ultimately be either all Cossack or all republican. Never did
+human sagacity utter a more pregnant truth. The two systems are at once
+perceived to be incongruous. But they are more than incongruous--they
+are incompatible. They never have permanently existed together in
+one country, and they never can. It would be easy to demonstrate this
+impossibility, from the irreconcilable contrast between their great
+principles and characteristics. But the experience of mankind has
+conclusively established it. Slavery, as I have already intimated,
+existed in every state in Europe. Free labor has supplanted it
+everywhere except in Russia and Turkey. State necessities developed in
+modern times are now obliging even those two nations to encourage and
+employ free labor; and already, despotic as they are, we find them
+engaged in abolishing slavery. In the United States, slavery came into
+collision with free labor at the close of the last century, and fell
+before it in New England, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania,
+but triumphed over it effectually, and excluded it for a period yet
+undetermined, from Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Indeed,
+so incompatible are the two systems, that every new State which is
+organized within our ever-extending domain makes its first political act
+a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at the cost
+of civil war, if necessary. The slave States, without law, at the last
+national election, successfully forbade, within their own limits, even
+the casting of votes for a candidate for President of the United States
+supposed to be favorable to the establishment of the free-labor system
+in new States.
+
+Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different States, but side by
+side within the American Union. This has happened because the Union is
+a confederation of States. But in another aspect the United States
+constitute only one nation. Increase of population, which is filling
+the States out to their very borders, together with a new and extended
+network of railroads and other avenues, and an internal commerce which
+daily becomes more intimate, is rapidly bringing the States into a
+higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation. Thus, these
+antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact, and
+collision results.
+
+Shall I tell you what this collision means? They who think that it is
+accidental, unnecessary, the work of interested or fanatical agitators,
+and therefore ephemeral, mistake the case altogether. It is an
+irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces, and it
+means that the United States must and will, sooner or later, become
+either entirely a slave-holding nation, or entirely a free-labor nation.
+Either the cotton- and rice-fields of South Carolina and the sugar
+plantations of Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free-labor, and
+Charleston and New Orleans become marts of legitimate merchandise alone,
+or else the rye-fields and wheat-fields of Massachusetts and New York
+must again be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and to the
+production of slaves, and Boston and New York become once more markets
+for trade in the bodies and souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend
+this great truth that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at final
+compromises between the slave and free States, and it is the existence
+of this great fact that renders all such pretended compromises, when
+made, vain and ephemeral. Startling as this saying may appear to you,
+fellow-citizens, it is by no means an original or even a modern one. Our
+forefathers knew it to be true, and unanimously acted upon it when
+they framed the Constitution of the United States. They regarded the
+existence of the servile system in so many of the States with sorrow and
+shame, which they openly confessed, and they looked upon the collision
+between them, which was then just revealing itself, and which we are now
+accustomed to deplore, with favor and hope. They knew that one or the
+other system must exclusively prevail.
+
+Unlike too many of those who in modern time invoke their authority, they
+had a choice between the two. They preferred the system of free labor,
+and they determined to organize the government, and so direct its
+activity, that that system should surely and certainly prevail. For this
+purpose, and no other, they based the whole structure of the government
+broadly on the principle that all men are created equal, and therefore
+free--little dreaming that, within the short period of one hundred
+years, their descendants would bear to be told by any orator, however
+popular, that the utterance of that principle was merely a rhetorical
+rhapsody; or by any judge, however venerated, that it was attended by
+mental reservation, which rendered it hypocritical and false. By the
+ordinance of 1787, they dedicated all of the national domain not yet
+polluted by slavery to free labor immediately, thenceforth and forever;
+while by the new Constitution and laws they invited foreign free labor
+from all lands under the sun, and interdicted the importation of African
+slave labor, at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances
+whatsoever. It is true that they necessarily and wisely modified this
+policy of freedom by leaving it to the several States, affected as they
+were by different circumstances, to abolish slavery in their own way and
+at their own pleasure, instead of confiding that duty to Congress; and
+that they secured to the slave States, while yet retaining the system
+of slavery, a three-fifths representation of slaves in the Federal
+Government, until they should find themselves able to relinquish it
+with safety. But the very nature of these modifications fortifies my
+position, that the fathers knew that the two systems could not endure
+within the Union, and expected within a short period slavery would
+disappear forever. Moreover, in order that these modifications might not
+altogether defeat their grand design of a republic maintaining universal
+equality, they provided that two thirds of the States might amend the
+Constitution.
+
+It remains to say on this point only one word, to guard against
+misapprehension. If these States are to again become universally
+slave-holding, I do not pretend to say with what violations of the
+Constitution that end shall be accomplished. On the other hand, while I
+do confidently believe and hope that my country will yet become a land
+of universal freedom, I do not expect that it will be made so otherwise
+than through the action of the several States cooperating with the
+Federal Government, and all acting in strict conformity with their
+respective constitutions.
+
+The strife and contentions concerning slavery, which gently-disposed
+persons so habitually deprecate, are nothing more than the ripening of
+the conflict which the fathers themselves not only thus regarded with
+favor, but which they may be said to have instituted.
+
+* * * I know--few, I think, know better than I--the resources and
+energies of the Democratic party, which is identical with the slave
+power. I do ample justice to its traditional popularity. I know
+further--few, I think, know better than I--the difficulties and
+disadvantages of organizing a new political force, like the Republican
+party, and the obstacles it must encounter in laboring without prestige
+and without patronage. But, understanding all this, I know that the
+Democratic party must go down, and that the Republican party must rise
+into its place. The Democratic party derived its strength, originally,
+from its adoption of the principles of equal and exact justice to
+all men. So long as it practised this principle faithfully, it was
+invulnerable. It became vulnerable when it renounced the principle,
+and since that time it has maintained itself, not by virtue of its own
+strength, or even of its traditional merits, but because there as
+yet had appeared in the political field no other party that had the
+conscience and the courage to take up, and avow, and practise the
+life-inspiring principle which the Democratic party had surrendered.
+At last, the Republican party has appeared. It avows, now, as the
+Republican party of 1800 did, in one word, its faith and its works,
+"Equal and exact justice to all men." Even when it first entered the
+field, only half organized, it struck a blow which only just failed to
+secure complete and triumphant victory. In this, its second campaign, it
+has already won advantages which render that triumph now both easy and
+certain.
+
+The secret of its assured success lies in that very characteristic
+which, in the mouth of scoffers, constitutes its great and lasting
+imbecility and reproach. It lies in the fact that it is a party of
+one idea; but that is a noble one--an idea that fills and expands all
+generous souls; the idea of equality--the equality of all men before
+human tribunals and human laws, as they all are equal before the Divine
+tribunal and Divine laws.
+
+I know, and you know, that a revolution has begun. I know, and all the
+world knows, that revolutions never go backward. Twenty Senators and a
+hundred Representatives proclaim boldly in Congress to-day sentiments
+and opinions and principles of freedom which hardly so many men, even
+in this free State, dared to utter in their own homes twenty years ago.
+While the Government of the United States, under the conduct of the
+Democratic party, has been all that time surrendering one plain and
+castle after another to slavery, the people of the United States have
+been no less steadily and perseveringly gathering together the forces
+with which to recover back again all the fields and all the castles
+which have been lost, and to confound and overthrow, by one decisive
+blow, the betrayers of the Constitution and freedom forever.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+VI. -- SECESSION.
+
+
+From the beginning of our history it has been a mooted question whether
+we are to consider the United States as a political state or as a
+congeries of political states, as a _Bundesstaat_ or as a _Staatenbund_.
+The essence of the controversy seems to be contained in the very title
+of the republic, one school laying stress on the word United, as the
+other does on the word States. The phases of the controversy have been
+beyond calculation, and one of its consequences has been a civil war of
+tremendous energy and cost in blood and treasure.
+
+Looking at the facts alone of our history, one would be most apt to
+conclude that the United States had been a political state from the
+beginning, its form being entirely revolutionary until the final
+ratification of the Articles of Confederation in 1781, then under the
+very loose and inefficient government of the Articles until 1789,
+and thereafter under the very efficient national government of the
+Constitution; that, in the final transformation of 1787-9, there were
+features which were also decidedly revolutionary; but that there was
+no time when any of the colonies had the prospect or the power of
+establishing a separate national existence of its own. The facts are
+not consistent with the theory that the States ever were independent
+political states, in any scientific sense.
+
+It cannot be said, however, that the actors in the history always had
+a clear perception of the facts as they took place. In the teeth of the
+facts, our early history presents a great variety of assertions of State
+independence by leading men, State Legislatures, or State constitutions,
+which still form the basis of the argument for State sovereignty. The
+State constitutions declared the State to be sovereign and independent,
+even though the framers knew that the existence of the State depended
+on the issue of the national struggle against the mother country. The
+treaty of 1783 with Great Britain recognized the States separately and
+by name as "free, sovereign, and independent," even while it established
+national boundaries outside of the States, covering a vast western
+territory in which no State would have ventured to forfeit its
+interest by setting up a claim to practical freedom, sovereignty, or
+independence. All our early history is full of such contradictions
+between fact and theory. They are largely obscured by the
+undiscriminating use of the word "people." As used now, it usually means
+the national people; but many apparently national phrases as to the
+"sovereignty of the people," as they were used in 1787-9, would seem
+far less national if the phraseology could show the feeling of those
+who then used them that the "people" referred to was the people of
+the State. In that case the number of the contradictions would be
+indefinitely increased; and the phraseology of the Constitution's
+preamble, "We, the people of the United States," would not be offered
+as a consciously nationalizing phrase of its framers. It is hardly to
+be doubted, from the current debates, that the conventions of
+Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York, Virginia, North
+Carolina, and South Carolina, seven of the thirteen States, imagined and
+assumed that each ratified the Constitution in 1788--90 by authority of
+the State's people alone, by the State's sovereign will; while the facts
+show that in each of these conventions a clear majority was coerced
+into ratification by a strong minority in its own State, backed by
+the unanimous ratifications of the other States. If ratification or
+rejection had really been open to voluntary choice, to sovereign will,
+the Constitution would never have had a moment's chance of life; so far
+from being ratified by nine States as a condition precedent to going
+into effect, it would have been summarily rejected by a majority of the
+States. In the language of John Adams, the Constitution was "extorted
+from the grinding necessities of a reluctant people." The theory of
+State sovereignty was successfully contradicted by national necessities.
+
+The change from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution,
+though it could not help antagonizing State sovereignty, was carefully
+managed so as to do so as little as possible. As soon as the plans
+by which the Federal party, under Hamilton's leadership, proposed to
+develop the national features of the Constitution became evident, the
+latent State feeling took fire. Its first symptom was the adoption
+of the name Republican by the new opposition party which took form in
+1792-3 under Jefferson's leadership. Up to this time the States had been
+the only means through which Americans had known any thing of republican
+government; they had had no share in the government of the mother
+country in colonial times, and no efficient national government to take
+part in under the Articles of Confederation. The claim of an exclusive
+title to the name of Republican does not seem to have been fundamentally
+an implication of monarchical tendencies against the Federalists so much
+as an implication that they were hostile to the States, the familiar
+exponents of republican government. When the Federalist majority in
+Congress forced through, in the war excitement against France in 1798,
+the Alien and Sedition laws, which practically empowered the President
+to suppress all party criticism of and opposition to the dominant party,
+the Legislatures of Kentucky and Virginia, in 1798-9, passed series of
+resolutions, prepared by Jefferson and Madison respectively, which for
+the first time asserted in plain terms the sovereignty of the
+States. The two sets of resolutions agreed in the assertion that the
+Constitution was a "compact," and that the States were the "parties"
+which had formed it. In these two propositions lies the gist of State
+sovereignty, of which all its remotest consequences are only natural
+developments. If it were true that the States, of their sovereign will,
+had formed such a compact; if it were not true that the adoption of
+the Constitution was a mere alteration of the form of a political state
+already in existence; it would follow, as the Kentucky resolutions
+asserted, that each State had the exclusive right to decide for itself
+when the compact had been broken, and the mode and measure of redress.
+It followed, also, that, if the existence and force of the Constitution
+in a State were due solely to the sovereign will of the State, the
+sovereign will of the State was competent, on occasion, to oust the
+Constitution from the jurisdiction covered by the State. In brief, the
+Union was wholly voluntary in its formation and in its continuance; and
+each State reserved the unquestionable right to secede, to abandon the
+Union, and assume an independent existence whenever due reason, in
+the exclusive judgment of the State, should arise. These latter
+consequences, not stated in the Kentucky resolutions, and apparently not
+contemplated by the Virginia resolutions, were put into complete form by
+Professor Tucker, of the University of Virginia, in 1803, in the notes
+to his edition of "Blackstone's Commentaries." Thereafter its statements
+of American constitutional law controlled the political training of the
+South.
+
+Madison held a modification of the State sovereignty theory, which has
+counted among its adherents the mass of the ability and influence
+of American authorities on constitutional law. Holding that the
+Constitution was a compact, and that the States were the parties to it,
+he held that one of the conditions of the compact was the abandonment
+of State sovereignty; that the States were sovereign until 1787-8, but
+thereafter only members of a political state, the United States. This
+seems to have been the ground taken by Webster, in his debates with
+Hayne and Calhoun. It was supported by the instances in which the
+appearance of a sovereignty in each State was yielded in the fourteen
+years before 1787; but, unfortunately for the theory, Calhoun was able
+to produce instances exactly parallel after 1787. If the fact that each
+State predicated its own sovereignty as an essential part of the steps
+preliminary to the convention of 1787 be a sound argument for State
+sovereignty before 1787, the fact that each State predicated its
+sovereignty as an essential part of the ratification of the Constitution
+must be taken as an equally sound argument for State sovereignty under
+the Constitution; and it seems difficult, on the Madison theory, to
+resist Calhoun's triumphant conclusion that, if the States went into the
+convention as sovereign States, they came out of it as sovereign States,
+with, of course, the right of secession. Calhoun himself had a sincere
+desire to avoid the exercise of the right of secession, and it was as a
+substitute for it that he evolved his doctrine of nullification,
+which has been placed in the first volume. When it failed in 1833, the
+exercise of the right of secession was the only remaining remedy for an
+asserted breach of State sovereignty.
+
+The events which led up to the success of the Republican party in
+electing Mr. Lincoln to the Presidency in 1860 are so intimately
+connected with the anti-slavery struggle that they have been placed in
+the preceding volume. They culminated in the first organized attempt to
+put the right of secession to a practical test. The election of
+Lincoln, the success of a "sectional party," and the evasion of the
+fugitive-slave law through the passage of "personal-liberty laws" by
+many of the Northern States, are the leading reasons assigned by South
+Carolina for her secession in 1860. These were intelligible reasons, and
+were the ones most commonly used to influence the popular vote. But all
+the evidence goes to show that the leaders of secession were not so
+weak in judgment as to run the hazards of war by reason of "injuries"
+so minute as these. Their apprehensions were far broader, if less
+calculated to influence a popular vote. In 1789 the proportions of
+population and wealth in the two sections were very nearly equal. The
+slave system of labor had hung as a clog upon the progress of the South,
+preventing the natural development of manufactures and commerce, and
+shutting out immigration. As the numerical disproportion between the two
+sections increased, Southern leaders ceased to attempt to control the
+House of Representatives, contenting themselves with balancing new
+Northern with new Southern States, so as to keep an equal vote in the
+Senate. Since 1845 this resource had failed. Five free States, Iowa,
+Wisconsin, California, Minnesota, and Oregon, had been admitted, with no
+new slave States; Kansas was calling almost imperatively for admission;
+and there was no hope of another slave State in future. When the
+election of 1860 demonstrated that the progress of the antislavery
+struggle had united all the free States, it was evident that it was but
+a question of time when the Republican party would control both
+branches of Congress and the Presidency, and have the power to make laws
+according to its own interpretation of the constitutional powers of the
+Federal Government.
+
+The peril to slavery was not only the probable prohibition of the
+inter-State slave-trade, though this itself would have been an event
+which negro slavery in the South could hardly have long survived. The
+more pressing danger lay in the results of such general Republican
+success on the Supreme Court. The decision of that Court in the Dred
+Scott case had fully sustained every point of the extreme Southern
+claims as to the status of slavery in the Territories; it had held that
+slaves were property in the view of the Constitution; that Congress
+was bound to protect slave-holders in this property right in the
+Territories, and, still more, bound not to prohibit slavery or allow a
+Territorial Legislature to prohibit slavery in the Territories, and
+that the Missouri compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional and void.
+The Southern Democrats entered the election of 1860 with this distinct
+decision of the highest judicial body of the country to back them. The
+Republican party had refused to admit that the decision of the Dred
+Scott case was law or binding. Given a Republican majority in both
+Houses and a Republican President, there was nothing to hinder the
+passage of a law increasing the number of Supreme Court justices to any
+desired extent, and the new appointments would certainly be of such
+a nature as to make the reversal of the Dred Scott decision an easy
+matter. The election of 1860 had brought only a Republican President;
+the majority in both Houses was to be against him until 1863 at least.
+But the drift in the North and West was too plain to be mistaken, and it
+was felt that 1860--would be the last opportunity for the Gulf States
+to secede with dignity and with the prestige of the Supreme Court's
+support.
+
+Finally, there seems to have been a strong feeling among the extreme
+secessionists, who loved the right of secession for its own sake, that
+the accelerating increase in the relative power of the North would soon
+make secession, on any grounds, impossible. Unless the right was to be
+forfeited by non-user, it must be established by practical exercise, and
+at once.
+
+Until about 1825-9 Presidential electors were chosen in most of the
+States by the Legislature. After that period the old practice was kept
+up only in South Carolina. On election day of November, 1860, the
+South Carolina Legislature was in session for the purpose of choosing
+electors, but it continued its session after this duty was performed. As
+soon as Lincoln's election was assured, the Legislature called a State
+Convention for Dec. 17th, took the preliminary steps toward putting the
+State on a war footing, and adjourned. The convention met at the State
+capital, adjourned to Charleston, and here, Dec. 20, 1860, passed
+unanimously an Ordinance of Secession. By its terms the people of South
+Carolina, in convention assembled, repealed the ordinance of May 23,
+1788, by which the Constitution had been ratified, and all Acts of the
+Legislature ratifying amendments to the Constitution, and declared the
+union between the State and other States, under the name of the United
+States of America, to be dissolved. By a similar process, similar
+ordinances were adopted by the State Conventions of Mississippi (Jan.
+9th), Florida (Jan. 10th), Alabama (Jan. 11th), Georgia (Jan. 19th),
+Louisiana (Jan. 25th), and Texas (Feb. 1st),--seven States in all.
+
+Outside of South Carolina, the struggle in the States named turned on
+the calling of the convention; and in this matter the opposition was
+unexpectedly strong. We have the testimony of Alexander H. Stephens that
+the argument most effective in overcoming the opposition to the calling
+of a convention was: "We can make better terms out of the Union than in
+it." The necessary implication was that secession was not to be final;
+that it was only to be a temporary withdrawal until terms of compromise
+and security for the fugitive-slave law and for slavery in the
+Territories could be extorted from the North and West. The argument soon
+proved to be an intentional sham.
+
+There has always been a difference between the theory of the State
+Convention at the North and at the South. At the North, barring a few
+very exceptional cases, the rule has been that no action of a State
+Convention is valid until confirmed by popular vote. At the South, in
+obedience to the strictest application of State sovereignty, the action
+of the State Convention was held to be the voice of the people of the
+State, which needed no popular ratification. There was, therefore,
+no remedy when the State Conventions, after passing the ordinances of
+secession, went on to appoint delegates to a Confederate Congress, which
+met at Montgomery, Feb. 4, 1861, adopted a provisional constitution
+Feb. 8th, and elected a President and Vice-President Feb. 9th. The
+conventions ratified the provisional constitution and adjourned, their
+real object having been completely accomplished; and the people of
+the several seceding States, by the action of their omnipotent State
+Conventions, and without their having a word to say about it, found
+themselves under a new government, totally irreconcilable with the
+jurisdiction of the United States, and necessarily hostile to it. The
+only exception was Texas, whose State Convention had been called in
+a method so utterly revolutionary that it was felt to be necessary to
+condone its defects by a popular vote.
+
+No declaration had ever been made by any authority that the erection of
+such hostile power within the national boundaries of the United
+States would be followed by war; such a declaration would hardly seem
+necessary. The recognition of the original national boundaries of
+the United States had been extorted from Great Britain by successful
+warfare. They had been extended by purchase from France and Spain in
+1803 and 1819, and again by war from Mexico in 1848. The United States
+stood ready to guarantee their integrity by war against all the rest of
+the world; was an ordinance of South Carolina, or the election of a _de
+facto_ government within Southern borders, likely to receive different
+treatment than was given British troops at Bunker Hill, or Santa Anna's
+lancers at Buena Vista? Men forgot that the national boundaries had been
+so drawn as to include Vermont before Vermont's admission and without
+Vermont's consent; that unofficial propositions to divide Rhode Island
+between Connecticut and Massachusetts, to embargo commerce with North
+Carolina, and demand her share of the Confederation debt, had in 1789-90
+been a sufficient indication that it was easier for a State to get into
+the American Union than to get out of it. It was a fact, nevertheless,
+that the national power to enforce the integrity of the Union had never
+been formally declared; and the mass of men in the South, even though
+they denied the expediency, did not deny the right of secession, or
+acknowledge the right of coercion by the Federal Government. To reach
+the original area of secession with land-forces, it was necessary for
+the Federal Government to cross the Border States, whose people in
+general were no believers in the right of coercion. The first attempt
+to do so extended the secession movement by methods which were far more
+openly revolutionary than the original secessions. North Carolina and
+Arkansas seceded in orthodox fashion as soon as President Lincoln called
+for volunteers after the capture of Fort Sumter. The State governments
+of Virginia and Tennessee concluded "military leagues" with the
+Confederacy, allowed Confederate troops to take possession of their
+States, and then submitted an ordinance of secession to the form of
+a popular vote. The State officers of Missouri were chased out of the
+State before they could do more than begin this process. In Maryland,
+the State government arrayed itself successfully against secession.
+
+In selecting the representative opinions for this period, all the
+marked shades of opinion have been respected, both the Union and the
+anti-coercion sentiment of the Border States, the extreme secession
+spirit of the Gulf States, and, from the North, the moderate and the
+extreme Republican, and the orthodox Democratic, views. The feeling of
+the so-called "peace Democrats" of the North differed so little from
+those of Toombs or Iverson that it has not seemed advisable to do more
+than refer to Vallandigham's speech in opposition to the war, under the
+next period.
+
+
+
+
+JOHN PARKER HALE,
+
+OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (BORN 1806, DIED 1873.)
+
+ON SECESSION; MODERATE REPUBLICAN OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 5, 1860.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+I was very much in hopes when the message was presented that it would be
+a document which would commend itself cordially to somebody. I was not
+so sanguine about its pleasing myself, but I was in hopes that it would
+be one thing or another. I was in hopes that the President would have
+looked in the face the crisis in which he says the country is, and that
+his message would be either one thing or another. But, sir, I have read
+it somewhat carefully. I listened to it as it was read at the desk; and,
+if I understand it--and I think I do--it is this: South Carolina has
+just cause for seceding from the Union; that is the first proposition.
+The second is, that she has no right to secede. The third is, that we
+have no right to prevent her from seceding. That is the President's
+message, substantially. He goes on to represent this as a great and
+powerful country, and that no State has a right to secede from it; but
+the power of the country, if I understand the President, consists in
+what Dickens makes the English constitution to be--a power to do nothing
+at all.
+
+Now, sir, I think it was incumbent upon the President of the United
+States to point out definitely and recommend to Congress some rule
+of action, and to tell us what he recommended us to do. But, in my
+judgment, he has entirely avoided it. He has failed to look the thing
+in the face. He has acted like the ostrich, which hides her head and
+thereby thinks to escape danger. Sir, the only way to escape danger
+is to look it in the face. I think the country did expect from the
+President some exposition of a decided policy; and I confess that,
+for one, I was rather indifferent as to what that policy was that he
+recommended; but I hoped that it would be something; that it would be
+decisive. He has utterly failed in that respect.
+
+I think we may as well look this matter right clearly in the face; and
+I am not going to be long about doing it. I think that this state of
+affairs looks to one of two things: it looks to absolute submission, not
+on the part of our Southern friends and the Southern States, but of the
+North, to the abandonment of their position,--it looks to a surrender
+of that popular sentiment which has been uttered through the constituted
+forms of the ballot-box, or it looks to open war. We need not shut our
+eyes to the fact. It means war, and it means nothing else; and the State
+which has put herself in the attitude of secession, so looks upon it.
+She has asked no council, she has considered it as a settled question,
+and she has armed herself. As I understand the aspect of affairs,
+it looks to that, and it looks to nothing else except unconditional
+submission on the part of the majority. I did not read the paper--I do
+not read many papers--but I understand that there was a remedy suggested
+in a paper printed, I think, in this city, and it was that the President
+and the Vice-President should be inaugurated (that would be a great
+concession!) and then, being inaugurated, they should quietly resign!
+Well, sir, I am not entirely certain that that would settle the
+question. I think that after the President and Vice-President-elect had
+resigned, there would be as much difficulty in settling who was to take
+their places as there was in settling it before.
+
+I do not wish, sir, to say a word that shall increase any irritation;
+that shall add any feeling of bitterness to the state of things which
+really exists in the country, and I would bear and forbear before I
+would say any thing which would add to this bitterness. But I tell you,
+sir, the plain, true way is to look this thing in the face--see where we
+are. And I avow here--I do not know whether or not I shall be sustained
+by those who usually act with me--if the issue which is presented is
+that the constitutional will of the public opinion of this country,
+expressed through the forms of the Constitution, will not be submitted
+to, and war is the alternative, let it come in any form or in any shape.
+The Union is dissolved and it cannot be held together as a Union, if
+that is the alternative upon which we go into an election. If it is
+pre-announced and determined that the voice of the majority, expressed
+through the regular and constituted forms of the Constitution, will not
+be submitted to, then, sir, this is not a Union of equals; it is a Union
+of a dictatorial oligarchy on one side, and a herd of slaves and cowards
+on the other. That is it, sir; nothing more, nothing less. * * *
+
+
+
+
+ALFRED IVERSON,
+
+OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1798, DIED 1874.)
+
+ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 5, 1860
+
+
+I do not rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of entering,at any length
+into this discussion, or to defend the President's message, which
+has been attacked by the Senator from New Hampshire.* I am not the
+mouth-piece of the President. While I do not agree with some portions
+of the message, and some of the positions that have been taken by the
+President, I do not perceive all the inconsistencies in that document
+which the Senator from New Hampshire has thought proper to present.
+
+It is true, that the President denies the constitutional right of a
+State to secede from the Union; while, at the same time, he also states
+that this Federal Government has no constitutional right to enforce or
+to coerce a State back into the Union which may take upon itself the
+responsibility of secession. I do not see any inconsistency in that.
+The President may be right when he asserts the fact that no State has a
+constitutional right to secede from the Union. I do not myself place the
+right of a State to secede from the Union upon constitutional grounds. I
+admit that the Constitution has not granted that power to a State. It is
+exceedingly doubtful even whether the right has been reserved. Certainly
+it has not been reserved in express terms. I therefore do not place
+the expected action of any of the Southern States, in the present
+contingency, upon the constitutional right of secession; and I am not
+prepared to dispute therefore, the, position which the President has
+taken upon that point.
+
+I rather agree with the President that the secession of a State is
+an act of revolution taken through that particular means or by that
+particular measure. It withdraws from the Federal compact, disclaims any
+further allegiance to it, and sets itself up as a separate government,
+an independent State. The State does it at its peril, of course, because
+it may or may not be cause of war by the remaining States composing the
+Federal Government. If they think proper to consider it such an act
+of disobedience, or if they consider that the policy of the Federal
+Government be such that it cannot submit to this dismemberment, why then
+they may or may not make war if they choose upon the seceding States. It
+will be a question of course for the Federal Government or the remaining
+States to decide for themselves, whether they will permit a State to
+go out of the Union, and remain as a separate and independent State, or
+whether they will attempt to force her back at the point of the bayonet.
+That is a question, I presume, of policy and expediency, which will be
+considered by the remaining States composing the Federal Government,
+through their organ, the Federal Government, whenever the contingency
+arises.
+
+But, sir, while a State has no power, under the Constitution, conferred
+upon it to secede from the Federal Government or from the Union, each
+State has the right of revolution, which all admit. Whenever the burdens
+of the government under which it acts become so onerous that it cannot
+bear them, or if anticipated evil shall be so great that the
+State believes it would be better off--even risking the perils of
+secession--out of the Union than in it, then that State, in my
+opinion, like all people upon earth has the right to exercise the
+great fundamental principle of self-preservation, and go out of the
+Union--though, of course, at its own peril--and bear the risk of the
+consequences. And while no State may have the constitutional right to
+secede from the Union, the President may not be wrong when he says the
+Federal Government has no power under the Constitution to compel the
+State to come back into the Union. It may be a _casus omissus_ in the
+Constitution; but I should like to know where the power exists in the
+Constitution of the United States to authorize the Federal Government
+to coerce a sovereign State. It does not exist in terms, at any rate, in
+the Constitution. I do not think there is any inconsistency, therefore,
+between the two positions of the President in the message upon these
+particular points.
+
+The only fault I have to find with the message of the President, is the
+inconsistency of another portion. He declares that, as the States have
+no power to secede, the Federal Government is in fact a consolidated
+government; that it is not a voluntary association of States. I deny it.
+It was a voluntary association of States. No State was ever forced to
+come into the Federal Union. Every State came voluntarily into it.
+It was an association, a voluntary association of States; and the
+President's position that it is not a voluntary association is, in my
+opinion, altogether wrong.
+
+But whether that be so or not, the President declares and assumes that
+this government is a consolidated government to this extent: that all
+the laws of the Federal Government are to operate directly upon each
+individual of the States, if not upon the States themselves, and must
+be enforced; and yet, at the same time, he says that the State which
+secedes is not to be coerced. He says that the laws of the United States
+must be enforced against every individual of a State.
+
+Of course, the State is composed of individuals within its limits,
+and if you enforce the laws and obligations of the Federal Government
+against each and every individual of the State, you enforce them against
+a State. While, therefore, he says that a State is not to be coerced, he
+declares, in the same breath, his determination to enforce the laws of
+the Union, and therefore to coerce the State if a State goes out. There
+is the inconsistency, according to my idea, which I do not see how the
+President or anybody else can reconcile. That the Federal Government is
+to enforce its laws over the seceding State, and yet not coerce her into
+obedience, is to me incomprehensible.
+
+But I did not rise, Mr. President, to discuss these questions in
+relation to the message; I rose in behalf of the State that I represent,
+as well as other Southern States that are engaged in this movement, to
+accept the issue which the Senator from New Hampshire has seen fit to
+tender--that is, of war. Sir, the Southern States now moving in this
+matter are not doing it without due consideration. We have looked over
+the whole field. We believe that the only security for the institution
+to which we attach so much importance is secession and a Southern
+confederacy. We are satisfied, notwithstanding the disclaimers upon the
+part of the Black Republicans to the contrary, that they intend to
+use the Federal power, when they get possession of it, to put down and
+extinguish the institution of slavery in the Southern States. I do not
+intend to enter upon the discussion of that point. That, however, is
+my opinion. It is the opinion of a large majority of those with whom I
+associate at home, and I believe of the Southern people. Believing that
+this is the intention and object, the ultimate aim and design, of the
+Republican party, the Abolitionists of the North, we do not intend to
+stay in this Union until we shall become so weak that we shall not be
+able to resist when the time comes for resistance. Our true policy is
+the one which we have made up our minds to follow. Our true policy is to
+go out of this Union now, while we have strength to resist any attempt
+on the part of the Federal Government to coerce us. * * *
+
+We intend, Mr. President, to go out peaceably if we can, forcibly if we
+must; but I do not believe, with the Senator from New Hampshire, that
+there is going to be any war. If five or eight States go out, they will
+necessarily draw all the other Southern States after them. That is a
+consequence that nothing can prevent. If five or eight States go out
+of this Union, I should like to see the man that would propose a
+declaration of war against them, or attempt to force them into obedience
+to the Federal Government at the point of the bayonet or the sword.
+
+Sir, there has been a good deal of vaporing on this subject. A great
+many threats have been thrown out. I have heard them on this floor, and
+upon the floor of the other House of Congress; but I have also perceived
+this: they come from those who would be the very last men to attempt
+to put their threats into execution. Men talk sometimes about their
+eighteen million who are to whip us; and yet we have heard of cases in
+which just such men had suffered themselves to be switched in the
+face, and trembled like sheep-stealing dogs, expecting to be shot every
+minute. These threats generally come from men who would be the last to
+execute them. Some of these Northern editors talk about whipping the
+Southern States like spaniels. Brave words; but I venture to assert none
+of those men would ever volunteer to command an army to be sent down
+South to coerce us into obedience to Federal power. * * *
+
+But, sir, I apprehend that when we go out and form our confederacy--as
+I think and hope we shall do very shortly--the Northern States, or the
+Federal Government, will see its true policy to be to let us go in peace
+and make treaties of commerce and amity with us, from which they will
+derive more advantages than from any attempt to coerce us. They cannot
+succeed in coercing us. If they allow us to form our government without
+difficulty, we shall be very willing to look upon them as a favored
+nation and give them all the advantages of commercial and amicable
+treaties. I have no doubt that both of us--certainly the Southern
+States--would live better, more happily, more prosperously, and with
+greater friendship, than we live now in this Union.
+
+Sir, disguise the fact as you will, there is an enmity between the
+Northern and Southern people that is deep and enduring, and you never
+can eradicate it--never! Look at the spectacle exhibited on this floor.
+How is it? There are the Republican Northern Senators upon that side.
+Here are the Southern Senators on this side. How much social intercourse
+is there between us? You sit upon your side, silent and gloomy; we sit
+upon ours with knit brows and portentous scowls. Yesterday I observed
+that there was not a solitary man on that side of the Chamber came over
+here even to extend the civilities and courtesies of life; nor did any
+of us go over there. Here are two hostile bodies on this floor; and it
+is but a type of the feeling that exists between the two sections. We
+are enemies as much as if we were hostile States. I believe that the
+Northern people hate the South worse than ever the English people hated
+France; and I can tell my brethren over there that there is no love lost
+upon the part of the South.
+
+In this state of feeling, divided as we are by interest, by a
+geographical feeling, by every thing that makes two people separate and
+distinct, I ask why we should remain in the same Union together? We have
+not lived in peace; we are not now living in peace. It is not expected
+or hoped that we shall ever live in peace. My doctrine is that whenever
+even man and wife find that they must quarrel, and cannot live in
+peace, they ought to separate; and these two sections--the North and
+South--manifesting, as they have done and do now, and probably will ever
+manifest, feelings of hostility, separated as they are in interests and
+objects, my own opinion is they can never live in peace; and the sooner
+they separate the better.
+
+Sir, these sentiments I have thrown out crudely I confess, and upon the
+spur of the occasion. I should not have opened my mouth but that the
+Senator from New Hampshire seemed to show a spirit of bravado, as if
+he intended to alarm and scare the Southern States into a retreat from
+their movements. He says that war is to come, and you had better take
+care, therefore. That is the purport of his language; of course those
+are not his words; but I understand him very well, and everybody else,
+I apprehend, understands him that war is threatened, and therefore the
+South had better look out. Sir, I do not believe that there will be any
+war; but if war is to come, let it come. We will meet the Senator
+from New Hampshire and all the myrmidons of Abolitionism and Black
+Republicanism everywhere, upon our own soil; and in the language of a
+distinguished member from Ohio in relation to the Mexican War, we will
+"welcome you with bloody hands to hospitable graves."
+
+
+
+
+BENJAMIN WADE,
+
+OF OHIO, (BORN 1800, DIED 1878.)
+
+ON SECESSION, AND THE STATE OF THE UNION; REPUBLICAN OPINION;
+
+SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, DECEMBER 17, 1860.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT:
+
+At a time like this, when there seems to be a wild and unreasoning
+excitement in many parts of the country, I certainly have very little
+faith in the efficacy of any argument that may be made; but at the
+same time, I must say, when I hear it stated by many Senators in this
+Chamber, where we all raised our hands to Heaven, and took a solemn oath
+to support the Constitution of the United States, that we are on the
+eve of a dissolution of this Union, and that the Constitution is to be
+trampled under foot--silence under such circumstances seems to me akin
+to treason itself.
+
+I have listened to the complaints on the other side patiently, and with
+an ardent desire to ascertain what was the particular difficulty under
+which they were laboring. Many of those who have supposed themselves
+aggrieved have spoken; but I confess that I am now totally unable to
+understand precisely what it is of which they complain. Why, sir, the
+party which lately elected their President, and are prospectively to
+come into power, have never held an executive office under the General
+Government, nor has any individual of them. It is most manifest,
+therefore, that the party to which I belong have as yet committed no act
+of which anybody can complain. If they have fears as to the course that
+we may hereafter pursue, they are mere apprehensions--a bare suspicion;
+arising, I fear, out of their unwarrantable prejudices, and nothing
+else.
+
+I wish to ascertain at the outset whether we are right; for I tell
+gentlemen that, if they can convince me that I am holding any political
+principle that is not warranted by the Constitution under which we live,
+or that trenches upon their rights, they need not ask me to compromise
+it. I will be ever ready to grant redress, and to right myself whenever
+I am wrong. No man need approach me with a threat that the Government
+under which I live is to be destroyed; because I hope I have now, and
+ever shall have, such a sense of justice that, when any man shows
+me that I am wrong, I shall be ready to right it without price or
+compromise.
+
+Now, sir, what is it of which gentlemen complain? When I left my home in
+the West to come to this place, all was calm, cheerful, and contented.
+I heard of no discontent. I apprehended that there was nothing to
+interrupt the harmonious course of our legislation. I did not learn
+that, since we adjourned from this place at the end of the last session,
+there had been any new fact intervening that should at all disturb the
+public mind. I do not know that there has been any encroachment upon
+the rights of any section of the country since that time; I came here,
+therefore, expecting to have a very harmonious session. It is very true,
+sir, that the great Republican party which has been organized ever since
+you repealed the Missouri Compromise, and who gave you, four years ago,
+full warning that their growing strength would probably result as it
+has resulted, have carried the late election; but I did not suppose that
+would disturb the equanimity of this body. I did suppose that every man
+who was observant of the signs of the times might well see that things
+would result as they have resulted. Nor do I understand now that
+anything growing out of that election is the cause of the present
+excitement that pervades the country.
+
+Why, Mr. President, this is a most singular state of things. Who is it
+that is complaining? They that have been in a minority? They that have
+been the subjects of an oppressive and aggressive Government? No, sir.
+Let us suppose that when the leaders of the old glorious Revolution met
+at Philadelphia eighty-four years ago to draw up a bill of indictment
+against a wicked King and his ministers, they had been at a loss what
+they should set forth as the causes of their complaint. They had
+no difficulty in setting them forth so that the great article of
+impeachment will go down to all posterity as a full justification of all
+the acts they did. But let us suppose that, instead of its being these
+old patriots who had met there to dissolve their connection with the
+British Government, and to trample their flag under foot, it had
+been the ministers of the Crown, the leading members of the British
+Parliament, of the dominant party that had ruled Great Britain for
+thirty years previous: who would not have branded every man of them as a
+traitor? It would be said: "You who have had the Government in your own
+hands: you who have been the ministers of the Crown, advising everything
+that has been done, set up here that you have been oppressed and
+aggrieved by the action of that very Government which you have directed
+yourselves." Instead of a sublime revolution, the uprising of an
+oppressed people, ready to battle against unequal power for their
+rights, it would have been an act of treason.
+
+How is it with the leaders of this modern revolution? Are they in a
+position to complain of the action of this Government for years past?
+Why, sir, they have had more than two-thirds of the Senate for many
+years past, and until very recently, and have almost that now. You--who
+complain, I ought to say--represent but a little more than one-fourth of
+the free people of these United States, and yet your counsels prevail,
+and have prevailed all along for at least ten years past. In the
+Cabinet, in the Senate of the United States, in the Supreme Court, in
+every department of the Government, your officers, or those devoted to
+you, have been in the majority, and have dictated all the policies of
+this Government. Is it not strange, sir, that they who now occupy these
+positions should come here and complain that their rights are stricken
+down by the action of the Government?
+
+But what has caused this great excitement that undoubtedly prevails in a
+portion of our country? If the newspapers are to be credited, there is
+a reign of terror in all the cities and large towns in the southern
+portion of this community that looks very much like the reign of terror
+in Paris during the French revolution. There are acts of violence that
+we read of almost every day, wherein the rights of northern men are
+stricken down, where they are sent back with indignities, where they are
+scourged, tarred, feathered, and murdered, and no inquiry made as to
+the cause. I do not suppose that the regular Government, in times of
+excitement like these, is really responsible for such acts. I know that
+these outbreaks of passion, these terrible excitements that sometimes
+pervade the community, are entirely irrepressible by the law of the
+country. I suppose that is the case now; because if these outrages
+against northern citizens were really authorized by the State
+authorities there, were they a foreign Government, everybody knows, if
+it were the strongest Government on earth, we should declare war upon
+her in one day.
+
+But what has caused this great excitement? Sir, I will tell you what I
+suppose it is. I do not (and I say it frankly) so much blame the people
+of the South; because they believe, and they are led to believe by all
+the information that ever comes before them, that we, the dominant party
+to-day, who have just seized upon the reins of this Government, are
+their mortal enemies, and stand ready to trample their institutions
+under foot. They have been told so by our enemies at the North. Their
+misfortune, or their fault, is that they have lent a too easy ear to the
+insinuations of those who are our mortal enemies, while they would not
+hear us.
+
+Now I wish to inquire, in the first place, honestly, candidly, and
+fairly, whether the Southern gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber
+that complain so much, have any reasonable grounds for that complaint--I
+mean when they are really informed as to our position.
+
+Northern Democrats have sometimes said that we had personal liberty
+bills in some few of the States of the North, which somehow trenched
+upon the rights of the South under the fugitive bill to recapture their
+runaway slaves; a position that in not more than two or three cases,
+so far as I can see, has the slightest foundation in fact; and even if
+those where it is most complained of, if the provisions of their law are
+really repugnant to that of the United States, they are utterly void,
+and the courts would declare them so the moment you brought them up.
+Thus it is that I am glad to hear the candor of those gentlemen on the
+other side, that they do not complain of these laws. The Senator from
+Georgia (Mr. Iverson) himself told us that they had never suffered any
+injury, to his knowledge and belief, from those bills, and they cared
+nothing about them. The Senator from Virginia (Mr. Mason) said the same
+thing; and, I believe, the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Brown).
+You all, then, have given up this bone of contention, this matter of
+complaint which Northern men have set forth as a grievance more than
+anybody else.
+
+Mr. Mason. Will the Senator indulge me one moment.
+
+Mr. Wade. Certainly.
+
+Mr. Mason. I know he does not intend to misrepresent me or other
+gentlemen. What I said was, that the repeal of those laws would furnish
+no cause of satisfaction to the Southern States. Our opinions of those
+laws we gave freely. We said the repeal of those laws would give no
+satisfaction.
+
+Mr. Wade. Mr. President, I do not intend to misrepresent anything. I
+understood those gentlemen to suppose that they had not been injured by
+them. I understood the Senator from Virginia to believe that they were
+enacted in a spirit of hostility to the institutions of the South, and
+to object to them not because the acts themselves had done them any
+hurt, but because they were really a stamp of degradation upon Southern
+men, or something like that--I do not quote his words. The other
+Senators that referred to it probably intended to be understood in the
+same way; but they did acquit these laws of having done them injury to
+their knowledge or belief.
+
+I do not believe that these laws were, as the Senator supposed, enacted
+with a view to exasperate the South, or to put them in a position of
+degradation. Why, sir, these laws against kidnapping are as old as the
+common law itself, as that Senator well knows. To take a freeman and
+forcibly carry him out of the jurisdiction of the State, has ever been,
+by all civilized countries, adjudged to be a great crime; and in most of
+them, wherever I have understood anything about it, they have penal
+laws to punish such an offence. I believe the State of Virginia has one
+to-day as stringent in all its provisions as almost any other of which
+you complain. I have not looked over the statute-books of the South; but
+I do not doubt that there will be found this species of legislation upon
+all your statute-books.
+
+Here let me say, because the subject occurs to me right here, the
+Senator from Virginia seemed not so much to point out any specific acts
+that Northern people had done injurious to your property as, what he
+took to be a dishonor and a degradation. I think I feel as sensitive
+upon that subject as any other man. If I know myself, I am the last man
+that would be the advocate of any law or any act that would humiliate or
+dishonor any section of this country, or any individual in it; and, on
+the other hand, let me tell these gentlemen I am exceedingly sensitive
+upon that same point, whatever they may think about it. I would
+rather sustain an injury than an insult or dishonor; and I would be
+as unwilling to inflict it upon others as I would be to submit to it
+myself. I never will do either the one or the other if I know it.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I know that charges have been made and rung in our ears, and reiterated
+over and over again, that we have been unfaithful in the execution of
+your fugitive bill. Sir, that law is exceedingly odious to any free
+people. It deprives us of all the old guarantees of liberty that the
+Anglo-Saxon race everywhere have considered sacred--more sacred than
+anything else.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Mr. President, the gentleman says, if I understood him, that these
+fugitives might be turned over to the authorities of the State from
+whence they came. That would be a very poor remedy for a free man in
+humble circumstances who was taken under the provisions of this bill in
+a summary way, to be carried--where? Where he came from? There is no law
+that requires that he should be carried there. Sir, if he is a free man
+he may be carried into the market-place anywhere in a slave State; and
+what chance has he, a poor, ignorant individual, and a stranger,
+of asserting any rights there, even if there were no prejudices or
+partialities against him? That would be mere mockery of justice and
+nothing else, and the Senator well knows it. Sir, I know that from the
+stringent, summary provisions of this bill, free men have been kidnapped
+and carried into captivity and sold into everlasting slavery. Will any
+man who has a regard to the sovereign rights of the State rise here and
+complain that a State shall not make a law to protect her own people
+against kidnapping and violent seizures from abroad? Of all men, I
+believe those who have made most of these complaints should be the
+last to rise and deny the power of a sovereign State to protect her own
+citizens against any Federal legislation whatever. These liberty bills,
+in my judgment, have been passed, not with a view of degrading the
+South, but with an honest purpose of guarding the rights of their own
+citizens from unlawful seizures and abductions. I was exceedingly glad
+to hear that the Senators on the other side had arisen in their places
+and had said that the repeal of those laws would not relieve the case
+from the difficulties under which they now labor.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Gentlemen, it will be very well for us all to take a view of all the
+phases of this controversy before we come to such conclusions as seem to
+have been arrived at in some quarters. I make the assertion here that I
+do not believe, in the history of the world, there ever was a nation or
+a people where a law repugnant to the general feeling was ever executed
+with the same faithfulness as has been your most savage and atrocious
+fugitive bill in the North. You yourselves can scarcely point out any
+case that has come before any northern tribunal in which the law has not
+been enforced to the very letter. You ought to know these facts, and you
+do know them. You all know that when a law is passed anywhere to bind
+any people, who feel, in conscience, or for any other reason, opposed
+to its execution, it is not in human nature to enforce it with the same
+certainty as a law that meets with the approbation of the great mass of
+the citizens. Every rational man understands this, and every candid man
+will admit it. Therefore it is that I do not violently impeach you for
+your unfaithfulness in the execution of many of your laws. You have in
+South Carolina a law by which you take free citizens of Massachusetts
+or any other maritime State, who visit the city of Charleston, and lock
+them up in jail under the penalty, if they cannot pay the jail-fees, of
+eternal slavery staring them in the face--a monstrous law, revolting
+to the best feelings of humanity and violently in conflict with
+the Constitution of the United States. I do not say this by way of
+recrimination; for the excitement pervading the country is now so great
+that I do not wish to add a single coal to the flame; but nevertheless I
+wish the whole truth to appear.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+Now, Mr. President, I have shown, I think, that the dominant majority
+here have nothing to complain of in the legislation of Congress, or in
+the legislation of any of the States, or in the practice of the people
+of the North, under the fugitive slave bill, except so far as they say
+certain State legislation furnishes some evidence of hostility to their
+institutions. And here, sir, I beg to make an observation. I tell the
+Senator, and I tell all the Senators, that the Republican party of the
+Northern States, so far as I know, and of my own State in particular,
+hold the same opinions with regard to this peculiar institution of
+yours that are held by all the civilized nations of the world. We do not
+differ from the public sentiment of England, of France, of Germany, of
+Italy, and every other civilized nation on God's earth; and I tell you
+frankly that you never found, and you never will find, a free community
+that are in love with your peculiar institution. The Senator from Texas
+(Mr. Wigfall) told us the other day that cotton was king, and that by
+its influence it would govern all creation. He did not say so in words,
+but that was the substance of his remark: that cotton was king, and that
+it had its subjects in Europe who dared not rebel against it. Here let
+me say to that Senator, in passing, that it turns out that they are
+very rebellious subjects, and they are talking very disrespectfully at
+present of that king that he spoke of. They defy you to exercise your
+power over them. They tell you that they sympathize in this controversy
+with what you call the black Republicans. Therefore, I hope that, so
+far as Europe is concerned at least, we shall hear no more of this boast
+that cotton is king; and that he is going to rule all the civilized
+nations of the world, and bring them to his footstool. Sir, it will
+never be done.
+
+But, sir, I wish to inquire whether the Southern people are injured by,
+or have any just right to complain of that platform of principles that
+we put out, and on which we have elected a President and Vice-President.
+I have no concealments to make, and I shall talk to you, my Southern
+friends, precisely as I would talk upon the stump on the subject. I tell
+you that in that platform we did lay it down that we would, if we had
+the power, prohibit slavery from another inch of free territory under
+this Government. I stand on that position to-day. I have argued
+it probably to half a million people. They stand there, and have
+commissioned and enjoined me to stand there forever; and, so help me
+God, I will. I say to you frankly, gentlemen, that while we hold this
+doctrine, there is no Republican, there is no convention of Republicans,
+there is no paper that speaks for them, there is no orator that sets
+forth their doctrines, who ever pretends that they have any right in
+your States to interfere with your peculiar institution; but, on the
+other hand, our authoritative platform repudiates the idea that we have
+any right or any intention ever to invade your peculiar institution in
+your own States.
+
+Now, what do you complain of? You are going to break up this Government;
+you are going to involve us in war and blood, from a mere suspicion that
+we shall justify that which we stand everywhere pledged not to do.
+Would you be justified in the eyes of the civilized world in taking
+so monstrous a position, and predicating it on a bare, groundless
+suspicion? We do not love slavery. Did you not know that before to-day,
+before this session commenced? Have you not a perfect confidence that
+the civilized world is against you on this subject of loving slavery
+or believing that it is the best institution in the world? Why, sir,
+everything remains precisely as it was a year ago. No great catastrophe
+has occurred. There is no recent occasion to accuse us of anything.
+But all at once, when we meet here, a kind of gloom pervades the whole
+community and the Senate Chamber. Gentlemen rise and tell us that they
+are on the eve of breaking up this Government, that seven or eight
+States are going to break off their connection with the Government,
+retire from the Union, and set up a hostile government of their own, and
+they look imploringly over to us, and say to us: "You can prevent it; we
+can do nothing to prevent it; but it all lies with you." Well, sir, what
+can we do to prevent it? You have not even condescended to tell us what
+you want; but I think I see through the speeches that I have heard from
+gentlemen on the other side. If we would give up the verdict of the
+people, and take your platform, I do not know but you would be satisfied
+with it. I think the Senator from Texas rather intimated, and I think
+the Senator from Georgia more than intimated, that if we would take what
+is exactly the Charleston platform on which Mr. Breckenridge was placed,
+and give up that on which we won our victory, you would grumblingly and
+hesitatingly be satisfied.
+
+Mr. Iverson. I would prefer that the Senator would look over my remarks
+before quoting them so confidently. I made no such statement as that. I
+did not say that I would be satisfied with any such thing. I would not
+be satisfied with it.
+
+Mr. Wade. I did not say that the Senator said so; but by construction I
+gathered that from his speech. I do not know that I was right in it.
+
+Mr. Iverson. The Senator is altogether wrong in his construction.
+
+Mr. Wade. Well, sir, I have now found what the Senator said on the other
+point to which he called my attention a little while ago. Here it is:
+
+"Nor do we suppose that there will be any overt acts upon the part of
+Mr. Lincoln. For one, I do not dread these overt acts. I do not propose
+to wait for them. Why, sir, the power of this Federal Government could
+be so exercised against the institution of slavery in the Southern
+States, as that, without an overt act, the institution would not last
+ten years. We know that, sir; and seeing the storm which is approaching,
+although it may be seemingly in the distance, we are determined to seek
+our own safety and security before it shall burst upon us and overwhelm
+us with its fury, when we are not in a situation to defend ourselves."
+
+That is what the Senator said.
+
+Mr. Iverson. Yes; that is what I said.
+
+Mr. Wade. Well, then, you did not expect that Mr. Lincoln would commit
+any overt act against the Constitution--that was not it--you were not
+going to wait for that, but were going to proceed on your supposition
+that probably he might; and that is the sense of what I said before.
+
+Well, Mr. President, I have disavowed all intention on the part of the
+Republican party to harm a hair of your heads anywhere. We hold to
+no doctrine that can possibly work you an inconvenience. We have
+been faithful to the execution of all the laws in which you have any
+interest, as stands confessed on this floor by your own party, and as is
+known to me without their confessions. It is not, then, that Mr. Lincoln
+is expected to do any overt act by which you may be injured; you will
+not wait for any; but anticipating that the Government may work an
+injury, you say you will put an end to it, which means simply, that
+you intend either to rule or ruin this Government. That is what your
+complaint comes to; nothing else. We do not like your institution, you
+say. Well, we never liked it any better than we do now. You might
+as well have dissolved the Union at any other period as now, on that
+account, for we stand in relation to it precisely as we have ever
+stood; that is, repudiating it among ourselves as a matter of policy
+and morals, but nevertheless admitting that where it is out of our
+jurisdiction, we have no hold upon it, and no designs upon it.
+
+Then, sir, as there is nothing in the platform on which Mr. Lincoln was
+elected of which you complain, I ask, is there anything in the character
+of the President-elect of which you ought to complain? Has he not lived
+a blameless life? Did he ever transgress any law? Has he ever committed
+any violation of duty of which the most scrupulous can complain? Why,
+then, your suspicions that he will? I have shown that you have had the
+government all the time until, by some misfortune or maladministration,
+you brought it to the very verge of destruction, and the wisdom of the
+people had discovered that it was high time that the scepter should
+depart from you, and be placed in more competent hands; I say that this
+being so, you have no constitutional right to complain; especially when
+we disavow any intention so to make use of the victory we have won as to
+injure you at all.
+
+This brings me, sir, to the question of compromises. On the first day of
+this session, a Senator rose in his place and offered a resolution for
+the appointment of a committee to inquire into the evils that exist
+between the different sections, and to ascertain what can be done to
+settle this great difficulty. That is the proposition substantially. I
+tell the Senator that I know of no difficulty; and as to compromises, I
+had supposed that we were all agreed that the day of compromises was at
+an end. The most solemn compromises we have ever made have been
+violated without a whereas. Since I have had a seat in this body, one of
+considerable antiquity, that had stood for more than thirty years, was
+swept away from your statute-books. When I stood here in the minority
+arguing against it; when I asked you to withhold your hand; when I told
+you it was a sacred compromise between the sections, and that when it
+was removed we should be brought face to face with all that sectional
+bitterness that has intervened; when I told you that it was a sacred
+compromise which no man should touch with his finger, what was your
+reply? That it was a mere act of Congress--nothing more, nothing
+less--and that it could be swept away by the same majority that passed
+it. That was true in point of fact, and true in point of law; but it
+showed the weakness of compromises. Now, sir, I only speak for myself;
+and I say that, in view of the manner in which other compromises have
+been heretofore treated, I should hardly think any two of the Democratic
+party would look each other in the face and say "compromise" without a
+smile. (Laughter.) A compromise to be brought about by act of Congress,
+after the experience we have had, is absolutely ridiculous.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+I say, then, that so far as I am concerned, I will yield to no
+compromise. I do not come here begging, either. It would be an indignity
+to the people that I represent if I were to stand here parleying as to
+the rights of the party to which I belong. We have won our right to the
+Chief Magistracy of this nation in the way that you have always won your
+predominance; and if you are as willing to do justice to others as to
+exact it from them, you would never raise an inquiry as to a committee
+for compromises. Here I beg, barely for myself, to say one thing more.
+Many of you stand in an attitude hostile to this Government; that is to
+say, you occupy an attitude where you threaten that, unless we do so and
+so, you will go out of this Union and destroy the Government. I say
+to you for myself, that, in my private capacity, I never yielded to
+anything by way of threat, and in my public capacity I have no right
+to yield to any such thing; and therefore I would not entertain a
+proposition for any compromise, for, in my judgment, this long, chronic
+controversy that has existed between us must be met, and met upon the
+principles of the Constitution and laws, and met now. I hope it may be
+adjusted to the satisfaction of all; and I know no other way to adjust
+it, except that way which is laid down by the Constitution of the United
+States. Whenever we go astray from that, we are sure to plunge ourselves
+into difficulties. The old Constitution of the United States, although
+commonly and frequently in direct opposition to what I could wish,
+nevertheless, in my judgment, is the wisest and best constitution
+that ever yet organized a free Government; and by its provisions I
+am willing, and intend, to stand or fall. Like the Senator from
+Mississippi, I ask nothing more. I ask no ingrafting upon it. I ask
+nothing to be taken away from it. Under its provisions a nation has
+grown faster than any other in the history of the world ever did before
+in prosperity, in power, and in all that makes a nation great and
+glorious. It has ministered to the advantages of this people; and now
+I am unwilling to add or take away anything till I can see much clearer
+than I can now that it wants either any addition or lopping off.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+The Senator from Texas says--it is not exactly his language--we will
+force you to an ignominious treaty up in Faneuil Hall. Well, sir, you
+may. We know you are brave; we understand your prowess; we want no fight
+with you; but, nevertheless, if you drive us to that necessity, we
+must use all the powers of this Government to maintain it intact in its
+integrity. If we are overthrown, we but share the fate of a thousand
+other Governments that have been subverted. If you are the weakest then
+you must go to the wall; and that is all there is about it. That is
+the condition in which we stand, provided a State sets herself up in
+opposition to the General Government.
+
+I say that is the way it seems to me, as a lawyer. I see no power in the
+Constitution to release a Senator from this position. Sir, if there
+was any other, if there was an absolute right of secession in the
+Constitution of the United States when we stepped up there to take our
+oath of office, why was there not an exception in that oath? Why did
+it not run "that we would support the Constitution of the United States
+unless our State shall secede before our term was out?" Sir, there is
+no such immunity. There is no way by which this can be done that I can
+conceive of, except it is standing upon the Constitution of the United
+States, demanding equal justice for all, and vindicating the old flag
+of the Union. We must maintain it, unless we are cloven down by superior
+force.
+
+Well, sir, it may happen that you can make your way out of the Union,
+and that, by levying war upon the Government, you may vindicate your
+right to independence. If you should do so, I have a policy in my mind.
+No man would regret more than myself that any portion of the people of
+these United States should think themselves impelled, by grievances or
+anything else, to depart out of this Union, and raise a foreign flag and
+a hand against the General Government. If there was any just cause
+on God's earth that I could see that was within my reach of honorable
+release from any such pretended grievance, they should have it; but
+they set forth none; I can see none. It is all a matter of prejudice,
+superinduced unfortunately, I believe, as I intimated before, more
+because you have listened to the enemies of the Republican party and
+what they said of us, while, from your intolerance, you have shut out
+all light as to what our real principles are. We have been called and
+branded in the North and in the South and everywhere else, as John Brown
+men, as men hostile to your institutions, as meditating an attack upon
+your institutions in your own States--a thing that no Republican ever
+dreamed of or ever thought of, but has protested against as often as the
+question has been up; but your people believe it. No doubt they believe
+it because of the terrible excitement and reign of terror that prevails
+there. No doubt they think so, but it arises from false information,
+or the want of information--that is all. Their prejudices have been
+appealed to until they have become uncontrolled and uncontrollable.
+
+Well, sir, if it shall be so; if that "glorious Union," as we call it,
+under which the Government has so long lived and prospered, is now about
+to come to a final end, as perhaps it may, I have been looking around to
+see what policy we should adopt; and through that gloom which has been
+mentioned on the other side, if you will have it so, I still see a
+glorious future for those who stand by the old flag of the nation.
+
+But, sir, I am for maintaining the Union of these States. I will
+sacrifice everything but honor to maintain it. That glorious old flag of
+ours, by any act of mine, shall never cease to wave over the integrity
+of this Union as it is. But if they will not have it so, in this new,
+renovated Government of which I have spoken, the 4th of July, with all
+its glorious memories, will never be repealed. The old flag of 1776
+will be in our hands, and shall float over this nation forever; and this
+capital, that some gentlemen said would be reserved for the Southern
+republic, shall still be the capital. It was laid out by Washington;
+it was consecrated by him; and the old flag that he vindicated in the
+Revolution shall still float from the Capitol.
+
+I say, sir, I stand by the Union of these States. Washington and his
+compatriots fought for that good old flag. It shall never be hauled
+down, but shall be the glory of the Government to which I belong, as
+long as my life shall continue. To maintain it, Washington and his
+compatriots fought for liberty and the rights of man. And here I will
+add that my own father, although but a humble soldier, fought in the
+same great cause, and went through hardships and privations sevenfold
+worse than death, in order to bequeath it to his children. It is my
+inheritance. It was my protector in infancy, and the pride and glory
+of my riper years; and, Mr. President, although it may be assailed by
+traitors on every side, by the grace of God, under its shadow I will
+die.
+
+
+
+
+JOHN JORDON CRITTENDEN,
+
+OF KENTUCKY. (BORN 1787, DIED 1863.)
+
+ON THE CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE;
+
+UNITED STATES SENATE, DECEMBER 18, 1860.
+
+
+I am gratified, Mr. President, to see in the various propositions which
+have been made, such a universal anxiety to save the country from
+the dangerous dissensions which now prevail; and I have, under a very
+serious view and without the least ambitious feeling whatever connected
+with it, prepared a series of constitutional amendments, which I desire
+to offer to the Senate, hoping that they may form, in part at least,
+some basis for measures that may settle the controverted questions which
+now so much agitate our country. Certainly, sir, I do not propose
+now any elaborate discussion of the subject. Before presenting these
+resolutions, however, to the Senate, I desire to make a few remarks
+explanatory of them, that the Senate may understand their general scope.
+
+The questions of an alarming character are those which have grown out
+of the controversy between the northern and southern sections of our
+country in relation to the rights of the slave-holding States in the
+Territories of the United States, and in relation to the rights of
+the citizens of the latter in their slaves. I have endeavored by these
+resolutions to meet all these questions and causes of discontent, and
+by amendments to the Constitution of the United States, so that the
+settlement, if we happily agree on any, may be permanent, and leave no
+cause for future controversy. These resolutions propose, then, in the
+first place, in substance, the restoration of the Missouri Compromise,
+extending the line throughout the Territories of the United States
+to the eastern border of California, recognizing slavery in all the
+territory south of that line, and prohibiting slavery in all the
+territory north of it; with a provision, however, that when any of those
+Territories, north or south, are formed into States, they shall then be
+at liberty to exclude or admit slavery as they please; and that, in the
+one case or the other, it shall be no objection to their admission into
+the Union. In this way, sir, I propose to settle the question, both as
+to territory and slavery, so far as it regards the Territories of the
+United States.
+
+I propose, sir, also, that the Constitution be so amended as to declare
+that Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery in the District
+of Columbia so long as slavery exists in the States of Maryland and
+Virginia; and that they shall have no power to abolish slavery in any of
+the places under their special jurisdiction within the Southern States.
+
+These are the constitutional amendments which I propose, and embrace the
+whole of them in regard to the questions of territory and slavery. There
+are other propositions in relation to grievances, and in relation to
+controversies, which I suppose are within the jurisdiction of Congress,
+and may be removed by the action of Congress. I propose, in regard
+to legislative action, that the fugitive slave law, as it is commonly
+called, shall be declared by the Senate to be a constitutional act, in
+strict pursuance of the Constitution. I propose to declare that it
+has been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to be
+constitutional, and that the Southern States are entitled to a faithful
+and complete execution of that law, and that no amendment shall be made
+hereafter to it which will impair its efficiency. But, thinking that it
+would not impair its efficiency, I have proposed amendments to it in two
+particulars. I have understood from gentlemen of the North that there
+is objection to the provision giving a different fee where the
+commissioner decides to deliver the slave to the claimant, from that
+which is given where he decides to discharge the alleged slave; the law
+declares that in the latter case he shall have but five dollars, while
+in the other he shall have ten dollars--twice the amount in one case
+than in the other. The reason for this was very obvious. In case he
+delivers the servant to his claimant he is required to draw out a
+lengthy certificate, stating the principle and substantial grounds on
+which his decision rests, and to return him either to the marshal or to
+the claimant to remove him to the State from which he escaped. It was
+for that reason that a larger fee was given to the commissioner, where
+he had the largest service to perform. But, sir, the act being viewed
+unfavorably and with great prejudice, in a certain portion of our
+country, this was regarded as very obnoxious, because it seemed to give
+an inducement to the commissioner to return the slave to the master, as
+he thereby obtained the larger fee of ten dollars instead of the smaller
+one of five dollars. I have said, let the fee be the same in both cases.
+
+I have understood, furthermore, sir, that inasmuch as the fifth section
+of that law was worded somewhat vaguely, its general terms had admitted
+of the construction in the Northern States that all the citizens were
+required, upon the summons of the marshal, to go with him to hunt up,
+as they express it, and arrest the slave; and this is regarded as
+obnoxious. They have said, "in the Southern States you make no such
+requisition on the citizen"; nor do we, sir. The section, construed
+according to the intention of the framers of it, I suppose, only
+intended that the marshal should have the same right in the execution
+of process for the arrest of a slave that he has in all other cases of
+process that he is required to execute--to call on the _posse comitatus_
+for assistance where he is resisted in the execution of his duty, or
+where, having executed his duty by the arrest, an attempt is made to
+rescue the slave. I propose such an amendment as will obviate this
+difficulty and limit the right of the master and the duty of the citizen
+to cases where, as in regard to all other process, persons may be called
+upon to assist in resisting opposition to the execution of the laws.
+
+I have provided further, sir, that the amendment to the Constitution
+which I here propose, and certain other provisions of the Constitution
+itself, shall be unalterable, thereby forming a permanent and
+unchangeable basis for peace and tranquillity among the people. Among
+the provisions in the present Constitution, which I have by amendment
+proposed to render unalterable, is that provision in the first article
+of the Constitution which provides the rule for representation,
+including in the computation three-fifths of the slaves. That is to
+be rendered unchangeable. Another is the provision for the delivery of
+fugitive slaves. That is to be rendered unchangeable.
+
+And with these provisions, Mr. President, it seems to me we have a solid
+foundation upon which we may rest our hopes for the restoration of peace
+and good-will among all the States of this Union, and all the people.
+I propose,sir, to enter into no particular discussion. I have explained
+the general scope and object of my proposition. I have provided further,
+which I ought to mention, that, there having been some difficulties
+experienced in the courts of the United States in the South in carrying
+into execution the laws prohibiting the African slave trade, all
+additions and amendments which may be necessary to those laws to render
+them effectual should be immediately adopted by Congress, and especially
+the provision of those laws which prohibit the importation of African
+slaves into the United States. I have further provided it as a
+recommendation to all the States of this Union, that whereas laws have
+been passed of an unconstitutional character, (and all laws are of
+that character which either conflict with the constitutional acts
+of Congress, or which in their operation hinder or delay the proper
+execution of the acts of Congress,) which laws are null and void, and
+yet, though null and void, they have been the source of mischief and
+discontent in the country, under the extraordinary circumstances in
+which we are placed; I have supposed that it would not be improper or
+unbecoming in Congress to recommend to the States, both North and South,
+the repeal of all such acts of theirs as were intended to control, or
+intended to obstruct the operation of the acts of Congress, or which in
+their operation and in their application have been made use of for the
+purpose of such hindrance and opposition, and that they will repeal
+these laws or make such explanations or corrections of them as to
+prevent their being used for any such mischievous purpose.
+
+I have endeavored to look with impartiality from one end of our country
+to the other; I have endeavored to search up what appeared to me to be
+the causes of discontent pervading the land; and, as far as I am capable
+of doing so, I have endeavored to propose a remedy for them. I am far
+from believing that, in the shape in which I present these measures,
+they will meet with the acceptance of the Senate. It will be
+sufficiently gratifying if, with all the amendments that the superior
+knowledge of the Senate may make to them, they shall, to any effectual
+extent, quiet the country.
+
+Mr. President, great dangers surround us. The Union of these States
+is dear to the people of the United States. The long experience of its
+blessings, the mighty hopes of the future, have made it dear to the
+hearts of the American people. Whatever politicians may say, whatever
+of dissension may, in the heat of party politics, be created among
+our people, when you come down to the question of the existence of the
+Constitution, that is a question beyond all politics; that is a question
+of life and death. The Constitution and the Union are the life of this
+great people--yes, sir, the life of life. We all desire to preserve
+them, North and South; that is the universal desire. But some of the
+Southern States, smarting under what they conceive to be aggressions of
+their Northern brethren and of the Northern States, are not contented to
+continue this Union, and are taking steps, formidable steps, towards a
+dissolution of the Union, and towards the anarchy and the bloodshed, I
+fear, that are to follow. I say, sir, we are in the presence of great
+events. We must elevate ourselves to the level of the great occasion. No
+party warfare about mere party questions or party measures ought now
+to engage our attention. They are left behind; they are as dust in the
+balance. The life, the existence of our country, of our Union, is
+the mighty question; and we must elevate ourselves to all those
+considerations which belong to this high subject.
+
+I hope, therefore, gentlemen will be disposed to bring the sincerest
+spirit of conciliation, the sincerest spirit and desire to adjust all
+these difficulties, and to think nothing of any little concessions of
+opinions that they may make, if thereby the Constitution and the country
+can be preserved.
+
+The great difficulty here, sir--I know it; I recognize it as the
+difficult question, particularly with the gentlemen from the North--is
+the admission of this line of division for the territory, and the
+recognition of slavery on the one side, and the prohibition of it on the
+other. The recognition of slavery on the southern side of that line is
+the great difficulty, the great question with them. Now, I beseech you
+to think, and you, Mr. President, and all, to think whether, for such
+a comparative trifle as that, the Union of this country is to be
+sacrificed. Have we realized to ourselves the momentous consequences of
+such an event? When has the world seen such an event? This is a mighty
+empire. Its existence spreads its influence throughout the civilized
+world. Its overthrow will be the greatest shock that civilization and
+free government have received; more extensive in its consequences; more
+fatal to mankind and to the great principles upon which the liberty of
+mankind depends, than the French revolution with all its blood, and with
+all its war and violence. And all for what? Upon questions concerning
+this line of division between slavery and freedom? Why, Mr. President,
+suppose this day all the Southern States, being refused this right;
+being refused this partition; being denied this privilege, were to
+separate from the Northern States, and do it peacefully, and then were
+to come to you peacefully and say, "let there be no war between us;
+let us divide fairly the Territories of the United States"; could the
+northern section of the country refuse so just a demand? What would you
+then give them? What would be the fair proportion? If you allowed them
+their fair relative proportion, would you not give them as much as is
+now proposed to be assigned on the southern side of that line, and would
+they not be at liberty to carry their slaves there, if they pleased? You
+would give them the whole of that; and then what would be its fate?
+
+Is it upon the general principle of humanity, then, that you (addressing
+Republican Senators) wish to put an end to slavery, or is it to be urged
+by you as a mere topic and point of party controversy to sustain party
+power? Surely I give you credit for looking at it upon broader and
+more generous principles. Then, in the worst event, after you have
+encountered disunion, that greatest of all political calamities to the
+people of this country, and the disunionists come, the separating States
+come, and demand or take their portion of the Territories, they can
+take, and will be entitled to take, all that will now lie on the
+southern side of the line which I have proposed. Then they will have
+a right to permit slavery to exist in it; and what do you gain for the
+cause of anti-slavery? Nothing whatever. Suppose you should refuse their
+demand, and claim the whole for yourselves, that would be a flagrant
+injustice which you would not be willing that I should suppose would
+occur. But if you did, what would be the consequence? A State north and
+a State south, and all the States, north and south, would be attempting
+to grasp at and seize this territory, and to get all of it that they
+could. That would be the struggle, and you would have war; and not
+only disunion, but all these fatal consequences would follow from your
+refusal now to permit slavery to exist, to recognize it as existing,
+on the southern side of the proposed line, while you give to the people
+there the right to exclude it when they come to form a State government,
+if such should be their will and pleasure.
+
+Now, gentlemen, in view of this subject, in view of the mighty
+consequences, in view of the great events which are present before you,
+and of the mighty consequences which are just now to take effect, is
+it not better to settle the question by a division upon the line of the
+Missouri Compromise? For thirty years we lived quietly and peacefully
+under it. Our people, North and South, were accustomed to look at it
+as a proper and just line. Can we not do so again? We did it then to
+preserve the peace of the country. Now you see this Union in the most
+imminent danger. I declare to you that it is my solemn conviction that
+unless something be done, and something equivalent to this proposition,
+we shall be a separated and divided people in six months from this time.
+That is my firm conviction. There is no man here who deplores it more
+than I do; but it is my sad and melancholy conviction that that will be
+the consequence. I wish you to realize fully the danger. I wish you
+to realize fully the consequences which are to follow. You can give
+increased stability to this Union; you can give it an existence, a
+glorious existence, for great and glorious centuries to come, by now
+setting it upon a permanent basis, recognizing what the South considers
+as its rights; and this is the greatest of them all; it is that you
+should divide the territory by this line, and allow the people south of
+it to have slavery when they are admitted into the Union as States, and
+to have it during the existence of the territorial government. That is
+all. Is it not the cheapest price at which such a blessing as this Union
+was ever purchased? You think, perhaps, or some of you, that there is no
+danger, that it will but thunder and pass away. Do not entertain such a
+fatal delusion. I tell you it is not so. I tell you that as sure as we
+stand here disunion will progress. I fear it may swallow up even old
+Kentucky in its vortex--as true a State to the Union as yet exists in
+the whole Confederacy--unless something be done; but that you will have
+disunion, that anarchy and war will follow it, that all this will take
+place in six months, I believe as confidently as I believe in your
+presence. I want to satisfy you of the fact.
+
+     *     *     *     *     *
+
+The present exasperation; the present feeling of disunion, is the
+result of a long-continued controversy on the subject of slavery and
+of territory. I shall not attempt to trace that controversy; it is
+unnecessary to the occasion, and might be harmful. In relation to such
+controversies, I will say, though, that all the wrong is never on one
+side, or all the right on the other. Right and wrong, in this world,
+and in all such controversies, are mingled together. I forbear now any
+discussion or any reference to the right or wrong of the controversy,
+the mere party controversy; but in the progress of party, we now come
+to a point where party ceases to deserve consideration, and the
+preservation of the Union demands our highest and our greatest
+exertions. To preserve the Constitution of the country is the highest
+duty of the Senate, the highest duty of Congress--to preserve it and to
+perpetuate it, that we may hand down the glories which we have received
+to our children and to our posterity, and to generations far beyond us.
+We are, Senators, in positions where history is to take notice of the
+course we pursue.
+
+History is to record us. Is it to record that when the destruction of
+the Union was imminent; when we saw it tottering to its fall; when we
+saw brothers arming their hands for hostility with one another, we stood
+quarrelling about points of party politics; about questions which we
+attempted to sanctify and to consecrate by appealing to our conscience
+as the source of them? Are we to allow such fearful catastrophes to
+occur while we stand trifling away our time? While we stand thus,
+showing our inferiority to the great and mighty dead, showing our
+inferiority to the high positions which we occupy, the country may be
+destroyed and ruined; and to the amazement of all the world, the great
+Republic may fall prostrate and in ruins, carrying with it the very hope
+of that liberty which we have heretofore enjoyed; carrying with it, in
+place of the peace we have enjoyed, nothing but revolution and havoc and
+anarchy. Shall it be said that we have allowed all these evils to come
+upon our country, while we were engaged in the petty and small disputes
+and debates to which I have referred? Can it be that our name is to rest
+in history with this everlasting stigma and blot upon it?
+
+Sir, I wish to God it was in my power to preserve this Union by
+renouncing or agreeing to give up every conscientious and other opinion.
+I might not be able to discard it from my mind; I am under no obligation
+to do that. I may retain the opinion, but if I can do so great a good as
+to preserve my country and give it peace, and its institutions and its
+Union stability, I will forego any action upon my opinions. Well, now,
+my friends (addressing the Republican Senators), that is all that is
+asked of you. Consider it well, and I do not distrust the result. As
+to the rest of this body, the gentlemen from the South, I would say to
+them, can you ask more than this? Are you bent on revolution, bent on
+disunion. God forbid it. I cannot believe that such madness possesses
+the American people. This gives reasonable satisfaction. I can speak
+with confidence only of my own State. Old Kentucky will be satisfied
+with it, and she will stand by the Union and die by the Union if this
+satisfaction be given. Nothing shall seduce her. The clamor of no
+revolution, the seductions and temptations of no revolution, will
+tempt her to move one step. She has stood always by the side of the
+Constitution; she has always been devoted to it, and is this day. Give
+her this satisfaction, and I believe all the States of the South that
+are not desirous of disunion as a better thing than the Union and the
+Constitution, will be satisfied and will adhere to the Union, and
+we shall go on again in our great career of national prosperity and
+national glory.
+
+But, sir, it is not necessary for me to speak to you of the consequences
+that will follow disunion. Who of us is not proud of the greatness we
+have achieved? Disunion and separation destroy that greatness. Once
+disunited, we are no longer great. The nations of the earth who
+have looked upon you as a formidable Power, and rising to untold and
+immeasurable greatness in the future, will scoff at you. Your flag, that
+now claims the respect of the world, that protects American property
+in every port and harbor of the world, that protects the rights of
+your citizens everywhere, what will become of it? What becomes of its
+glorious influence? It is gone; and with it the protection of American
+citizens and property. To say nothing of the national honor which
+it displayed to all the world, the protection of your rights, the
+protection of your property abroad is gone with that national flag,
+and we are hereafter to conjure and contrive different flags for our
+different republics according to the feverish fancies of revolutionary
+patriots and disturbers of the peace of the world. No, sir; I want to
+follow no such flag. I want to preserve the union of my country. We have
+it in our power to do so, and we are responsible if we do not do it.
+
+I do not despair of the Republic. When I see before me Senators of so
+much intelligence and so much patriotism, who have been so honored by
+their country, sent here as the guardians of that very union which is
+now in question, sent here as the guardians of our national rights, and
+as guardians of that national flag, I cannot despair; I cannot despond.
+I cannot but believe that they will find some means of reconciling and
+adjusting the rights of all parties, by concessions, if necessary, so
+as to preserve and give more stability to the country and to its
+institutions.
+
+
+
+
+ROBERT TOOMBS,
+
+OF GEORGIA. (BORN 1810--DIED 1885.)
+
+ON SECESSION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY 7, 1861.
+
+
+MR. PRESIDENT AND SENATORS:
+
+The success of the Abolitionists and their allies, under the name of the
+Republican party, has produced its logical results already. They have
+for long years been sowing dragons' teeth, and have finally got a crop
+of armed men. The Union, sir, is dissolved. That is an accomplished fact
+in the path of this discussion that men may as well heed. One of your
+confederates has already, wisely, bravely, boldly, confronted public
+danger, and she is only ahead of many of her sisters because of her
+greater facility for speedy action. The greater majority of those sister
+States, under like circumstances, consider her cause as their cause; and
+I charge you in their name to-day, "Touch not Saguntum." It is not only
+their cause, but it is a cause which receives the sympathy and will
+receive the support of tens and hundreds of thousands of honest
+patriotic men in the non-slave-holding States, who have hither-to
+maintained constitutional rights, and who respect their oaths, abide by
+compacts, and love justice. And while this Congress, this Senate, and
+this House of Representatives, are debating the constitutionality and
+the expediency of seceding from the Union, and while the perfidious
+authors of this mischief are showering down denunciations upon a large
+portion of the patriotic men of this country, those brave men are coolly
+and calmly voting what you call revolution--ay, sir, doing better than
+that: arming to defend it. They appealed to the Constitution,
+they appealed to justice, they appealed to fraternity, until the
+Constitution, justice, and fraternity were no longer listened to in the
+legislative halls of their country, and then, sir, they prepared for the
+arbitrament of the sword; and now you see the glittering bayonet, and
+you hear the tramp of armed men from your Capitol to the Rio Grande. It
+is a sight that gladdens the eyes and cheers the heart of other millions
+ready to second them.
+
+Inasmuch, sir, as I have labored earnestly, honestly, sincerely, with
+these men to avert this necessity so long as I deemed it possible, and
+inasmuch as I heartily approve their present conduct of resistance, I
+deem it my duty to state their case to the Senate, to the country, and
+to the civilized world.
+
+Senators, my countrymen have demanded no new government; they have
+demanded no new constitution. Look to their records at home and here
+from the beginning of this national strife until its consummation in
+the disruption of the empire, and they have not demanded a single thing
+except that you shall abide by the Constitution of the United States;
+that constitutional rights shall be respected, and that justice shall be
+done. Sirs, they have stood by your Constitution; they have stood by
+all its requirements; they have performed all its duties unselfishly,
+uncalculatingly, disinterestedly, until a party sprang up in this
+country which endangered their social system--a party which they
+arraign, and which they charge before the American people and all
+mankind, with having made proclamation of outlawry against four thousand
+millions of their property in the Territories of the United States; with
+having put them under the ban of the empire in all the States in which
+their institutions exist, outside the protection of Federal laws; with
+having aided and abetted insurrection from within and invasion from
+without, with the view of subverting those institutions, and desolating
+their homes and their firesides. For these causes they have taken up
+arms. I shall proceed to vindicate the justice of their demands, the
+patriotism of their conduct. I will show the injustice which they suffer
+and the rightfulness of their resistance.
+
+I shall not spend much time on the question that seems to give my
+honorable friend (Mr. Crittenden) so much concern--the constitutional
+right of a State to secede from this Union. Perhaps he will find out
+after a while that it is a fact accomplished. You have got it in
+the South pretty much both ways. South Carolina has given it to you
+regularly, according to the approved plan. You are getting it just below
+there (in Georgia), I believe, irregularly, outside of the law, without
+regular action. You can take it either way. You will find armed men to
+defend both. I have stated that the discontented States of this
+Union have demanded nothing but clear, distinct, unequivocal,
+well-acknowledged constitutional rights; rights affirmed by the highest
+judicial tribunals of their country; rights older than the Constitution;
+rights which are planted upon the immutable principles of natural
+justice; rights which have been affirmed by the good and the wise of all
+countries, and of all centuries. We demand no power to injure any man.
+We demand no right to injure our confederate States. We demand no right
+to interfere with their institutions, either by word or deed. We have
+no right to disturb their peace, their tranquillity, their security. We
+have demanded of them simply, solely--nothing else--to give us equality,
+security, and tranquillity. Give us these, and peace restores itself.
+Refuse them, and take what you can get.
+
+I will now read my own demands, acting under my own convictions, and the
+universal judgment of my countrymen. They are considered the demands of
+an extremist. To hold to a constitutional right now makes one considered
+as an extremist--I believe that is the appellation these traitors and
+villains, North and South, employ. I accept their reproach rather than
+their principles. Accepting their designation of treason and rebellion,
+there stands before them as good a traitor, and as good a rebel as ever
+descended from revolutionary loins.
+
+What do the rebels demand? First, "that the people of the United States
+shall have an equal right to emigrate and settle in the present or any
+future acquired territories, with whatever property they may possess
+(including slaves), and be securely protected in its peaceable enjoyment
+until such Territory may be admitted as a State into the Union, with or
+without slavery, as she may determine, on an equality with all existing
+States." That is our territorial demand. We have fought for this
+Territory when blood was its price. We have paid for it when gold
+was its price. We have not proposed to exclude you, though you have
+contributed very little of blood or money. I refer especially to New
+England. We demand only to go into those Territories upon terms of
+equality with you, as equals in this great Confederacy, to enjoy the
+common property of the whole Union, and receive the protection of the
+common government, until the Territory is capable of coming into the
+Union as a sovereign State, when it may fix its own institutions to suit
+itself.
+
+The second proposition is, "that property in slaves shall be entitled to
+the same protection from the Government of the United States, in all of
+its departments, everywhere, which the Constitution confers the power
+upon it to extend to any other property, provided nothing herein
+contained shall be construed to limit or restrain the right now
+belonging to every State to prohibit, abolish, or establish and protect
+slavery within its limits." We demand of the common government to use
+its granted powers to protect our property as well as yours. For this
+protection we pay as much as you do. This very property is subject to
+taxation. It has been taxed by you and sold by you for taxes. The title
+to thousands and tens of thousands of slaves is derived from the United
+States. We claim that the Government, while the Constitution recognizes
+our property for the purposes of taxation, shall give it the same
+protection that it gives yours. Ought it not to be so? You say no. Every
+one of you upon the committee said no. Your Senators say no. Your House
+of Representatives says no. Throughout the length and breadth of your
+conspiracy against the Constitution, there is but one shout of no! This
+recognition of this right is the price of my allegiance. Withhold it,
+and you do not get my obedience. This is the philosophy of the armed
+men who have sprung up in this country. Do you ask me to support a
+government that will tax my property; that will plunder me; that
+will demand my blood, and will not protect me? I would rather see the
+population of my native State laid six feet beneath her sod than they
+should support for one hour such a government. Protection is the price
+of obedience everywhere, in all countries. It is the only thing that
+makes government respectable. Deny it and you cannot have free subjects
+or citizens; you may have slaves.
+
+We demand, in the next place, "that persons committing crimes against
+slave property in one State, and fleeing to another, shall be delivered
+up in the same manner as persons committing crimes against other
+property, and that the laws of the State from which such persons flee
+shall be the test of criminality." That is another one of the demands of
+an extremist and rebel. The Constitution of the United States, article
+four, section two, says:
+
+"A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who
+shall flee from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand
+of the executive authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered
+up to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime." But the
+non-slave-holding States, treacherous to their oaths and compacts, have
+steadily refused, if the criminal only stole a negro, and that negro was
+a slave, to deliver him up. It was refused twice on the requisition of
+my own State as long as twenty-two years ago. It was refused by Kent and
+by Fairfield, Governors of Maine, and representing, I believe, each
+of the then Federal parties. We appealed then to fraternity, but we
+submitted; and this constitutional right has been practically a dead
+letter from that day to this. The next case came up between us and the
+State of New York, when the present senior Senator (Mr. Seward) was
+the Governor of that State; and he refused it. Why? He said it was not
+against the laws of New York to steal a negro, and therefore he would
+not comply with the demand. He made a similar refusal to Virginia. Yet
+these are our confederates; these are our sister States! There is
+the bargain; there is the compact. You have sworn to it. Both these
+Governors swore to it. The Senator from New York swore to it. The
+Governor of Ohio swore to it when he was inaugurated. You cannot bind
+them by oaths.
+
+Yet they talk to us of treason; and I suppose they expect to whip
+freemen into loving such brethren! They will have a good time in doing
+it!
+
+It is natural we should want this provision of the Constitution carried
+out. The Constitution says slaves are property; the Supreme Court says
+so; the Constitution says so. The theft of slaves is a crime; they are
+a subject-matter of felonious asportation. By the text and letter of the
+Constitution you agreed to give them up. You have sworn to do it, and
+you have broken your oaths. Of course, those who have done so look out
+for pretexts. Nobody expected them do otherwise. I do not think I
+ever saw a perjurer, however bald and naked, who could not invent some
+pretext to palliate his crime, or who could not, for fifteen shillings,
+hire an Old Bailey lawyer to invent some for him. Yet this requirement
+of the Constitution is another one of the extreme demands of an
+extremist and a rebel.
+
+The next stipulation is that fugitive slaves shall be surrendered under
+the provisions of the fugitive-slave act of 1850, without being entitled
+either to a writ of _habeas corpus_, or trial by jury, or other similar
+obstructions of legislation, in the State to which he may flee. Here is
+the Constitution:
+
+"No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws
+thereof, escaping into an-other, shall, in consequence of any law or
+regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall
+be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may
+be due."
+
+This language is plain, and everybody understood it the same way for the
+first forty years of your government. In 1793, in Washington's time, an
+act was passed to carry out this provision. It was adopted unanimously
+in the Senate of the United States, and nearly so in the House of
+Representatives. Nobody then had invented pretexts to show that the
+Constitution did not mean a negro slave. It was clear; it was plain.
+Not only the Federal courts, but all the local courts in all the States,
+decide that this was a constitutional obligation. How is it now? The
+North sought to evade it; following the instincts of their natural
+character, they commenced with the fraudulent fiction that fugitives
+were entitled to _habeas corpus_, entitled to trial by jury in the State
+to which they fled. They pretended to believe that our fugitive slaves
+were entitled to more rights than their white citizens; perhaps they
+were right, they know one another better than I do. You may charge
+a white man with treason, or felony, or other crime, and you do not
+require any trial by jury before he is given up; there is nothing to
+determine but that he is legally charged with a crime and that he
+fled, and then he is to be delivered up upon demand. White people
+are delivered up every day in this way; but not slaves. Slaves, black
+people, you say, are entitled to trial by jury; and in this way schemes
+have been invented to defeat your plain constitutional obligations. * * *
+
+The next demand made on behalf of the South is, "that Congress shall
+pass effective laws for the punishment of all persons in any of the
+States who shall in any manner aid and abet invasion or insurrection in
+any other State, or commit any other act against the laws of nations,
+tending to disturb the tranquillity of the people or government of any
+other State." That is a very plain principle. The Constitution of the
+United States now requires, and gives Congress express power, to
+define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas,
+and offences against the laws of nations. When the honorable and
+distinguished Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas) last year introduced
+a bill for the purpose of punishing people thus offending under that
+clause of the Constitution, Mr. Lincoln, in his speech at New York,
+which I have before me, declared that it was a "sedition bill "; his
+press and party hooted at it. So far from recognizing the bill as
+intended to carry out the Constitution of the United States, it received
+their jeers and jibes. The Black Republicans of Massachusetts elected
+the admirer and eulogist of John Brown's courage as their governor, and
+we may suppose he will throw no impediments in the way of John Brown's
+successors. The epithet applied to the bill of the Senator from Illinois
+is quoted from a deliberate speech delivered by Lincoln in New York,
+for which, it was stated in the journals, according to some resolution
+passed by an association of his own party, he was paid a couple of
+hundred dollars. The speech should therefore have been deliberate.
+Lincoln denounced that bill. He places the stamp of his condemnation
+upon a measure intended to promote the peace and security of confederate
+States. He is, therefore, an enemy of the human race, and deserves the
+execration of all mankind.
+
+We demand these five propositions. Are they not right? Are they not
+just? Take them in detail, and show that they are not warranted by the
+Constitution, by the safety of our people, by the principles of eternal
+justice. We will pause and consider them; but mark me, we will not let
+you decide the question for us. * * *
+
+Senators, the Constitution is a compact. It contains all our obligations
+and the duties of the Federal Government. I am content and have ever
+been content to sustain it. While I doubt its perfection, while I do
+not believe it was a good compact, and while I never saw the day that I
+would have voted for it as a proposition _de novo_, yet I am bound to it
+by oath and by that common prudence which would induce men to abide by
+established forms rather than to rush into unknown dangers. I have given
+to it, and intend to give to it, unfaltering support and allegiance,
+but I choose to put that allegiance on the true ground, not on the false
+idea that anybody's blood was shed for it. I say that the Constitution
+is the whole compact. All the obligations, all the chains that fetter
+the limbs of my people, are nominated in the bond, and they wisely
+excluded any conclusion against them, by declaring that "the powers not
+granted by the Constitution to the United States, or forbidden by it to
+the States, belonged to the States respectively or the people." Now I
+will try it by that standard; I will subject it to that test. The law
+of nature, the law of justice, would say--and it is so expounded by the
+publicists--that equal rights in the common property shall be enjoyed.
+Even in a monarchy the king cannot prevent the subjects from enjoying
+equality in the disposition of the public property. Even in a despotic
+government this principle is recognized. It was the blood and the
+money of the whole people (says the learned Grotius, and say all the
+publicists) which acquired the public property, and therefore it is
+not the property of the sovereign. This right of equality being, then,
+according to justice and natural equity, a right belonging to all
+States, when did we give it up? You say Congress has a right to pass
+rules and regulations concerning the Territory and other property of the
+United States. Very well. Does that exclude those whose blood and money
+paid for it? Does "dispose of" mean to rob the rightful owners? You must
+show a better title than that, or a better sword than we have.
+
+But, you say, try the right. I agree to it. But how? By our judgment?
+No, not until the last resort. What then; by yours? No, not until the
+same time. How then try it? The South has always said, by the Supreme
+Court. But that is in our favor, and Lincoln says he "will not stand that
+judgment." Then each must judge for himself of the mode and manner
+of redress. But you deny us that privilege, and finally reduce us to
+accepting your judgment. The Senator from Kentucky comes to your aid,
+and says he can find no constitutional right of secession. Perhaps not;
+but the Constitution is not the place to look for State rights. If that
+right belongs to independent States, and they did not cede it to the
+Federal Government, it is reserved to the States, or to the people. Ask
+your new commentator where he gets the right to judge for us. Is it in
+the bond?
+
+The Northern doctrine was, many years ago, that the Supreme Court was
+the judge. That was their doctrine in 1800. They denounced Madison
+for the report of 1799, on the Virginia resolutions; they denounced
+Jefferson for framing the Kentucky resolutions, because they were
+presumed to impugn the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United
+States; and they declared that that court was made, by the Constitution,
+the ultimate and supreme arbiter. That was the universal judgment--the
+declaration of every free State in this Union, in answer to the Virginia
+resolutions of 1798, or of all who did answer, even including the State
+of Delaware, then under Federal control.
+
+The Supreme Court have decided that, by the Constitution, we have a
+right to go to the Territories and be protected there with our property.
+You say, we cannot decide the compact for ourselves. Well, can the
+Supreme Court decide it for us? Mr. Lincoln says he does not care what
+the Supreme Court decides, he will turn us out anyhow. He says this in
+his debate with the honorable member from Illinois [Mr. Douglas]. I have
+it before me. He said he would vote against the decision of the Supreme
+Court. Then you did not accept that arbiter. You will not take my
+construction; you will not take the Supreme Court as an arbiter; you
+will not take the practice of the government; you will not take the
+treaties under Jefferson and Madison; you will not take the opinion of
+Madison upon the very question of prohibition in 1820. What, then, will
+you take? You will take nothing but your own judgment; that is, you will
+not only judge for yourselves, not only discard the court, discard our
+construction, discard the practice of the government, but you will drive
+us out, simply because you will it. Come and do it! You have sapped the
+foundations of society; you have destroyed almost all hope of peace. In
+a compact where there is no common arbiter, where the parties finally
+decide for themselves, the sword alone at last becomes the real, if not
+the constitutional, arbiter. Your party says that you will not take the
+decision of the Supreme Court. You said so at Chicago; you said so in
+committee; every man of you in both Houses says so. What are you going
+to do? You say we shall submit to your construction. We shall do it,
+if you can make us; but not otherwise, or in any other manner. That is
+settled. You may call it secession, or you may call it revolution; but
+there is a big fact standing before you, ready to oppose you--that fact
+is, freemen with arms in their hands. The cry of the Union will not
+disperse them; we have passed that point; they demand equal rights; you
+had better heed the demand. * * *
+
+
+
+
+SAMUEL SULLIVAN COX,
+
+OF OHIO. (BORN, 1824-DIED, 1889.)
+
+ON SECESSION; DOUGLAS DEMOCRATIC OPINION;
+
+IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 14, 1861.
+
+
+MR. CHAIRMAN:
+
+I speak from and for the capital of the greatest of the States of the
+great West. That potential section is beginning to be appalled at the
+colossal strides of revolution. It has immense interests at stake in
+this Union, as well from its position as its power and patriotism. We
+have had infidelity to the Union before, but never in such a fearful
+shape. We had it in the East during the late war with England. Even so
+late as the admission of Texas, Massachusetts resolved herself out of
+the Union. That resolution has never been repealed, and one would infer,
+from much of her conduct, that she did not regard herself as bound by
+our covenant. Since 1856, in the North, we have had infidelity to the
+Union, more insidious infractions of the Constitution than by
+open rebellion. Now, sir, as a consequence, in part, of these very
+infractions, we have rebellion itself, open and daring, in terrific
+proportions, with dangers so formidable as to seem almost remediless. *
+* *'
+
+I would not exaggerate the fearful consequences of dissolution. It is
+the breaking up of a federative Union, but it is not like the breaking
+up of society. It is not anarchy. A link may fall from the chain, and
+the link may still be perfect, though the chain have lost its length and
+its strength. In the uniformity of commercial regulations, in matters
+of war and peace, postal arrangements, foreign relations, coinage,
+copyrights, tariff, and other Federal and national affairs, this great
+government may be broken; but in most of the essential liberties and
+rights which government is the agent to establish and protect, the
+seceding State has no revolution, and the remaining States can have
+none. This arises from that refinement of our polity which makes the
+States the basis of our instituted labor. Greece was broken by the
+Persian power, but her municipal institutions remained. Hungary lost
+her national crown, but her home institutions remain. South Carolina may
+preserve her constituted domestic authority, but she must be content to
+glimmer obscurely remote rather than shine and revolve in a constellated
+band. She even goes out by the ordinance of a so-called sovereign
+convention, content to lose by her isolation that youthful, vehement,
+exultant, progressive life, which is our NATIONALITY! She foregoes
+the hopes, the boasts, the flag, the music, all the emotions, all the
+traits, and all the energies which, when combined in our United States,
+have won our victories in war and our miracles of national advancement.
+Her Governor, Colonel Pickens, in his inaugural, regretfully "looks
+back upon the inheritance South Carolina had in the common glories
+and triumphant power of this wonderful confederacy, and fails to find
+language to express the feelings of the human heart as he turns from the
+contemplation." The ties of brotherhood, interest, lineage, and history
+are all to be severed. No longer are we to salute a South Carolinian
+with the "_idem sententiam de republica_," which makes unity and
+nationality. What a prestige and glory are here dimmed and lost in the
+contaminated reason of man!
+
+Can we realize it? Is it a masquerade, to last for a night, or a reality
+to be dealt with, with the world's rough passionate handling? It is sad
+and bad enough; but let us not over-tax our anxieties about it as yet.
+It is not the sanguinary regime of the French revolution; not the rule
+of assignats and guillotine; not the cry of "_Vivent les Rouges! A mort
+les gendarmes!_" but as yet, I hope I may say, the peaceful attempt
+to withdraw from the burdens and benefits of the Republic. Thus it is
+unlike every other revolution. Still it is revolution. It may, according
+as it is managed, involve consequences more terrific than any revolution
+since government began.
+
+If the Federal Government is to be maintained, its strength must not
+be frittered away by conceding the theory of secession. To concede
+secession as a right, is to make its pathway one of roses and not of
+thorns. I would not make its pathway so easy. If the government has any
+strength for its own preservation, the people demand it should be put
+forth in its civil and moral forces. Dealing, however, with a sensitive
+public sentiment, in which this strength reposes, it must not be rudely
+exercised. It should be the iron hand in the glove of velvet. Firmness
+should be allied with kindness. Power should assert its own prerogative,
+but in the name of law and love. If these elements are not thus blended
+in our policy, as the Executive proposes, our government will prove
+either a garment of shreds or a coat of mail. We want neither. * * *
+
+Before we enter upon a career of force, let us exhaust every effort
+at peace. Let us seek to excite love in others by the signs of love in
+ourselves. Let there be no needless provocation and strife. Let every
+reasonable attempt at compromise be considered. Otherwise we have a
+terrible alternative. War, in this age and in this country, sir, should
+be the _ultima ratio_. Indeed, it may well be questioned whether there
+is any reason in it for war. What a war! Endless in its hate, without
+truce and without mercy. If it ended ever, it would only be after a
+fearful struggle; and then with a heritage of hate which would forever
+forbid harmony. * * *
+
+Small States and great States; new States and old States; slave States
+and free States; Atlantic States and Pacific States; gold and silver
+States; iron and copper States; grain States and lumber States; river
+States and lake States;--all having varied interests and advantages,
+would seek superiority in armed strength. Pride, animosity, and glory
+would inspire every movement. God shield our country from such a
+fulfilment of the prophecy of the revered founders of the Union! Our
+struggle would be no short, sharp struggle. Law, and even religion
+herself, would become false to their divine purpose. Their voice would
+no longer be the voice of God, but of his enemy. Poverty, ignorance,
+oppression, and its hand-maid, cowardice, breaking out into merciless
+cruelty; slaves false; freemen slaves, and society itself poisoned
+at the cradle and dishonored at the grave;--its life, now so full
+of blessings, would be gone with the life of a fraternal and united
+Statehood. What sacrifice is too great to prevent such a calamity? Is
+such a picture overdrawn? Already its outlines appear. What means the
+inaugural of Governor Pickens, when he says: "From the position we may
+occupy toward the Northern States, as well as from our own internal
+structure of society, the government may, from necessity, become
+strongly military in its organization"? What mean the minute-men
+of Governor Wise? What the Southern boast that they have a rifle or
+shot-gun to each family?
+
+What means the Pittsburgh mob? What this alacrity to save Forts Moultrie
+and Pinckney? What means the boast of the Southern men of being the
+best-armed people in the world, not counting the two hundred thousand
+stand of United States arms stored in Southern arsenals? Already Georgia
+has her arsenals, with eighty thousand muskets. What mean these lavish
+grants of money by Southern Legislatures to buy more arms? What mean
+these rumors of arms and force on the Mississippi? These few facts have
+already verified the prophecy of Madison as to a disunited Republic.
+
+Mr. Speaker, he alone is just to his country, he alone has a mind
+unwarped by section, and a memory unparalyzed by fear, who warns against
+precipitancy. He who could hurry this nation to the rash wager of
+battle is not fit to hold the seat of legislation. What can justify the
+breaking up of our institutions into belligerent fractions? Better this
+marble Capitol were levelled to the dust; better were this Congress
+struck dead in its deliberations; better an immolation of every ambition
+and passion which here have met to shake the foundations of society
+than the hazard of these consequences! * * * I appeal to Southern men,who
+contemplate a step so fraught with hazard and strife, to pause. Clouds
+are about us! There is lightning in their frown! Cannot we direct it
+harmlessly to the earth? The morning and evening prayer of the people I
+speak for in such weakness rises in strength to that Supreme Ruler
+who, in noticing the fall of a sparrow, cannot disregard the fall of a
+nation, that our States may continue to be as they have been--one; one
+in the unreserve of a mingled national being; one as the thought of God
+is one!
+
+
+
+
+JEFFERSON DAVIS,
+
+OF MISSISSIPPI. (BORN 1808, DIED 1889.)
+
+ON WITHDRAWAL FROM THE UNION; SECESSIONIST OPINION;
+
+UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY 21, 1861.
+
+
+I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that
+I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn
+ordinance of her people in convention assembled, has declared her
+separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course
+my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however,
+that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my
+associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does
+not invite me to go into argument, and my physical condition would not
+permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become
+me to say something on the part of the State I here represent, on an
+occasion so solemn as this.
+
+It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for
+many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty,
+the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not
+believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi
+was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing
+necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of
+my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by
+her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think that she
+has justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her
+people before that act was taken, counselled them then that if the state
+of things which they apprehended should exist when the convention met,
+they should take the action which they have now adopted.
+
+I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with
+the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to
+disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the
+law. Such is not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often
+confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a
+remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the
+agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has
+violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge
+for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals
+to the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States
+themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to
+convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then,
+and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its
+practical application.
+
+A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often
+arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of
+nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his
+deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some
+remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound
+South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the
+doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be
+within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to
+be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for
+their judgment.
+
+Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be
+justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a
+time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better
+comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable
+rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying
+that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it
+has made to any agent whomsoever.
+
+I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi,
+believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by
+their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the
+important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the
+Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that
+the name of the great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth,
+has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase
+"to execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied
+to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of
+the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to
+be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United
+States. They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion
+of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which
+cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn
+from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the
+purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has
+withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States
+to be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding
+herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is, in
+which her safety requires that she should provide for the maintenance of
+her rights out of the Union, surrenders all the benefits (and they are
+known to be many), deprives herself of the advantages (they are known
+to be great), severs all the ties of affection (and they are close and
+enduring) which have bound her to the Union; and thus divesting herself
+of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be
+exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within
+her limits.
+
+I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the
+bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife and
+to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in
+Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of
+egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the
+case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing
+the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct
+is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated
+line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from
+the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar or
+one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory
+of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other
+States.
+
+It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief
+that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers
+bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present
+decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created
+free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social
+institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been
+invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That
+Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and
+purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their
+independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man
+was born--to use the language of Mr. Jefferson--booted and spurred to
+ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equal--meaning the
+men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule;
+that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by
+which power and place descended to families, but that all stations were
+equally within the grasp of each member of the body-politic. These were
+the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for
+which they made their declaration; these were the end to which their
+enunciation was directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how
+happened it that among the items of arraignment made against George III.
+was that he endeavored to do just what the North had been endeavoring
+of late to do--to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the
+Declaration announced that the negroes were free and equal, how was the
+Prince to be arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And
+how was this to be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the
+colonies to sever their connection with the mother country? When our
+Constitution was formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for
+there we find provision made for that very class of persons as property;
+they were not put upon the footing of equality with white men--not even
+upon that of paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was
+concerned, were discriminated against as a lower caste, only to be
+represented in the numerical proportion of three-fifths.
+
+Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we
+recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when
+you deny them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a
+Government which, thus perverted, threatens to be destructive of our
+rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our
+independence, and take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to
+others, not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own
+pecuniary benefit; but from the high and solemn motive of defending and
+protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to
+transmit unshorn to our children.
+
+I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my
+constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you,
+Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever
+sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now
+say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure,
+is the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you
+represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say
+I hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must
+part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have
+been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster
+on every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will
+invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the
+lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting
+our trust in God, and in our own firm hearts and strong arms, we will
+vindicate the right as best we may.
+
+In the course of my service here, associated at different times with
+a great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I
+have served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of
+offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile
+remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed,
+or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in
+this hour of our parting to offer you my apology for any pain which,
+in heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the
+remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of
+making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.
+
+Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the
+occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains for me to bid you a
+final adieu.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume III. (of 4), by Various
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AMERICAN ELOQUENCE, III. ***
+
+***** This file should be named 15393.txt or 15393.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/3/9/15393/
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/15393.zip b/15393.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..69e72f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/15393.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e7b908
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #15393 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15393)