diff options
Diffstat (limited to '15393-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/15393-h.htm | 7192 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/chase.jpg | bin | 0 -> 76836 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 78833 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/davis.jpg | bin | 0 -> 60207 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/douglas.jpg | bin | 0 -> 30415 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/everett.jpg | bin | 0 -> 44919 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/seward.jpg | bin | 0 -> 68414 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 15393-h/images/titlepage3.jpg | bin | 0 -> 73148 bytes |
8 files changed, 7192 insertions, 0 deletions
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. —THE ANTI-SLAVERY STRUGGLE (Continued from Vol. II.) <br /> <br /> + VI.—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. —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. — 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 — Frontispiece From a photograph.<br /> + <br /> SALMON P. CHASE — From a daguerreotype, engraved by F. E. + JONES.<br /> <br /> EDWARD EVERETT — From a painting by R. M. + STAIGG.<br /> <br /> STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS — From a steel engraving.<br /> + <br /> JEFFERSON DAVIS — 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. —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—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—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>"—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—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—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. + </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—"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—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—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. + </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."—<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"—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! + </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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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—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—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—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. + </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—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. + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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—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. + </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—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"—<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—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. + </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—but simply + the inhabitants—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—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. + </p> + <p> + 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. + </p> + <p> + 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." + </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—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. * * * + </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—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. + </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—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—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. * * * + </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—that they + were branded as dough-faces—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—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—I mean the law of nature—of physical + geography—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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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—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! + </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—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. + </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—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; <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—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. + </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—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—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!! + </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—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. * * * + </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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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"—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." + </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—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. + </p> + <p> + May 20, 1856. + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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:—Advantage was taken of it. + </p> + <p> + 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. * * * + </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—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—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—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.) + </p> + <p> + MR. DOUGLAS:—Say it. + </p> + <p> + 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? + </p> + <p> + MR. DOUGLAS:—I will; and therefore will not imitate you, sir. + </p> + <p> + MR. SUMNER:—I did not hear the Senator. + </p> + <p> + MR. DOUGLAS:—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:—Mr. President, again the Senator has switched his + tongue, and again he fills the Senate with its offensive odor. * * * + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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.) + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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—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: + </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—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—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—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—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: + </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—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—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. + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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—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. + </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,—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—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." + </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—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: + </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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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—mangled ruin—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—mere rubbish—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—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? + </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—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";—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—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. + </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—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. + </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—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—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. + </p> + <p> + 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. + </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—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—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—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—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—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—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. + </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—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—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—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. + </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—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. + </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. — 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—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—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),—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—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. + </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,—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. + </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—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. * * * + </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—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 <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—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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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—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—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—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? + </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—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—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—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—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—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—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. + </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—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. + </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—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. + </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—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. + </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—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—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—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—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? + </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—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. + </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—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—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—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—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—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. + </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—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—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. + </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—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—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;—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? + </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—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—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. + </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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..8acdf0d --- /dev/null +++ b/15393-h/images/titlepage3.jpg |
