. S 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 p6RnuliP6» 
 pHS^ 
 
T II K Kh\ (lU 1 U).\ or 1m;() 
 
 Speech clcUvmtl by JWv. ^icklcii, of ^m \(ovh, 
 
 I i < » I S I-: ( I I • i; K I • n K S K N 'I' A T I \ K S . 
 
 JAJVUAli\ lUUi, IMUI. 
 

THE HEPTTBIilC IS Z'L^EFEItlSII.A.BIjE. 
 
 "; SPEECH 
 
 HON. DANIEL E. SICKLES, 
 
 OF NEW YORK, 
 
 THE STATE OF THE UNION, 
 
 DELIVEKED IN 
 
 THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY IG. 1861 
 
 The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union — 
 
 Mr. SICKLES said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman : It is impossible to survey the state of things which now 
 exists in this country, without being impressed l)y the remarkable parallel dis- 
 closed between the present relations of the North and South and the relations 
 which existed between the mother country and the colonies prior to the com- 
 mencement of the revolutionary war. I think, .sir, that it is not too much to say 
 that perhaps there is now more alienation of feeling, and more political antagon- 
 ism between the difforent sections of this Confederacy, than prevailed between 
 the mother country and the colonies in 1774. "We all know that the war of the 
 Revolution was not fought so much to escape actual oppression as for a principle ; 
 not so much to remove material grievances that we suffered as for general rights 
 which wo asserted. 
 
 There is now very much of this same sort of conflict upon abstract questions. 
 But it is nevertheless true that millions of the population of this country, with 
 an unanimity never before witnessed in our history, protest against what they 
 declare to be substantial grievances ; among those thoy include the deprivation of 
 essential rights in the Territories, the insecurity of their property, the disturljancc 
 of their domestic tranquillity, — spoliations countenanced by their associates in 
 the Confederacy, and insurrections among their slaves openly promoted in pulpits 
 and presses ia the free States I Several of the southern States are endeavoring to 
 
2 
 
 escape these consequences by measures wliicli, whetlier justly or wrongfully ini- 
 tiated, beyond all doubt menace the dismeml^ermeut of this Confederacy, the 
 organization of one or more new governments within our present limits, and pos- 
 sibly some change in the political control of this continent. 
 
 When the controversy began between England and the colonies, George III and 
 the Ministry inclined to measures of the most vigorous coercion. Another great 
 and gallant party, led by Chatham and Burke, and counseled by our own Frank- 
 lin, proposed conciliation and the recognition of the principles, abstract though 
 they might have been, which were asserted by the colonies. The advocates of 
 conciliation were overborne, and the partizans of force controlled Parliament. 
 Its policy was pursued to the end, with what results history has recorded; 
 and in its perfect vindication of Burke and Chatliam and Franklin, history com- 
 mends to us, in this hour of trial, an impressive and apposite example. It is for 
 us to decide whether we will reject the counsel which this experience has devel- 
 oped to us, or whether we will instead, imitate the policy of George III and 
 Lord North, which proved so fatal to the aml)ition of England. 
 
 The great fact which constitutes the crisis, is, that eight millions of our popula- 
 tion are pervaded with the conviction of danger at home, of insecurity at their 
 firesides, of assaults made and menaced upon their property; the refusal of their 
 equal rights in the common Territories of the Union, acquired by the valor and 
 treasure of the whole nation. No matter, sir, for the purposes of the present 
 exigency, whether the grounds upon which this discontent is based, are entirely 
 well founded or not. That was well and wisely discussed last year. We have 
 now to deal with this extensive disaffection as a gigantic flict in our history and 
 position. 
 
 I do not propose to-day to consider in detail the causes of this state of things; 
 yet it may not be improper to advert to them in a general way. This revolution 
 began in November, 18(50. It was initiated by a change in the principles of the 
 Government. In the election of Mr. Lincoln upon the doctrines avowed in the 
 Chicago platform, a majority of the people asserted the right and the power to 
 legislate in conflict with the fundaiucntal law of the land, as embodied in the 
 Constitution and declared by the Supreme Court of the United States. The 
 assertion of that power, and placing the Government in the hands of an Execu- 
 tive pledged to exercise it, was of itself a civil revolution, in the character and 
 form and essence of the Government. So much of the revolution was accom- 
 plished in November. I.et it be well understood that a revolution in a popular 
 Government can be as well achieved through the ballot-box as by the bayonet. 
 
The determination of a niojorify of tlu- jicnjilc to <»vi'nidc wi'Il-ascert^iiiud mnl 
 essential constitutional rights is revolution in its most p<itontial aspect.. 
 
 The States of tlu- Conlt'doracy wi-ru llierohy separated into two sections — one 
 dominant and the otliir subject. Tlu- North appropriated to itself the exclusive 
 right of settlement in the Territories, which an- tlic cnminon property of all the 
 States. This exclusion of the slavcholdi-rs of the South from i'(|Ual participation 
 in the ri«;ht of emi^'ration and colonization witli their property, is predicated upon 
 the avowed uround that to hoiil .slaves is a >-\n which places a citizen under the 
 ban of the Federal (Jovernment ; that this description of jjroperty is not entitled 
 to protection beyond the limit.s of the State in which it may be held ; and that 
 the institution itself, thou^'h coeval with American civilization, and of unknown 
 anticjuity, is a r.lic of barbarism ; to tin- extinction of wliich the power and influ- 
 ence of the Federal Government became pledired in the election of Mr. Ijincoln. 
 
 The (Jovernment of the Tnited States has become I'uritan and prescriptive; 
 it has ceased to be catholic and tolerant, as it was iormed. and has continued 
 from the administration of \Va>liini.'ton down to the election of Lincoln. The 
 vital element of our i)olitical system has ever been the e<)uality of the States; 
 and from this follows the con.'^eijuent duty of non-interference with their local 
 institutions, and the ei|ual right of every citizen in the (iovernment and its 
 Territories. The essential characteristic of I'uritanism is the employment of 
 the powers of (iovernment to coniixd a unii'orm recognition of the opinions of 
 the majority, in all things. The Constitution of the Tnited States imposes no 
 test upon the institutions of a State or Territory, except that rliey shall be repult 
 lieaii. It was designed for a Confederation, embracing every element of civiliza- 
 tion, which cimld be developed under republican institutions. The triumph of 
 the Puritan element of the North, involves the probable destruction of the feder- 
 ative i)rirKiple of the (Constitution, ami the consolidation of the (Government 
 under the absolute power ot" a majority, which is one of the forms of despotism. 
 
 Such is the character of the revolution begun in November. It was peaceful 
 in form, T concede, but none the less comprehensive and radical. We are now 
 in the presence of the second pha."<e of the revolution, which is the secession of 
 several of the States of the Confederacy. Secession, also, wa.s avowed as a peace- 
 ful remedy. It was intended as a remedy by means of which the aggrieved States 
 could, without conflict, escape the conse>iuenees of the revolution already in pro- 
 gress, and after they had lost the means of protecting them,selvcs within the Gov- 
 ernment. I do not propose, sir, to diseu.ss the question of the right of secession. 
 It is too late for that. The reserved rights of the States is familiar Xew York 
 
doctrine. They were more insisted upon, perhaps, in our convention which rati- 
 fied the Constitution, because, of all the States, New York was the most reluctant 
 to yield its assent to the Union. Even in the colonial times, long before the 
 Revolution, we had occasion to consider this question in our controversy with 
 Vermont, where the right of a community to form an independent government 
 was successfully asserted, after a long struggle, in which Ethan Allen won as 
 much distinction as he afterwards gained at Ticonderoga.* 
 
 I might, in passing, compare the remedy of secession with various constitu- 
 tional remedies which are unquestioned, and which, perhaps, would be more 
 
 I. 
 
 effectual for the redress of grievances. Take, for instance, sir, the remedy of 
 refusing supplies to the Government. Ever since the seventeenth century this 
 has been recognized as a constitutional proceeding. It has been occasionally and 
 successfully employed in English history to compel modifications of the British 
 Constitution. It was employed to ameliorate the monarchical and aristocratical 
 elements of the Government and to secure larger powers to the people. Suppose 
 it were applied here ; suppose there was a sufficient representation in both Houses 
 to make it effectual; suppose the Representatives from the southern States alone, 
 without including their friends among the northern Representatives, had deter- 
 mined, in a body, to resort to every parliamentary resource to cut off supplies 
 from the Federal Government. Without supplies we all know that the Federal 
 Government would crumble to dust in a year; it would be paralyzed from head 
 to foot ; it would be compelled to yield to any assailant. That remedy was not 
 resorted to, although Mr. Lincoln's party failed to elect a majority in either 
 House of Congress. 
 
 Another remedy conceded to be within the Constitution is retaliation. I mean 
 
 * The dispute between Vermont and New York, wliicli began in 17G0, and continued 
 until 1790, is an instructive passage in our political history, illustrating the relations of 
 the colonies to each other and to the Confederation. The independence of Vermont was 
 not recognized by Congress until slie had successfully asserted and vindicated it against 
 Great Britain, New York, and even Congress itself. It is difiicult to say whether one most 
 admires the address of Jier diplomatists, the courage of her military leaders, or the sturdy 
 virtue of the "Green Mountain Boys;" but certain it is, that between her intrigues with 
 the British and her negotiations with Congress, her alliance with Massachusetts and her 
 mortal antagonism witli New York, Vermont, after a long and eventful struggle, baiHed 
 all her adversaries, established her independence as a sovereign State, and was duly ad- 
 mitted into the Union upon an equal footing with New York, her old enemy, but evermore, 
 I trust, her good friend. (See LippincotCs Cabinet Histories, Vermont, chaps. 3, 12, and 
 14, for tlie narrative of this controversy.) 
 
retaliatory legislation as betweeu tin- Suites; restrictions upon commerce au 
 trade and intercourse. Mr. Stephens, of Geor^'ia, atiJ other southern statesniei 
 have devised and su^'gested such measures, the conHtitutinnalitj of which is n»aii 
 tained hy the ai>lest jurists. A third remedy would have been the-withdraw; 
 of all the .southern Kepresentatives in both branches of Con^'rew. To illustrai 
 the effect of it: suppose the election of a President and Vico-I'resident, ha 
 devolved upon one or other of tlie two Houses of CongrcHs. and the Uepresen 
 atives of a sutheient number of States, to prevent the formation of a constitution! 
 quorum, had withdrawn : that would have rendered the constitutional election of 
 President impossible, and the eo»se(|ueuccs to the (Government of a failure I 
 choose an Kxecutive, in the manner re(|uired by the Constitution, I need notstc 
 to elaborate. 
 
 A fourth alternative, so far as the territorial «|ue>iinri is cMiKfriied, would hav 
 been for the southern States to occupy, by immiLrration, such portions of the con 
 niou tirritory as they desired, and pn.tect their slave property in the territory b 
 such force as might be neces.sary to repel interference. IJy the law of the Ian- 
 they would undoubtedly have had a right to defend their property by any amoui 
 of force necessary to overcome any species of attack. This remedy would hav 
 been what is (ailed " fighting within tlie Ininn." I say, therefore, sir, in get 
 eral terms, without amplifying the.-^e illustrations, that the remedy of secessio 
 chosen by the aggrieved St^ites, was perhaps the leiLst effectual as a mode of con 
 straint upon the (Government. It will remain to be considered, Mr. Chairman 
 how fir the plan of peaieable seec.-sion has been consistently carried out. 1 
 will remain to be seen whether or no, the precipitate action of South Carolina am 
 other southern States and communities has not essentially chan:;cd tl'o ori-rina 
 character of the secession movement. It will remain to be shown whether or d< 
 by their interference with the fort.s, arsenals, navy-yards, and the commoi 
 property of the Confederacy, they have not committed a faUil error in the devel 
 opment of their own policy, thcm.sclves initiating that resort to foree and " coci 
 cion " which they have so wisely, and, as I think, so justly deprecated. 
 
 Before proceeding to that branch of the subject, I will allude, cursorily, to th 
 policy proposed by the dominant party in the northern States, in the present con 
 dition of affairs. With remarkable unanimity they insist upon the emplovmen 
 of armies and fleets to compel the allegiance of unwilling States. If this polic 
 were just, it is impo.ssible. To what end shall we make war upon a member o 
 the Union ? It could not be expected that the most successful prosecution o 
 hostilities would end in reconciliation. Shall we seek to subjugate the South 
 
and, obliteratiiio- the States, hold it as a mere province, by conquest 'i This would 
 be repugnant to the theory of our (Jovcrnment, which has for its basis, States and 
 citizens, not dependencies or subjects. If the purpose of such a war be to 
 destroy the power of the antagonistic States, as foreign enemies, let me implore 
 you to wait for sufficient evidence of their hostility, and to be sure that you have 
 exhausted all the means of conciliation. But I utterly deny that the extremest 
 Federalist, at the time of the formation of the Constitution, ever tolerated the 
 idea that the Federal Government, through any of its instrumentalities, could 
 constrain the political action of any sovereign State, except by means of the judi- 
 cial power of the Supreme Court. It will be sufficient, to make this statement 
 indisputable, to refer gentlemen to the exposition of the Constitution by Alexan- 
 der Hamilton. The founder and leader of the Federal party developed in the 
 Federalist, cotemporaneously with the adoption of the Constitution, the most 
 powerful argument that could be framed against the power or the utility of 
 employing coercion through the Federal Government upon a sovereign State. 
 He convinced our public men of that epoch, that this element in the Articles 
 of Confederation, made the Government of the Confederation impracticable. 
 He established, by numerous examples from ancient and modern history,* that 
 whenever the controversies between associated States had resulted in an appeal 
 to force, civil war and foreign intervention hastened the destruction of the 
 Confederation. 
 
 Sir, we all know that the Amphyctionic league, one of the most perfect of the 
 Republics that existed among the Grecian Commonwealths, was destroyed by an 
 attempt to employ coercion upon one of its members. The people of the resisting 
 State— the Phocians— sought the alliance of Philip of Macedon. Eeady and 
 eager to give it, he occupied the territory of the Republic with his armies, and 
 settled the quarrel by annexing the principal States to Macedcn. The Achajan 
 Confederacy, the last and best hope of ancient liberty, was destroyed by the in- 
 tervention of Home, on the appeal of one of the confederated States, which sought 
 this mode of escaping the coercion of the league. The passions of men are Ihe 
 
 To those who are disposed to follow this branch of the discussion, nnd especially to the 
 Republicans who meditate the subjugation of the seceding States, I commend the essays 
 from Nos. lo to 20 of the Federalist, both inclusive. In denying this power to the Federal 
 Government, M..l,«on and Hamilton fully concurred. They represented, in this opinion, 
 bo h of the grear parties and all the leading public men of their tin.e, in this country. Who 
 will look further for authoritative exposition of the principles and faculties of our Govern- 
 meut i 
 
same in all time. We have, at this cpnch, a I'hilip of Miicpdon in Louis Napn- 
 Icon uf France, with armies such as the worhl has never before seen, eager for 
 employment ; with a Navy which would enable him to transfer these arras to our 
 shores, sooner than iMiilip of MaccJon could liave niarche<l to Athens. "Who can 
 fail to see that an attempt to subjngate the States of the South by the Federal 
 Government would result in appeals for aid, for protection, for alliances, for com- 
 mercial treaties, in any quarter where aid and succor could be found ? The 
 armies of Louis Napoleon and of Victoria, instead of the Conprcss of the United 
 States, would be made the arbiters of the issues arising out of the existing revo- 
 lution. The confederated Governments of modern tinirs equally illustrate the 
 same views. The more familiar instances e found in the hi.'.tory of the Ger- 
 manic Confederation, the I'nitcd N'" tl-, .iinl tlw Confederacy of Poland. 
 No in.stance more apposite can be\ an that tarnished by our own struggle 
 for indopendcnee, which was not accv i.shed without the intervention of France. 
 
 Having adverted, sir, to the snuthe. i remedy, and also to the policy of the 
 dominant party in the northern State.><, I will allude to the advice of the conser- 
 vative portion of the northern States. We recommend the recognition of all the 
 rights of the South, without fjualification ; the recognition of the e<jualify of the 
 States; and non-interference with the institution of slavery wherever it exists, or 
 where it may be ef^tablislied with the consent of the people, in any of the new 
 States to be formed out of the common territory belonging to the Union. This 
 is the remedy of justice and conciliation. 
 
 I'ermit ine, before I leave this general view of our situation, to advert to a 
 phrase which expresses, somewhat vaguely perhaps, a popular estimate of the 
 duty of the (Jovernment at this time. Everybody at i\u- North cal's for the 
 "enforcement of the laws." That would be, indeed, desirable. It is not less 
 the duty, perhaps, than a necessity of Government, because, without the enforce- 
 ment of tile laws, Government cannot be said to exist. Hut, ."ir, this suggestion 
 does not meet the existing state of things, because by the Constitution we can 
 only enforce our laws on persons, and by means of the magistr:icy. There arc 
 no laws that we can enforce against a Stato, in art .s. To bring individuals 
 within the reirular jurisdiction of law, we must have court,s and juries; 
 and the Constitution expressly declares that we must deal with offenders in 
 the State where the crime is committed. You must have a grand jury there to 
 find indictments ; which you know you have not. You must have your courts 
 there, before which you will arraign offenders ; and you have no courts. You 
 must empanel a jury of citizens of the State where the oSeuae was committed ; 
 
and that you cannot do ; and if you could, if you had g^l this machinery, where 
 would you find in South Carolina, or Georgia, or Louisiana, or any of the insur- 
 gent States, a jury that would bring in a verdict of guilty on an indictment for a 
 political oflFence, arising out of the present political troubles ? 
 
 Let us now return to the course of events at the South — for it is there our im- 
 mediate danger is to be seen. Pending the consideration in Congress, of the 
 various measures proposed to restore peace and to re-establish the Government, 
 upon secure foundations of popular content, alarming events have recently oc- 
 curred upon the soutber'n coast. We are threatened with immediate hostilities, 
 while we are deliberating. Should a state of war intervene, as an incident of 
 secession, provoked by the precipitate and unjustifiable action of the local author- 
 ities in these States, all hope of any solution, other than such as the sword may 
 provide, must be abandoned. It is not yet time to des-pair of some satisfactory 
 basis of adjustment being agreed upon in this Congress; although little, if any, 
 progress has yet been made in the work of reconciliation. It is, nevertheless, 
 beyond question, too soon for South Carolina, Louisiana, and their allies, 
 to assume to dictate to the United States the terms upon which the Confed- 
 eracy is to be dismembered, and to seize upon the possessions of the Govern- 
 ment which lie adjacent to their jurisdiction. The President has communicated 
 to Congress the recommendations which he has thought it his duty to make. 
 They are all that the South could reasonably ask or hope to secure. This House 
 has ordered a committee of one from each State, to consider the suggestions of 
 the President, together with propositions which have beeu presented to the House 
 from the Representatives of many States. In another place, our colleagues in 
 Congress are occupied assiduously with the consideration of the subject, and espe- 
 cially the plan of compromise proposed by a distinguished southern Senator. The 
 recent speech of another distinguished Senator, representing the Republican 
 party, and also, as rumor says, called to the highest position in the councils of 
 the nest Administration, authorizes us to expect, before many days, a proposition 
 of honorable compromise from the Cabinet of Mr. Lincoln. Perhap.s all these 
 hopes may be disappointed— all these labors unavailing. The grave, but welcome, 
 duty of pacification may, after all, unavoidably go over to our successors. Possi- 
 bly, if our patriotism has all become provincial, reconciliation is impossible. 
 
 What, then, is to be done? What is the duty of this Administration and of 
 this Congress ? If we must abandon all hope from our own exertions, let us, at 
 least, hand over our trust intact, to the next Administration. If the next Ad- 
 ministration, with a majority in both branches of Congress, fail, we must await 
 an appeal to the people. The Republican party can save the Union now, by an 
 honorable compromise, acceptable to the border States. If this be withheld, al- 
 though the Union may be yet dismembered, the Confederacy will be reconstructed 
 upon the ashes of the men who destroyed it. What is now to be done ? State 
 after State wirhdraws its Representatives from this Congress, and will soon accredit 
 them to the Congress of another confederation. Our wisest men fear that no 
 
9 
 
 compromise can be perfected in this Congress. The dominant party in the Legis- 
 latures of most of the eastern, northern, and western States have indicated by 
 their action that they will not make the concessionB that are indiapcnsablc to 
 reunion. What, then, 1 repeat, becomes the duty of this Congress and of this 
 Administration y I say, for one, that 1 believe that duty to be to preserve the 
 statits quo ; to maintain the Uuvernment ; and, as a paramount duty, neither to 
 initiate nor to permit agirression. 
 
 But it is an essential condition of this policy that the like purpose and the like 
 spirit shall animate our southern friends. It will never do, f-ir, for them to protest 
 against coercion, and, at the same moment, seize all the arms and arsenals and 
 forts and navy-yards and &hips tiiat may, through our forbearance, fall within 
 their power. This is not peaceful secession. These acts, whensoever or l)y 
 whomsoever done, are overt nets of war. And, sir, when sovereign States, 
 by their own deliberate acts, make war, they must not cry peace. When they 
 employ force, they cannot declaim against coercion. Tlie jurLndiction of the 
 Federal Government in the State of South Carolina is one thing; the right of 
 the Federal Government to juri.sdiction and absolute control over its forts and 
 arsenals and ships-of-war and navy-yards is (|iiitc a dilTerent f|uestion. How- 
 ever secession may, as a political remedy, extend to the territory of S(»uth Carolina, 
 or of Georgia, ur of Virginia, it does not apply to territory which, by their own 
 sovereign acts, they have indefcasibly ceded to the Government of the United 
 States. The repeal of the ordinance by which a Slate adopted the Constitution, 
 cannot undo an absolute cession of territory; all the territory thus acquired, with 
 the consent of the respective States, was purcha.scd for a fair equivalent. The 
 sovereign authority of the Government of the I'nited States, overall its territorial 
 po.ssessions within the State*, rests upon the unconditional and voluntary grant ol' 
 exclusive jurisdiction by the States in whitli it was previously vested; these States, 
 each for itself, had the sovereign right to -urrender this jurisdiction, or to reserve 
 it. Territory once ceded to us, by the act of the Slate, is relinquished f)revor, 
 and can only be regained with the consent of the Government of the United 
 States. 
 
 I am arguing this (|Ucstion, .^lr. Chairman, on tin- promi.-cs a.-^Humed by the 
 seceding States, and which they affirm to bo indisputable. They were always 
 sovereign. The Constitution recognizes their sovereign right to grant, or refuse 
 to grant, to the United States, exclusive juri.sdiction over these fortified places. 
 They have made the grant ab.solutely and without cond tion. Now, sir, when a 
 sovereign State, by its own act, wh.-thcr by. law, or by treaty, or by grant, cedes 
 unalterably a piece of territory, whether large or small, whether for a fortress, or 
 an arsenal, or a city, it is irrevocable, except with the consent of both parties — 
 the State and the Federal Government No matter what changes a State may 
 have the right to make in its political condition, those can never rotroact upon or 
 annul a cession of property, jurisdiction, or territorial control, made to another 
 sovereign State. 
 
10 
 
 Now, there is the case, stated with whatever accuracy I can command, with 
 regard to the forts, arsenals, navy-3-ards, and public buildings, belonging to the 
 Government of the United States, which we hold in the States. Let it be said, if 
 you please, that the Government is only a trustee. It is the trustee for thirty- 
 three States, not for one; and no one of the States can seize the common property 
 of all, divest the trustee of control, aud oust all the other associates of right, power, 
 and possession. Such a proposition is subversive of all the law of nations ; it is 
 monstrous in jurisprudence, in morals, and in politics. It is utterly untenable 
 and indefensible. I trust that this question will not be misunderstood by the 
 southern States. I hope they will not percipitate upon the General Government 
 the issue of war in defence of its incontestable right, and in the discharge of an 
 undoubted duty to hold each and every one of these fortified places, provided for 
 the common defence of this country. And, sir, it is there, and there alone, that, 
 at this time, the danger of a collision lies; it is upon this issue that, if civil war is 
 begun, the first battle will be fought. 
 
 Sir, it would be difficult to imagine graver errors than have been committed in 
 the rash seizure of these fortifications, and the appropriation of the public prop- 
 erty. Remember that these attacks and these seizures have been made notwith- 
 standing the solenm declaration by the President of the United States that he did 
 not possess the right to employ, and should not attempt to use, coercion upon a 
 sovereign State. No State has been assailed or menaced ; no ship-of-war threatened 
 any of their harbors; no military force was sent within their borders; and there- 
 fore it cannot be said that these seizures were made to secure the means of protection 
 against invasion. Kemember the course of events. South Carolina called a conven- 
 tion for the purpose of taking steps to secede from the Union. No interference from 
 any (luartcr hindered that measure. There was no interference from the Executive 
 or from Congress. The convention was held and the ordinance of secession 
 passed. No interference yet — none whatever. No naval force, or military force 
 was sent for any purpose of coercion. South Carolina organized and equipped 
 an army. There was yet no legislative or Executive interference on the part 
 of the General Government. The act of secession from its inception to its com- 
 pletion was rendered as perfect as human agency could make it, and no coercion 
 was attempted by the executive or legislative departments of the Government. 
 Therefore, in no sense was South Carolina menaced. 
 
 What next ? South Carolina sent three commissioners here to treat for the 
 ac(juisition of the forts in the harbor of Charleston, and the public establish- 
 ments belonging to the United States, within its boundaries. Pending negotia- 
 tions, all the unprotected forts, the arsenal, and the public buildings, were taken 
 and occupied by the authorities of South Carolina. If they belonged to her, 
 why did she come here to negotiate for them? If they did not belong to her, 
 to take them was an act of spoliation — an act of war. The commissioners, who 
 
11 
 
 had evidently studied diplomacy in the sehool of Sir Lucius ()"rrij.rjrer,* lost their 
 temper, and terminated their nei^otiution su<ldeiily in a secon<l u»»tc, which was 
 returned to them hy the President, as impirtinent. The transfer of sixty men 
 from one possession of the United States to another, as a me:wure of security for 
 themselves agaiust the threats of u State in arms, seems to have been sufficient 
 to arouse the apprehensions not only of South O:irolina, hut of all the adjacent 
 States. The mere ehaiiLre of position of a handful of men, menaced with attack 
 from an army, was assumed to be a declaration of war by the Federal (Jovcrnmcnt. 
 
 What next i* The forces of South Carolina assault au<l t;ike Castle Pinckney 
 and Fort Moultrie. With all the pomp ami eireumstanee of war, the battalions 
 of South Carolina, duly provided with .scaling' ladders, battle-axes, and pontoons, 
 march in j,'rim array to the assault of these fortifications — the clear and india- 
 putable property au«l domain of the I'nited StJites. Defended, (tr rather occu- 
 pied, only by an omnibus load of laborers, the capture does not prove as diificult 
 in execution as it was reckless in conception. The palmetto flai; is inau;,'urated 
 with blank cartridj^es, and the stars and stripes arc transferred to Fort Sumter — 
 a stroni,' place defended by a noble soldier — where mither the flair nor its defend- 
 ers have been disturbed. lOven yet, the President and Couf^ress forbear toj-csort 
 to measures cither of retaliation or of punishment, or even to recover passession 
 of the stronirholds upon which an inexcusable trespa.ss has been committed. 
 
 What next? The fortifications in the vicinity of (leorgia, Louisiana, and 
 Florida, are seized and held by the militia of those States, actinj;, it is under- 
 stood, by the authority of the Governors ol" those States, alth(mi:h withtmt the 
 
 * "Sir Lueitu. Oh, faith! I'm in the lack of iL I never could have fotind him in a 
 sweeter temper for my purpose — to be sure, I'm just come in the nick! Now to enter into 
 conversation with him, ami to quarrel nenteelly. \^liors up (•, Captain .Viisoi.itk.] With 
 regirJ to that mutter. Captain, I must heg le:ivc t.) .liffor in opinion with you. 
 
 CiipC. Ahsolnlf. I'pon my wonl, then, you musi be a very .subtle disputant : becn.'se, 
 sir, I happened just then to be giving no opinion iii all. 
 
 Sir Luriux. That's no roaion. For give mo leuve to tell you, a man may think an un- 
 truth, aa well as speak one. 
 
 Capt. Ahx. Very true, sir; but if a min never utters his thoughts, I should think they 
 might stand a chanoo of escaping controversy. 
 
 Sir Luciiit. Then, sir, you differ in opinion with me; which amounts to the same thing. 
 
 Capt. Abs. Hark'ce, Sir Lucius, if I had not b.-fore known you to be a gentleman, upon 
 my soul, I should not have discovered it at this interview : for w lat you can drive at, 
 unless you moan to quarrel with me. I cannot conceive I 
 
 Sir Lucius. 1 humbly thank you. sir. for the quickness of your apprehension, [/ioirrny.] 
 You have named the very thing I would be at. 
 
 Ciipt Ah.-,. Very well, sir; 1 shall certainly not balk your inclination. Rut I should be 
 glad you would please to explain your motives. 
 
 Sir Ludus. Pray. sir. be easy; the qu"»rrcl is a very pretty quarrel, as it stands; we 
 should only spoil it by trying to expl.ain it. * » • So, no more ; but name your time 
 aud place." — The Rirals, act iv, ti-inf m. 
 
12 
 
 sauction of the people, expressed either ia Legislatures or conventions. These 
 places are held by force, in contempt of the authority of the United States. 
 These are seditious proceedings ; they are insurrections against the Govern- 
 ment, differing only from the lawless disturbances of the pubHc peace by a mob, 
 in this : that they are of greater enormity, because perpetrated by men clothed 
 with color of authority, and holding responsible and respectable public stations. 
 And these offences against law and order, and the public peace and safety, are 
 suffered to pass by a lenient Government without punishment. The events of 
 the following week proved that forbearance was misconstrued into timidity, and 
 the indulgence extended to infatuation was made the shield to cover outrage with 
 impunity. 
 
 What next? An unarmed vessel of commerce, chartered by the Government 
 as a transport ship, appears in the waters of Charleston, bearing despatches, pro- 
 visions, and men to a place within the unquestionable jurisdiction of the Federal 
 Government of the United States. The American flag is flying at the masthead 
 of the Star of the West, and as she approaches the harbor, while in sight of the 
 fortifications belonging to this Government, the official character of the ship 
 being.well known, the authorities of South Carolina, through their military forces, 
 opened a fire upon that defenceless ship, and compelled her to retire and abandon 
 the peaceful and legitimate mission in which she was engaged. Now, sir, that 
 was an act of war, unqualified war. Had such an offence been perpetrated by 
 any foreign Power, it would have roused every man in this nation ; it would 
 have elicited from every patriot in this House a loud and earnest protest, and an 
 appeal for all the measures necessary to repel the insult and avenge the wrong. 
 
 It was, sir, I repeat, an act of naked, unmitigated war. Happily — thanks ! 
 eternal thanks ! to the moderation and the noble magnanimity of Major Ander- 
 son — it was not so treated by him. He remembered that it was done by his 
 fellow-countrymen; that it was done by men excited and misled by their passions, 
 and their own anomalous political condition. He paused, with cannon in position 
 and the torch lighted. He referred the transaction to his Government. Had 
 he employed the discretion vested in every commander of a fortress, when he 
 saw a ship, with his own flag floating over it, with defenceless men upon its 
 deck, fired upon without excuse or provocation, he would have been justified in 
 punishing this insult by laying Charleston in ashes; and had he done so, civiliza- 
 tion would have approved the act. No man, looking at the duty of Major Ander- 
 son, and looking at the responsiljility and obligation of his position, could have 
 censured the most signal vindication of the honor of the flag which his sword and 
 his life were pledged to maintain. It is another proof of the forbearance, not only 
 of the Government, but of the people, that the magnanimity of this gallant soldier, 
 is universally commended, and is known to be sanctioned without reserve by the 
 Administration. Yet the attack upon that ship was none the less an offence; it was 
 none the less an act of war; it was none the less the initiation of a policy which, if 
 persisted in, must inevitably bring on the conflict which we all so much deprecate. 
 
18 
 
 It must ivsult ill til.' i-iii|.lnyi,„-nt nf force to protect the rijilits aii«I the jiropcrty 
 and the honor of this country; ami it uiiist forever make iujpossilile that recogni- 
 tion of a coumion destiny in a reunited ('mrederacy, whicli. from one end of tlie 
 land to the other, seems the only possilile hope h-ft to the patriot, in the 
 existing; exigency. Sir, you couhl not — I have said it hefore. and 1 repeat 
 it now — you couM not recruit a regiment that wrndd ever march from the 
 frontier of New York into any soutliern Slate for the purjiose of einphiying co- 
 ercion upon its people in the exercise of their legitimate political rights. Never, 
 never 1 But the men of New York would go in untold thousands anywhere to 
 protect the flag of their country, and to maintain its legitimate authority. 
 
 Here, tli.-n. 1 a^k ynm- attention once more to the great and cardinal distinc- 
 tion hetween the employment of f »rce u|)on a sovereign State to compel the 
 abandonment of proper measures within its legitimate jurisdiction to obtain a re- 
 dress of grievances, or to secure independence; and the employment of force in 
 defence of the indisputable right and jurisdiction of the United States, where 
 that jurisdiction has been established irrevocably by the act of the seceding 
 State itself ^Vhen the Constitution was formed, it was proposed to allow the 
 General Government, without restricti<»n. to ae<|uire i)roperty in the States for 
 the erection of fortifications, and the establishment of arsenals, navy-yanls. up 
 for any other military purpose. In the debates on that article, it was insisted 
 that the power was too l)road. and that it was necessary it should be limited by 
 the insertion of a clause making the con.sent of the several States indispensible 
 to the exercise of the power. Such a (|ualificatif»n was inserted, I think, upon 
 the motion of Mr. (Jerry. In that form it was adopted unanimously, by the vote 
 of every State in the C'onfederacy. Accordingly, sir, the States where these 
 works of defence are located, have, in pui-suance of that clause in the Tonstitu- 
 tion, given their consent to the purchase of the property ; and have ceded for 
 ever, by their own sovereign will, exclusive jurisdiction to the Federal (n vern- 
 ment over all these fortified places. 
 
 It is well understood that the military plan of tlefenees in this country ha.s not 
 been considered with reference only to the protection of the locality where the 
 work may be jilaccd. but it is a great national system of defence, in which all 
 these fortified places bear an important relation, not only to local security, but to 
 the commort defence of the nation. Virginia or New York, have an e(|ual in- 
 terest in Fort I'ickens. which protects our .'squadron and c inmerce in the (Julf of 
 Mexico, or in Fortress Monroe, which protects the Capit4d where we are legislat- 
 ing; or in Fort Sumter, which is an ei|ually important strategic position. New 
 Y''ork has interests no less than South Carolina, or Georgia, or Fhirida. in each 
 and all of these defences, and in the Jiavy-yard an<I forts at Fen.sacola, which 
 have also been seized. The commercial interests of the North would be in.secure if 
 their vast shipping in the Gulf trade had no protection from a s^juadron, which 
 would find support and a basis of operations at I'ensacola. It is as es.sential to us 
 as Gibraltar is to the British fleet in the Mediterranean. 
 
14 
 The CHAIRMAN. The ocntlcuKiii's hour lias oxpived. 
 
 Several Membeks. We want to hear the conclusion of the gentleman's 
 argument ; and therefore move that his time be extended. 
 
 An extension of time was unanimously granted. 
 
 Mr. SICKLES. I thank the House. 
 
 To resume. I am strongly impressed, Mr Chairman, with the correctness of 
 the views I have presented, when I recur to the very eloquent and cogent argu- 
 ment of the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Garnett.] In his observations 
 yesterday on the subject of blockades, he adverted to the possibility that the Fed- 
 eral Government might blockade one or uiore of the southern ports, as a restrictive 
 measure, and one of a series of coercive proceedings; and he admonished us, if 
 such an attempt were made, that England and France, unable to do without south- 
 ern cotton, would interfere and compel us to open the southern ports. I main- 
 tain that the argument which the gentleman addressed against blockades is the 
 most unanswerable reason which human wisdom could frame against the surren- 
 der of our forts. If it be possible for the contingency to happen, that the navies 
 of France and England are to be brought to our shores to interfere with the asser- 
 tion of our jurisdiction, would it not be worse than madness for us to surrender the 
 fortified places, which alone would enable us to assert and maintain our indepen- 
 dence ? Whatever may be our views upon the right of peaceable secession, what- 
 ever we may anticipate as the future of this exigency, we yet have our political 
 position to maintain as a great commercial nation. The commercial element of 
 this country is in the North and West, and not in the South. The South must 
 always be essentially an agricultural community, and can never be a military, 
 naval, or commercial I'ower. 
 
 We also have our paramount duty of self-defence to perform ; and these posts, 
 these fortified places and navy-yards, are indispensable for the protection of our 
 political position against the eventualities which secession will bring with it. These 
 fortified jilaces are of a thousand times more importance with secession an accom- 
 plished and irreversible fact, than if it had never been contemplated. There is no 
 probability of foreign intervention without secession. With the establishment 
 of a southern confederacy it is, perhaps, unavoidable. These considera- 
 tions prove it to be our iujperative duty to hold these places, under all circum- 
 stances. This necessity should admonish the southern population, which I believe 
 sincerely desire to prevent war, that they can never be permitted to hold possessions 
 which are necessary to maintain the integrity of this continent against foreign 
 intervention or control. 
 
 (Jur own statute-books arc full of precedents to justify us in asserting more than 
 the right to hold these Ibrtified places. In 1811-12, Congress, by the votes of 
 large majorities, in which southern men united, determined to take possession of 
 the country west of the Mississippi, and also of the Floridas. And this was be- 
 cause their occupation was esssential to our political safety — to our teri'itorial pro- 
 
ir, 
 
 tfctinii. Tlic stati'siiiL'ii of till- Soutli are rniniuittiil to tin- rt'cniriiitiun of the rijriif 
 and duty ol" tliis (iovermiioiit to hold any jiart nf tlu-ir ti-rritory. as a matter (if 
 protective policy. Our own history is full of precedents for it. The liistory of 
 every free and trreat people furnishes precedents for similar nu'asures of .security. 
 The absolute rii;lits of the n.itinii coincide witli its neces.sary and olivious policy. 
 Our duty is, then, plain and unalfi-ralile. We must maintain all our ritrlits. No 
 forei}.'!! Power can he permitted to intervene between the seceiliiiLr States and this 
 Government, nor to exerci.se any protectorate over them, or to hold any of our 
 forts, or to occupy any portion of the territory hitherto within our limits. 
 
 The interest.s of civilization, the obli^ratious of international law. and the pro.s- 
 pcrity of European trade and commerce, forbid the hostile intervention of any 
 European I'ower in a controversy between the (Jeneral (Jovernment and the .soiith- 
 ern States. Yet it is a fact, of which we mu.st nut he uiimimlful. that tlie (lov- 
 eriiments of Europe are in the hands of aristocracies, jealous of our pro<;ress. and 
 fearful of the influence of our succe.><s upon their own political system. 'I'he Calu- 
 nets of France and KuLrlaiid would be inclined to .seek any oj>portunity whiidi mitrht 
 be lej^itimafely afforded to them, to jironiote the flismendierment of our ronfe<l- 
 eracy. hiu-d i'almerston, in his well-known antipathy to this country, only 
 represents the real sentiments of the uovnninir cl.i<«; in EiiL'land. The intimate 
 relations which, in earlier times, existed between France and America, are traditions 
 which Louis Najioleon has taken no pains to remember or preserve. Tliat one 
 or the other would desife to form an alli.ince with a southern confederacy, is 
 beyond a doubt. Tt mi<;ht be ditiicult to unite both of these Powers in such a 
 scheme of policy. And it would rem.iin for tmr diplomatists to avail themselves 
 of the jealousy which exists between Eiiirland and I-' ranee, to detach one or the 
 other from a hostile conjbination against us; and thus cjuploy the power of one to 
 prevent the intervention of either. 
 
 And here let me enter my protest, as an .\mcric.in. airainst the inference which 
 so many will be prompt to accept from the possible ilismembermcnt of the Con- 
 federacy, that republican institutions have fiilc<l. It is not so. When such an 
 event shall happen, it will prove only tliat our Fnion i>f States embraced an anta- 
 gonistical element which could not co-exist with a purely republie.in theory of 
 labor. This element, sit far from orifjinating with the l{e|iublie. was inherited 
 from Spain and France and England, and by them ingrafted upon our primitive 
 social, and jmlitical organization. The present controversy has not ari.sen out of 
 any defect in our form of (lovernment, nor docs it furnish the least proof that 
 the institutions which h.ive contributed so much to our signal advancement in 
 civilization and power, nrv not ei|ually adapted to promote the same results in one, 
 two, or three independent confederacies, embracing a honiogeneoas population 
 and congenial interests. If anything were needed to show that the di.saffection in 
 the southern States finds no origin in a di.ntrust of the adaptation of the free 
 institutions to their peculiar condition, it is to be seen in the fact that none of 
 them propose to make any radical change in their State constitutions or laws ; 
 
16 
 
 and with common accord, they all suprgest the existing Constitution of t"he United 
 States as the basis of the contemplated southern confedel'ation. It is not difficult, 
 I acknowledge, to foresee the ultimate changes which probable events might 
 render \inavoidable in the institutions of a southern confederacy composed ex- 
 clusively of slaveholding States. The necessity of large standing armies, the 
 exigencies of defence and internal security, would hasten its tendencies towai'ds 
 consolidation; the independence of the States would be merged; universal suffrage 
 would soon be abandoned ; and the Government would, in the end, yield to the con- 
 trol of an aristocracy, partly military, but mainly directed by the small class in 
 whom would be united the possession of all the capital and all the labor. "What- 
 ever may be the issue of existing complications, the Republic of the United 
 States is imperishable. It will survive all the dangers which now assail it. It 
 will vindicate the faith in humanity upon which it reposes. It will fulfill its 
 destiny in the development of an ameliorated system of institutions and laws, 
 which recognize the equality of all the citizens composing the Commonwealth. 
 
 It is my prayer to our Father, that these disastrous events may go no further; 
 that the day-spring from on high may visit us, and guide our feet into the way 
 of peace. But whatever may be the issue of events — whether, happily, by con- 
 ciliation and justice to the South, we may find an honorable and fraternal solution 
 of our difficulties, or whether, unhappily, we blindly drift into alienation, war, 
 and irrevocable separation — the great commercial interests of this country 
 require, the destiny of American civilization demands, that the political and 
 territorial control of this continent, from the mouth of the Hudson to the 
 mouth of the Mississippi, fi'om the Atlantic to the Pacific seas, shall remain 
 where it now is — in the hands of the Grovernment of the United States. In 
 all the partisan issues between the South and the Republican party, the people 
 of the ci^y of New York are with the South; but when the South makes an 
 untenable issue with our country, when the flag of the Union is insulted, 
 when the fortified places provided for the common defence are assaulted and 
 seized, when the South abandons its northern friends for English and French 
 alliances, then the loyal and patriotic population of that imperial city are 
 unanimous for the Union. 
 
 MoQiLL & WiTHEROW, Printers, Washington, D. 0. 
 
LlBRftR^ ^l, 
 
 CONGRESS 
 
 ■S%95 72*6 _