E440 
 .5 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 DDD017m32T 
 
^-ox;.'^' 
 
 .0' _.■ 
 
 .cV .N 
 
 
 
 Pv:,. 
 
 A" 
 
 |; 
 
 
 
 
 ,.^- 
 
 
 * „o^ 
 
 
 .1^ 
 
 1-J^^'' 
 
 
 
 v-^. 
 
 
 .^' 
 
 
 V 
 
 ^"%\ 
 
 >ifl^- 
 
 
 "t. 'o , , 
 
l'. ^^ 
 
 .0' 
 
 ^^o^ 
 
 
 
 
 •Ids/-'' 
 
 -^. 
 
 ^"-^c^. 
 
 ■/■ 
 
 '- ' 
 
 
 
 
 ,v 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 \^ 
 
 % 
 
 * - 
 
 
 
 
 
 0^ 
 
 
 
 
 .^' 
 
 °<. 
 
 '^O 
 
 'f- 
 
SPEECH 
 
 IlOiV. ALBEET RUST 
 
 OF aiika:s"sas, 
 
 ON 
 
 THE STATE OF THE UNION. 
 
 DELIVKUKIJ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 24, ISGl. 
 
 Tliy House liaving under consiJeration the report from the select committee 
 of thirty til rce. Mr. ULST said : 
 
 Mr, Si-eakrr: Having been n memhor of thai committee whose report is 
 
 ' ■•'^' '•' • '' "■••'"- f'.rcon!<i.l<Tat!on, I have sought the floor for the purpose 
 
 !!oiiii<« aiiil to tlic i.-oiintry — or, at lejist, to that j)ortion 
 
 pi.' whom I repri-jent here — the conclusions to winch I 
 
 III regard to the designs of that party which, in a few short 
 
 —>n»ro| ..f nil iho de[>arlmontH of this Government. I shall 
 
 " ' "f ih,, time to wl)i<-h 1 am entitled; because, in the 
 
 *■ l>>rt«iii i|ue<tioii8 which are releveut to this debate 
 
 ' n\ iir I lii.ire fthly dijx-ui.^ed, in this and in the other end of 
 
 I could do; ninl, in tln' iit-xt place, because I shall not con- 
 
 • r Imving conclii'l.'l " li it I have to say. 
 
 upon that . I did it in defiance of the advice, 
 
 -, and t* . .,i" gentlemen repres«-nting the same 
 
 i!it. iiiLTe-' 1 li>iened oidy to the dictates of duty 
 
 I found II ation for my conduct in the conscious- 
 
 I" ' ' " mm.iivi-«, and did not fcek for it elsewhere. 
 
 I" ' ''• 'I of the dutii'ft devolving U|ion me as a mem- 
 
 I" ' •■! ili.U :.,., . ... ..,,.,.1 nil personal, all party considerations. In- 
 
 d. ■ 1, 'ir. I tvcl that 1 now havt' no pnrty ; atid I fear that the time is not far 
 • I I ' ' when I rhall not know what to claim as my country. I r<-|)ressed 
 I hr'-w mv constituonlx would regard as loyal impulses; I curbed and 
 1 wliRt ! hnve lon<» known and acknowledged to bo a too impetuous tem- 
 per. I wn- • an<l earnest desire to extricate the country 
 from the i - dangirs that are imjiending over it, by the 
 adopt! ifi I ! «niild ifive peace, safety, and contidence — in the 
 jn.f n .Am of the incoming Administration — to the weaker 
 •■ ■ T ^ . without Hit much as wouiuling the most delicate 
 g the pride of opinion even of the stronger. I believe 
 tl I the minority of that committee was inspired by the 
 r '■ ■ i.ts aiid tliti wime purpo-fr" ; but I regret to say tl.ov Were met by 
 t! rilion of no eorre*p<indiiig sj'irit upon the part of the majority of 
 
 kcr, I propose briefly to review the action of the majority of 
 
 .1 M, ... .!..iii(T_ while I «hull speak with all respect to the 
 
 1 -hall, at the same time, speak with all the frank- 
 
 K' importance of the occa.«ioii and the great inter- 
 
 iv.'- i-n.iN.l .!. ' . .il. Alter five or six weeks of labor, what a inioerable 
 
 g»„.r»i..' I' ii^. i.r .• .i,t forth! Its conclusions, "lame and impotent" as they 
 
 » \ These |>olitical foundiing«, so far from having 
 
 b -imate ofl'spriiig of a majority of that ccimmittee, 
 
 W..U ,, I . I.^,, ,,.■ rej'i iirited if laid at the door of a single member of it 
 
 Triatcd by Liuhikl ToWkxa ut $1 per hundred copies. 
 
h. '1 • ^ 
 
 From the first day of its sessions to the last, its proceedings were the merest 
 ehain, an insult and a mockery to those southern friends of the Union who 
 hoped and expected anything from its deliberations. 
 
 Cunstit uted as it was, it could not well have been otherwise. Cast your eye 
 over the elements of which it was composed, and it will be obvious that none 
 but the most sanguine and credulous minds could have hoped for any success- 
 ful solution of the questions committed to its charge. From the southern 
 States of the Union the most temperate, the most moderate, the most conserva- 
 tive, the most forbearing geiillemen were appointed on that committee. From 
 the State of Arkansas, myself, sir, who am stigmatized at home as a "submis- 
 slonist." From other southern States were appointed gentlemen quite as ob- 
 noxious to that charge as I am, and still others who are suspected and accused 
 and denounced for entertaining Abolition and Republican sympathies and pro- 
 clivities by their own constituents. From the great North, the llei>resenta- 
 tives of that party, the success of which in the last canvass has given rise to 
 all these discussions and all these troubles, were stern, unbending, unconipro- 
 mising; while, sir, from that great party of the free States, bravely, heroically 
 conservative; composed of true and loyal men; men who are loyal to tlieir 
 States, loyal to their people, loyal to all of tlieir constitutional obligations and 
 duties, as they are to the Federal Government; and above all, loyal to those 
 great; principles of equality and fraternity upon which that Federal Govern- 
 ment was based; men to whom, above all others, the country looks for a safe 
 deliverance in this the hour of its trials and danger — you will not find a single 
 ^epre^eutative. Such, sir, was the jpcr.so?»ieZ of that committee. 
 
 1 do not mean, Mr. Speaker, to impute any blame to you in forming it. In 
 performing this, as other official'duties, I "believe your motives have been 
 •onscientious and patriotic; but I will say that, from the material at your dis- 
 posal, it was impossible to have constructed one which would hawe justified 
 less hope of a beneficent result. On the one hand were experienced, able, and 
 zealous repi'esentatives of the Republican party, unyielding, uncompromising, 
 defiant, and menacing. On the other hand were southern gentlemen quite, I 
 am willing to admit, as patriotic as I claim to be, whose conduct justified th« 
 inference that if, unfortunately, no terms of adjustment could be adopted, and 
 the a']v.!cates of the policy of coercion shall attempt, when they get contiol of 
 the powers of the Federal Government, to execute their threats, they will find, 
 sir, a divided South ; a people who, whatever differences may exist among them 
 now, will not be united, like a band of brothers, to defend their country, 
 whether right or wrong, in the quarrel in which she may be involved, lo the 
 last extremity, against any assault, any aggression, any iiostile invasion by the 
 Federal Government or from any other quarter, upon what pretext soever it 
 may be made. 
 
 I, sir, di) not believe in the legal, constitutional right of secession. But that 
 is one of the questions, referred to in the outset of my remarks, which I did not 
 propose to discuss. When six of the sovereign States of this Confederacy have 
 ■withdrawn their allegiance from the Federal Government, renounced its pro- 
 tection and defied its power, it is unstatesmanlike, it is idle, it is foolish , more 
 than all this, sir, it is criminal, to waste time in discussing their right to do so. 
 They have done so in the exercise of aright inherent in every freeman — tlie right 
 to resist injustice; to avenge and retaliate wrong; to repel aggre.ssiSi; the right, 
 above and superior to all other rights, of self-defence and self-preservation. 
 
 If the men who will in a little while hold, for good or for evil, the destinies 
 of tills great countrj^ in their hands, shall, bj- attempting to execute the laws of 
 the United States in any one of the seceding States, plunge the cou/itry into 
 all the horrors of civil war, under the mistaken belief that they will find more 
 than one will, sentiment, and purpose in all the southern States o|ipt).-ed to 
 them, befoie God and my country I believe that all the blood that sliall be 
 shed will be upon the heads of those gentlemen from the South, in Congress 
 and out of Congress, who have betrayed them into that error. 
 
 Tlie interests of the Union, of peace, of humanity, of the material progress 
 and hrip|)ine?8 of tlie civilized world, forbid that any southern State or southern 
 eitizeu should in this most important crisis of our country's history occupj' an 
 equivocal po.-ition. In the name of tlie great interests, and the thirty million 
 peof'le, of whom we are the Representatives, I entreat all the southern States 
 and the southern people to unite in demanding that only of the party in power 
 lyhich it would be honorable and graceful and patriotic in them to concede— 
 
S\nd?n±±%^H g^-'-^-te^s of onr existing con.titntional 
 
 t fn of ^h« '"'muriity for the future against that mischievous and insane ogite- 
 
 aHke of t 'It7?\T''5'^^^^ l^''\ ^'^' ^^*^"' ^"^^ ^l^'^^-a ^iH be, destrulive 
 IZ A I ^'1^""^' and kindly relations which once happily did and should 
 
 muniJv an7n1 ti:' ""''' ^''"T ^'^^^^"* ^^^^'^"^ «f "- ^"^« Political TiL 
 Sed^rary. ^''''' '''^^"''' "'^'^ P'-^^Penty of every portion of this 
 
 dav','rn« f/«n'lT" '■T7i'"^^''°l* ^°*^ Tennessee who have within the la«t f«^ 
 daj3 made speeches which have been spread broadcast over the northern SiMtm, 
 «lttVrl? '? ""-'"^r^ "^ the Republican party, as evidence of the pubfie 
 JllT,^ ^ ^- ^''"t''^'-" people, to be urged as argument in justificatio« 
 
 of the nncompromTsing attitude in this House of those enemies of the people 
 and domestic institutions of the South, have assumed a fearful responsibility. 
 I know, sir, that the State which I represent in part upon this floor, has 
 been, and now is as conservative and loyal to the Union, as any one of the 
 
 ti r.li!j'7. ^''H '"'"'Pf ' 'V- ^?' P"°P'^' ^'^^ ™y^^lf' ^^^^ been reluctant 
 t^ believe tha the crusade which has been waged in the North, against «« in- 
 etitut.on which no man doubts or denies her right to maintain, was any thisg 
 more than a means used by demagogues to get into power. 
 
 But, sir, when the most sagacious and prudent leaders of the party, whene 
 triumph in the recent canvass so excited and alarmed the southern people re- 
 lu.^e tl»e slightest concessions to compose this excitement and avert the direfol 
 calamities which are its threatened consequences, Arkansas no longer trusts ta 
 tlie justice or forbearance of that party, but turns to her own strong arm for 
 Bcc-unty She looked hopefully to this Congress for some assurance from tl>« 
 par^- who could give it, that the powers of this Government were not soon H 
 be perverted to the overthrow and destruction of any one of the great inter- 
 ests which it was established to protect. She has received none, and despaiw 
 ol receiving any; and her people are as unanimous now, in the abseiwe •f 
 puarantees from a hostile northern majority to respect and protect her riffK«e 
 in tlieir (Ictermination to withdraw from the Union as they were* only a few 
 months ag„ to adlicre to and maintain it. Having become convinced of the 
 determined imrposes of the Republican partv— that is, if its representetivtP 
 uf.on the comn.iltee of thirty-three and upon this floor are the representativts 
 of the prevailing sentiment among the northern people— I hope they are aot^ 
 the^- are animated by but one sentiment of hostility to the Government t« be 
 administered by that part}-, and one determination to unite with their soutlierB 
 brethren in resisting it. 
 
 As an evidence of what the sentiment with reference to the Union htm b«<n 
 in Arkansas, and the revolution that has taken place there within a few we«k« 
 past, I will read a few extracts from a letter T have just received from a mwii- 
 ber of the Legislature of that State: a gentleman of fortune, of inteingenee 
 of character, of conservutive temper and principles; a man who, when I mw 
 liim in November last, was as good a Union man as anv upon this f!«or; wh» 
 advocated, with much zeal and great ability, in the last presidenfiiil canvass 
 the claimsof Judge Douglas to the Presidency, and the great principles of j»OBuIar 
 sovereignty, upon wJiich the canvass was made. That gentleman writes methue: 
 
 . * * ..rr, . ... . . LittlkRock, c/anwf/ry 10, ISn. 
 
 . * • •> Ti,o most congcrvative liave now abandoned all hop< e of a i)rcstrv:ition of Ike 
 Union ; yel wu are willing to make a last and earnest anpeal for new and efft ctiiul cnarant««e 
 of our connlltutioiuil rl{;lits. Tou would be astonislied, liowever, to learn what a reactbm 
 has occurred ill till- Legislature on tliis ([uestion since you left U8." * * * "A few w<»hi 
 eince, it was • Union' or disunion ; now it is, what sort of disunion? "Whether by srp«^te 
 State secession or co-operation V Tou need not <loubt that Arkansas prefers the latter ^»d« 
 and much dei>lore» thw neeessily which drives lit-r to cither." ' 
 
 There, sir, ia a fair representation of the at present prevailing eentiment ui 
 Arkansas. She does much deplore, as I deplore, the necessity which drives ft«r 
 to any mode of disunion. But when that necessity is forced upon her, a8 she 
 has been tardy and deliberate in coming to a conclusion, she will hesitate tke 
 less with regard to the course she ought to pursue, and be more reckless of the 
 consequences to which it may lead. No, gentlemen I look for no divide 
 counsels i>r lukewarm allegiance among the people of Arkansas to their dw« 
 State government, when driven to the sad alternative of electing between di»- 
 honoring and ignominious submission to a relentless northern despotism, foro«d 
 upon them by an exclusive northern vote, and resistance to that despotism ewm 
 to self-immnlatinn. 
 
Now, sir, to return to the point to which I intended particularly to address 
 myseir.' 1 I'uive stated, or have intended to state, that every aiijieal made to the 
 majority of tliat committee by southern members of it for the adoption of such 
 measures — askin;^ nothing which would involve a sacrifice of a single right or 
 •interest of their constituents — as would allay the agitation and excitement 
 whicli i)ervades the country, and restore tliat tranquility and prosperity of 
 whicli it has been so destructive, was met with a cold and stern refusal to con- 
 cede anytliing or adopt any measure involving the slightest infraction of the 
 creed of their party. I stated upon the committee — and it may not be ini- 
 proper to repeat it here — that the majority of the committee seemed more soli- 
 citous to provide for future party triumphs than to preserve the present peace 
 of the countrj'. 
 
 Thougli we were in the midst of revolution, though armed hosts were gather- 
 ing in botli sections of the Union, and we expecting every moment to hear the 
 clash of arms, tlie battle strife, the din and cry of war; though we were ex- 
 pecting every moment to have borne to us upon the lightning's wings the moan 
 of a dying feilowcitizen — no matter whether from the Xorth or South, still yet 
 a fellow-citizen, slain by his brother's hand — that majorit}', with a fidelity 
 which would have done iionor to it in a better, a less unholy cause, adhered to 
 the " Chicago platform." 
 
 The only inquiry, when a proposition was made for peace, for conciliation, to 
 arrest this unnatural and mutually distruclive strife, was, is it consistent with 
 the Chicago nlatfoi'm? Consistency, consistency with /the Chicago platform, 
 was the "priceless jewel" which that party seemed willing to preserve at the cost 
 of a ruined Governmeut and a ruined people, of a civil war, dragging after it in 
 its tiain such sufferings and sacrifices as the world's history furnishes no parallel 
 to; and for what? An opitiion, which, if their leadeis are honest, they admit, 
 as I shall directly show, is a mere abstraction, and is of rio practical importance. 
 
 I want to impress upon tliis House and the country that the Republican party, 
 as represented upon the committee of tliirt\--three, was unwilling to abate one 
 hair's breadth, one jot or tittle of the Chicago platform to preserve the Union, 
 or to avert from the country all the horrors of a fratricidal war. 
 
 I appeal to the gentlemen of the committee who are now present to say if 
 one of them voted for a single propositiim which he believed to infract in t'ue 
 slightest degiee the Chicago platform. No, sir; the Constitution of the Union, 
 the prosperity and welfare of the Union, the lives of thousands of the people, 
 and the Union itself, they seemed willing to sacrifice to this idol of their wor- 
 ship, the Chicago platform. 
 
 1 appeal to them to know if a member of their party pri posed or voted for, 
 or v.'ould have voted for, an}' other measure of accommodation incompatible 
 with the creed of their party, whose inteiests and whose continued success 
 they setined to hold as paramount to every other object. 
 
 I ap|)eal to them to know if they did not threaten coercion, force, war itself, 
 if the South would not acquiesce in such measures of adjustment as were in 
 harmony with the Chicago platform. "Ah," said a New England member, 
 "you may talk about compromise, but when you speak of revolution, tliere is 
 
 ■ but one way to treat it; that is \uth the sword." Such, sir, was the spirit 
 manifested by the majority of that committee. We ask for a compromise and 
 
 ■ an adjustment of our ditficalties, fair and honorable to all parties, or a peaceful 
 separation and equitable division of our common property. They offer to us 
 war. We ask for the olive branch, and they tender the sword, if tliese men 
 truly represent the northern people, there is but one course which honor and 
 ordinary pride and self respect leave the South to pursue. 
 
 The gentleman from Massachusetts, in his separate report, uses this language: 
 " He eiuleavored to act in good faitli, and with a view to the restoration of the kindly rela- 
 tions between the opposite sections of the country, which seem to bo so rudely threatened. 
 That this spirit has been fairly reciprocated by a portion of the Representatives of the ag- 
 grieved ritates, he lakes great pleasure to acknowledge. Had that portion constituted only 
 a bare majority of the whole number, he would still have pledged all the limited aid in liis 
 power to unite with them; but the fact is wholly otherwise. Whilst three States have refused 
 to be represented at all, seven more, thus making ten out of fifteen, have decided to reject 
 the couelusious arrived at by the committee." 
 
 Sir, much as 1 might desire the approbation and commendation of the gen- 
 tleman from Massachusetts and his colleagues on the committee, the betrayal 
 of the rights, interests, and honor of my constituents and section is a price 
 which 1 cannot pay for them. 
 
Tlie eentleman from Massachusetts offered nothing, voter! for nothine de- 
 clared he would vote for nothing which came in conflict with the theories of 
 the Kepublican party ; which violated the principles of the Chicago platform, 
 or recognized the rights of property in man; which recognized the right of 
 the soulliern planter to the slaves upon his plantation as property. lie says a 
 "minority of the committee from the aggrieved States," he takes great pleas- 
 ure to acknowledge, "reciprocated the spirit" which he, in "good faith," 
 evinced to nettle the controversy between the sections " upo7i the basis of the 
 Chicarjo platform." I thank God it was only a minority from the agcjrieved 
 States winch "fairly reciprocated the spirit" of the gentleman from Massachu- 
 setts. I thank God it was a small minority. I believe, if a new Congiess were 
 elected, and another Committee appointed, the minority "fairly reci[)rocating 
 the spirit" of the gentleman from Massachusetts would be very small indeed. 
 
 The gentleman from Massachusetts publishes in his report a resolution offered 
 by himself^in that committee, declaring "a peaceful acquiescence in the elec- 
 tion of a Chief Magistrate, accomplislied in accordance with every le?al and 
 constitutional requirement," to be first, the "paramount," afterwards amended 
 upon the mcition of the gentleman from Virginia to " a high and imperative" 
 duty of every good citizen of l-he United States. I was one of those seven 
 who refused to vote for this resolution. He offers in his report an argument to 
 prove the ]>ropriety of it. I believe I shall not have time to reply to that ar- 
 gument. To concede it, was to concede everything. We had assembled to 
 agree upon terms upon which we could recommend to the southern States 
 "peaceful acquiescence" in the election of Abiaham Lincoln, elected upon the 
 sole principle of jiostility to an institution vital to the independence and pros- 
 perity of these States. 
 
 1 repeat, sir, that although I agree to the resolution in the abstract, I refused 
 to vote for it. I deny that it is the duty of any good citizen to acquiesce in 
 anj- government which was ordained and established for his protection iu all 
 his constitutional rights, when it becomes perverted into a means of w.rong 
 and oppression and an instrument by which those rights can be destroyed. 
 
 Let me submit to the gentleman from the South who voted for the resolution, 
 this proposition : Suppose John Brown, the robber and murderer, the felon and 
 traitor, the hero and martyr of the Republican party, had escaped conviction 
 and punishment by death upon the scaffold for his manifold crimes— and if he 
 bad, I believe that today he would be a more popular man with the Republi- 
 can parly tluin Abraham Lincoln, the President elect — suppose he had been 
 selected by t!ie Chicago convention as the candidate of the party, and elected, 
 as he would have been : then would the gentleman from Massachusetts, and 
 those from the North and South who have voted with him for his resolution, 
 aUege it to be the " high and imperative duty" of citizens of Virginia and 
 other southern States "peacefully to acquiesce in his election," and submit to 
 a government administered by him? 
 
 tsh: DUNN. Are you not aware, sir, that in the Chicago platform the raid 
 of John Brown is expressly condemned? 
 
 Mr. RUST. No sir. 
 
 Mr. DUNN. I want it to go out with your speech, then, that 3'ou are mis- 
 representing the public sentiment of the North. 
 
 Mr. RUST. That is not an applicable re])ly to what I have been stating. I 
 have supposed a case that might happen — which I believe would, in all proba- 
 bilit}', have happened, but for the just doom of a traitor and outlaw; for, sir, 
 if John Brown had lived, I am of the opinion that he would have been a more 
 po[)ular man to-day than Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 Mr. I'ALMKU. I think the gentleman is mistaken. I think he did say 
 affirmatively that John Brown was the hero and martyr of the Republican 
 party, which called forth the remark of the gentleman from Indiana. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I do think so. Now, what does the gentleman say? Does he 
 den)' or controvert what I have stated with reference to the action of the ma- 
 jority of the select committee of thirty-three? Does the gentleman admit 
 that the majority of the committee was willing to concede an^ thing in conflict 
 with the Chicago platform; will he deny that the majority, in response to all 
 our demands, threatened us with the sword? 
 
 Mr. DUNN. I desire, as one member of that committee, to say that I en- 
 deavored to discharge my duty there without any reference whatever to the 
 CUieago platform ; and 1 believe that that phrase escaped from my lips but 
 
once; anrl that was in reference to that very charge that the Republican party 
 sympathized with that raid of John Brown. I believe that every enlightened 
 oitizen of tliis conntr}', north and south, knows that to be an infamous libel 
 upon the Republican party; and I am only surprised that men who have great 
 public interests in charge in this day of peril will give circulation to such a 
 libelous assertion. 
 
 Mr. IIUBT. What is that libelous assertion? 
 
 Mr. DUNN. That the Republican party sympathizes with John Brown. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I do not reply to that here ; but, sir, I will not appeal to him 
 as a gentleman, nor do I appeal to hini at all again. But I appeal to other 
 gentlemen of that committee, to whom that appellation may yet apply. I ap- 
 peal to the gentleman from Massachusetts, or to any other member upon the 
 committee, of that parly, if they manifested a willingness to vote for any 
 measure in conflict with the Chicago platform; and whether they conceded 
 one hair's breadth of what they called their idea of republican Government. 
 
 Mr. HINDMAN. In reply to the remark just made by the gentleman from 
 Indiana, I wish to ask one question, that his position may be well understood. 
 Did he intend to intimate that he, upon that committee, was willing to give 
 any vote that would amount to a repudiation of the Chicago platform, or any 
 portion thereof? 
 
 Mr. DUNN. I am very frank to say I did not ; because I did not believe 
 that platform to be in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 Mj^ RUST. I have got all I want. And in regard to that infamous libel 
 ■which the gentleman has charged upon me, I hope now he will say he is re- 
 sponsible for it, and I will treat it hereafter. Let me know now? 
 
 Mr. DUNN. The gentleman can seek what he desires. 
 
 Mr. RUST. Those who incite others to war should be willing to wage war 
 themselves. 
 
 Mr. DUNN. This is a free country ; and the gentleman can seek redress in 
 any form he pleases. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I have the answer I wanted. Oh, no; they deprecate brute 
 force; they want reason, argument, thought, discussion here; but when they 
 are held to responsibility for their insolence, cowards they prove to be, who 
 are willing to involve othei's in dangers which they will not share themselves. 
 
 Mr. COLFAX. I desire to ask whether these reniarks of the gentleman from 
 Arkansas are strictlj^ in order? 
 
 RUST. I am done with that. 
 
 Mr. COLFAX. I insist that to apply the epithet "coward" to any member 
 »f the House is not in order? 
 
 Mr. HINDMAN. It occurs to me that the gentleman from Indiana might 
 kave raised the point of order upon his colleague with more propriety. I 
 would inquire of the Chair whether it is in order to apply the language "in- 
 famous libel" to any member of this House? 
 
 The SVEAKER pro tempore, {Mr. Kellogg, of Illinois, in the chair.) The 
 Chair would suggest to the gentleman that this character of debate is hardly 
 in order. 
 
 Mr. HINDMAN. If it is not in order, why did the Chair permit the gentle- 
 man from Indiana (Mr. Dunn) to use the word "infamous," as applicable to a 
 gentleman in this House? Why did not the Chair then enforce the rule? 
 
 Mr. DUNN. If the gentleman will allow me, I will say this 
 
 Mr. RUST. No, sir ; no, sir ; not with my permission shall the gentleman 
 open his mouth. 
 
 Mr. DUNN. Then the gentleman's colleague should not have asked the 
 question. 
 
 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair requires gentlemen to observe order 
 in the course of debate. The Chair would observe to the gentleman from Ar- 
 kansas that the matters to which allusion is now made took place before the 
 present occupant of the chair took the chair, as he recollects. Whether it be 
 80 or not, this course of discussion was not then in his mind. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I desire to make this inquiry of the Chair. I wish to ascertain 
 from the Chair whether, in his opinion, the gentleman from Arkansas was the 
 first one who committed a breach of parliamentary privilege? 
 
 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would suggest to the gentleman 
 from Arkansas, that the present occupant of the chair "was not in the chair at 
 the time when, apparently, this character of discussion commenced; but he 
 
■will say to the gentleman, that he "will, as far as possible, require gentlemen to 
 observe the order of debate while he occupies the chair, whether upon one 
 »ide or the other. 
 
 Mr. RUST. With regard to Jolin Brown — who?e name I introduced bj' way 
 of argument — and his Republican sympathizers, it is only necessary to state, in 
 proof of the charge-, that he is their hero and martyr; that monuments have 
 been erected to his memory; the anniversary of his death has been celebrated 
 by multitudes of his admirers; the present Governor of Massachusetts, I am in- 
 formed, has testified his appreciation of his character and sympatliy with the 
 cause in whicii he sacrificed himself, by the contribution of a large amount of 
 money to a fund to be devoted to that purpose; and, last of all, Mr. Skw.vrd, in 
 a recent sp^BPi, spoke of the invasion of Virginia bj' Brown as an ilhistiation 
 of the "feamil and uncompromising hostility to slaver}'" which pervades the 
 world wherever slavery does not exist. What more evidence is necessary to 
 show that John Brown is regarded by prominent and influential members of 
 the Republican party as a martyr and a hero? 
 
 I will say, again, Mr. Speaker! if the Republican members of this House upon 
 the committee of thirty-three, or upon this floor, represent the sentiment of the 
 northern people, all hope of com[)romise is gone. I am willing to vote for a 
 proposition which allows the people, as a dernier rexort, to speak for them- 
 Belves; and if this House refuses that opportunity; if it is uiiwilliug to trust it« 
 own constituents, I say, then, I will exliort every man of the South, my own 
 peo])le as well as other peo[)le of the southern States, to prcpaie for war. I 
 would prefer war, with all its attendant horrors, to such a submission as it 
 would be, after all that has occurred, upon the part of the Soutli, to allow this 
 Goverrmient to go into the hands of the Republican parly, and be administered 
 by them in the southern States of the Union. I would prefer that the whole 
 southern States sliould become one blood-stained and unpeopled desert; I 
 would prefer anything to such a humiliation and dislionor as it woidd be to 
 submit to such a party and to such an Administration, under such circumstances. 
 After all tliat has been said and done by the southern [icople, submission now 
 for the sake of peace would invite future aggressions and iiisults which slaves 
 themselves would not brook or submit to. If justice is denied us now, the odds 
 against us will be greater a year hence, or two months hence, tlian they now 
 are; and our true policy is to demand equality in the Union, and if that is de- 
 nied, assert and maintain our independence out of it, and, if need be, with the 
 •word, and "pray God to be with the right." 
 
 But I do not believe that these Representatives represent that people. I 
 have a hope that a different sentiment prevails among the northern people. I 
 hope, if this Ui ion is dissolved, tliere will be a reconstruction of it. The inter- 
 ests of all sections of this Confederacy are in the Union, and of none more so 
 than the State which I in part represent As to the country in the Mississippi 
 vallev, it is impossible to divide it. Social relations and iVelings and sympa- 
 thies and conmiercial interests are so blended that it is beyond the power of 
 man to sunder tliem. Let this Congress madly refuse to do its duty, and con- 
 ventions 1)6 called, and States secede, and disunion come, still God has so united 
 the people of the Mississijipi valley that the folly and wickedness of man can- 
 not keep them asunder, l^tt the Utdon be dissolved, or rather suspended, and 
 a new one Avill be formed out of tlie wreck, upon a firmer, juster, and more 
 enduring basis than the old one, which is now in its expiring agonies. The inhab- 
 itants of the Mississippi valley are one and indivisible. United with the Gulf 
 and Atlantic States, they would form an empire in which there need be no jar- 
 ring or antagoiiistic interests, with elements of wealth and strength and [•rogresa 
 which iti a little time would make them the foremost nation u[)on the earth. 
 
 The gentleman from Ghio. (Mr. Corwin.) who submitted the majority report 
 of the committee, is not, I believe, in his seat; but 1 must be permitted to say 
 that a more disingenuous production never emanated from the jien of a political 
 partisan. 1 will review but a small portion of it. The excuse which he made 
 in that report, to the House and to the country, for not acceding to the propo- 
 sition to divide the territory belonging to the United States between tlie two 
 sections, u[ion the line of ."5(1^ SiV. was that it was incumbered with a provision 
 to apply it to all territoi)- hereafter to be acquired. If gentlemen will take the 
 trouble to read the journal of the proceedings of the committee, they will dis- 
 cover that that gentleman and his colleagues, after having voted for and 
 adopted an amendment to the resolution proposed by himself, confining itg 
 
8 V 
 
 operation to the Territories now belonging to the United States, and having 
 thus removed the objection to it urged iu his report, voted it down after it was 
 60 amended. 
 
 lie argued, and may have argued well, that it was unwise and inexpedient 
 to anticipate the acquisition, by the Government, of new territories when those 
 now belonging to it were tlie source of such angry and dangerous controversies. 
 But I submit if it was fair to assign as a reason for rejecting a proposition in- 
 sisted upon by the minorit}', an objectionable feature which, upon his own mo- 
 tion, and by the votes of his ov/n colleagues, had been stricken out of it. The 
 minority of the committee insisted upon a proposition similar to that introduced 
 into the Senate by the venerable Senator from Kentucky, (Mr. Crittenden,) 
 ■with reference to slavery in the District of Columbia, docks, arsena]gund navy- 
 yards, and all places under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United sfates. The^ 
 majority voted a resolution declaring that as tliere was no purpose anywhere 
 to interfere with slavery in those places, it was not expedient to act upon the 
 proposition, and consequently voted it down. Tiie reported proceedings of a 
 Republican caucus furnishes, perhaps, a more satisfactory explanation. It was 
 determined, in tliafc caucus that, while it was not now the pur]>ose of the Re- 
 publican party to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, it might not 
 always be so; and lience they would not so amend the Constitution as to de- 
 prive them of the power when it might be their pleasure to do it. 
 
 Now, sir, within my experience, petitions liave been presented at that bar 
 praying for tlie abolition of slavery in all places under the exclusive jui'isdic- 
 tion of the United States. We of the South believe that the leaders of the Re- 
 publican party are pledged to abolish slavery wherever it exists, if they can 
 constitutionally do it. But whether there was just cause for apprehension or 
 not, gentlemen of the majority of the committee, and among them one to whom 
 I shall not refer again, voted for a resolution which I introduced on the first 
 day I attended the sittings of the committee, declaring that "discontent and 
 hostility to the Federal Government existed among the southern people," and 
 whether, with or without cause, it was the duty of the committee to report 
 Buch just and reasonable measures of conciliation as would allay them. It 
 seems to me that it was bad faith on the part of any member of the commit- 
 tee who voted for my resolution to vole against the proposition to amend the 
 Constitution so as to de]>rive Congress of the power to abolish slavery in tlie 
 District of Columbia. Xevertheless, I believe that all, or nearly all, of the 
 Republican members of the committee so voted. 
 
 In refusing, at a time like this, as a ])eace-offeriug to the South, to relinquish 
 the power, it would hardly be denied by them, I presume, tlmt they contem- 
 plate, at some future time, its exercise. I would not accept their denial. I 
 believe it is their purpose to abolisli slavery, not only where they have the 
 constitutional power to do it, but wherever it exists in the United States. 
 Until the present session of Congress, during which my opportunities forjudg- 
 ing of their designs have been more favorable than ever before, I have not be- 
 lieved lliat they entertained any designs upon slavery in the States where it 
 exists. But, upon observing their bearing through "this whole contest, their 
 wanton endeavors to irritate and exasperate the South by the needless passage 
 of resolutions, which could have no other effect, and by other means; their re- 
 fusal to make any concession ; their refusal to sacrifice a mere abstract opinion, 
 or even a trifling party advantage, for the sake of a peaceful solution of the 
 existing sectional troubles, — it has become my deliberate conviction, that it is 
 the settled purpose of the Republican partj-, "if they are permitted to continue 
 in power, to abolish slavery, with or without constitutional right, wherever 
 the jurisdiction of the Government which they may administer is recognized 
 aqd submittted to. 
 
 The gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Millson,) with whom I agree in most 
 things, said that he feared not the Republican party. Sir, I have seen brave 
 men, and read of brave men, but if, under existing circumstances, the gentle- 
 man fears nothing, he is the bravest man I have seen or read of in the whole 
 course of my life. He says that Virginia will not submit to Lincoln, but that 
 Lincoln will submit to Virginia. Really, it is my misfortune not to understand 
 the meaning of the gentleman. I cannot understand the reasoning by which 
 he arrives at the conclusion that Lincoln will administer the Government in 
 submission to the State of Virginia. Did Virginia vote for Lincoln ? Was it 
 by the voice of Virginia that Lincoln was elected President of the United 
 
states? The gentleman says that Lincoln will discharge the functions imposed 
 upon him by tlie State of Virginia, and by the Constitution of the United 
 States, whicli Virginia had a large part in framing. I. believe that Mr. Lincoln 
 repudiates that Constitution; and 1 will show i* from his own written declara- 
 tion — made with deliberation, I presume; be-.-ause I find it in a letter which, 
 from the occasion which called it forth, was, no doubt, written with care and 
 deliberation. He said, only one year before he was elected : 
 
 " The Dinioeraoy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to he absoiutely nothing, when in 
 conflict with another man's r'igbl of propi.Tty. Kepublicans, on the contrary, are for both the 
 man auU the dollar, but iti case uf cuuflict the man before the dollar." 
 
 Now, sir, how do you translate or interpret that expression of Mr. Lincoln? 
 He says the liepublicans are for both the man and the dollar; but in case of 
 conflict, the njan before the dollar. \f the riiiht of property of a southern 
 citizen iti his slaves comes in conflict with the rights of person, recognized as 
 belonging to the slave himself by Mv. Lincoln, the rights of the southern citizen 
 are to go down Is not that a fair interpretation of what Mr. Lincoln said? 
 What did he mean, if he did not mean that when mj' rights, as the owner of 
 my slave in a free State, or even in a slave Stnle, come in conflict with the 
 rights of the person claimed as a slave, my rights must be subjected to the 
 rights of peison of my slave? 
 
 Again, he sajs: 
 
 " This is a world of compensations ; and ho who would be no slave must consent to have no 
 slave. Those who deny freedom toothers deterve it not for themselves; and under a just God 
 cannot long retain it." 
 
 These are the sentiments of the President elect of the Republican party, of 
 whose admin stration m^^ friend from Virginia is not afi-aid. Does he believe 
 that the Constitution will impose any restraint upon a man who uttered such 
 sentiments as these only a little more Than nyeurago? Ilasnot Lincoln pledged 
 himself to the doctrine that rights of person aio liigher than ris^hts of property? 
 Has he not said in express terms, that where the two come in conflict, rights 
 of property must be yielde<l, and rights of jierson maintained? If he is an 
 honest nian, he will carry his llieury into practice. I should have less respect 
 for him if 1 believed that he would not carry tliat theory into piactice than I 
 liave for him now ; believing, as I do, that he will. In the one case, I could 
 regard him as a crazy, but honest fanatic; in tlie other, as nothing more than 
 a reckless and unpiincipled demagogue. And yet tlie gentleman from Virginia 
 is not afraid! He thinks it is onl^' cowards who, under such circumstances, 
 are afi aid to allow the Government of the United States to pass into the hands 
 of such a President 
 
 Mr. MILLSUIS'. The gentleman from Arkansas seems whoUj' fo have misap- 
 prehended everything that I did say. I snid that I told the members of the 
 llei-ublican parly, more than a year ago, that I did not fear ihem, because they 
 never had hud a majority here since I had been a member of Congress; and I did 
 not believe they ever would have a majority, if southein men chose to reniain 
 in their sweats. Will the gentleman from Arkansas tell me what he can fear from 
 a minorily ? 
 
 Mr. IIUST. We are in a minority to-day. We were in a minority when the 
 gentleman addressed the House. We were reduced so low, and were so help- 
 less, so feeble, so powerless, upon this side of the House, onlj- a few days a^o, 
 that upon a test question we could not call the yeas and nays; and yet the 
 gentleman from Virginia says that tlie Republicans are not yet in a majority, 
 and that he believes they never will bo! 
 
 Air. MILLSON. The gentleman again misunderstands what 1 did say. I 
 stated what I had said more than a year ago. I said afterwards that, in conse- 
 quence of our being in a minority from the secession of the southern States, it 
 became necessary that guarantees, such as the gentleman requires, should be 
 given. „ 
 
 Mr. RUST. I am glad I misunderstood the gentleman. He knows I have 
 not read his speech, for I told him so this morning; and the notes I took of it 
 ■were taken amidst a great deal of noise and confusion, and my hearing is very 
 indistinct; I hear but little of what tianspires around me. I hope if I have 
 misconceived him, he will accept this as an explanation. 
 
 But, sir, I do think that even before the secession of the southern States, the 
 Republicans had a majority in this House. They organized this House. They 
 elected the Speaker and all the otlicers connected with it, and it is impossible 
 
10 
 
 for one to understand how a minority could accomplish so much. It is true they 
 were not all from the South, but none the less Republicans on that account. 
 When this Congress asseii^^ed a year asjo, no one thought of secession, txeept 
 iu the event which has since occurred ; but even then they had a majority. In 
 1841, the Kepublican party numbered only two members upon this floor. In 
 1847, as Mr. Giddings says, "he was one of seven. In 1855, Mr. Giddings, with his 
 own hand, drew up that portion of the T'hiladelphia platform in reference to 
 slavery when they palled a plurality of the votes for President, and nearly 
 elected their candidate; and, in 1860, they have nominated and elected the 
 President and Vice President upon the same platform, so far as it relates to 
 slaver)', that Giddings drafted in 1856 at Philadelphia, and have the control of 
 this House and the other branch of Congress and every department of the Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Mr MILLSON". Will the gentleman let me interrupt him again? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I prefer not to be interrupted. 1 have already spoken longer 
 than I intended, and have said almost nothing that I intended to say. Now, 
 sir, look at the rapid strides which that party has made in the last few years, 
 and at the I'esults which they have already accomplished. What is the feeling 
 of that party now? In the committee of thirty-three, three of its eighteen 
 members, under existing circumstances, in a cri.sis which threatens the existence 
 of everything dear to the American citizen, refused to vote away the power to 
 interfere with slavery in the States where it exists — three of the Republican 
 members of that committee, selei;ted for their supposed conservatism of senti- 
 ments,- refused to yield the right to abrogate slavery in the States where it now 
 exists; and I believe that a majority of the members on the other side of the 
 House would vote to day against a proposition to give up that power. What 
 may we not expect in four, eight, or twelve years more, with our past experi- 
 ence of the progress of that party? I say that under the existing Constitution 
 the South has no hope in this Union without essential, material, effectual, and 
 irrepealable guarantees of her constitutional rights; and let the conseijuencea 
 be what they may, if these guarantees are not conceiled, I warn the people of 
 Arkansas of the dangers that threaten them in the Union, and beg and implore 
 them, as their last and only hope of security, to go out of it. 
 
 Mr. Speakei", I do not know what was sought to be accomplished by making 
 a report which was no report; a report repudiated by the committee that 
 ordereTl it to be made. 
 
 Mr. MALLORY. Will the gentleman from Arkansas permit me to ask him 
 a question? Do I understand him to say that a majority of the committee of 
 thirty-three, or a majority of that portion of the committee which represented 
 the free States, refused in committee to vote for an amendment of the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, providing that slavery' should never be interfered 
 with in the States where it exists? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I said nothing like that; and I am sorry my friend from Kentucky 
 could so far misapprehend me. I went on to review'the'procress of the Repub- 
 lican party in this House and the country. I stated that m 1841 there were 
 two Republicans in this House; in 1847, seven; in 1856 they controlled the 
 organization which nominated Fremont; and in 1860 they elected Lincoln. I 
 then said that three members of the committee of thirty- three from the northern 
 States, selected, I suppose, because of their conservative sentimetts, refused to 
 yield tlie power to legislate on slavery, or to amend the Constitution so as to 
 exclude forever the power to do so. 
 
 Mr. MALLORY. Then, as I wish to be thoroughly informed on this branch 
 of subject, I ask my friend from Arkansas whether these three memb.-rs of the 
 committtee refused to surrender up a power which they supposed they had; 
 or did they refuse to agree to that amendment because they thought it unne- 
 cessary, inasmuch as such power is not possessed now? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I am not so unkind as to assign motives to men's actions. I 
 hardly understand the actions themselves. 
 
 Mr. MALLORY. I only asked the question for information. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I heard them assign no reason for their action. 
 
 Mr. HI^'DMAX. Will the gentleman from Kentucky allow me to ask him 
 whether hi' is familiar with the reason? 
 
 Mr. MALLORY. I am not, sir. I only asked for information. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I repeat, that I shall not undertake to assign motives for men's ac- 
 tions. I was saying that the chairman of the committee made a report, which 
 
11 
 
 is no report ; -which I did not not vote for, which you (Mr. Kellog) did not vote 
 for, and wliich no member of the committee voted for. That gentleman, (Mr. 
 CoRwix,) in the speech which he made, alluded to ^uth Carolina as having 
 taken, m she did in 18">3, the lead in this work of treason and rebellion. It is 
 well enough, peihaps, that the Repiitlican party should try to avail themselves 
 of the odiurn which attaches, or which did attach, to the precipitate action of 
 South Carolina; hut is the gentleman from Ohio conversant only with that 
 part of the history of the country of which he calls himself a part? Has he 
 never read anything of history? Does he not know that South Carolina, in 
 1833, was following the lead of New England States in 1814, when we were 
 at war witii a powerful nation ? The Ne\v England States, during the most of 
 the struggle, afforded ai<l and comfort to the public enemy, and resolved that 
 they would leave the Union. They sent ambassadors to Washington to treat 
 with the administration of Mr. Madison for the terms of their withdrawal. 
 They were not even in a time of war denounced as rebels and traitors. John 
 Quincy Adams declared in his writings that that great catastrophe, tlie dis- 
 memberment of the Confederacy, was only averted by the receipt of iutelli- 
 genee that peace had been concluded by the treaty of Ghent. Have New 
 l-'ugland and northern States a prescriptive right to treason and rebellion ; "or 
 is not that treason in Massachusetts and Connecticut and Rhode Island, which 
 is treason in Florida, South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi! If not, then 
 indeed we have never been equals in this Confederacy. If one law is to be 
 applied to one portion of the Confederacy, and another to another, if that 
 whic-h is treason in one part is not tieason in another, then we have remained 
 in the Union much too long alread}'. 
 
 Again : while South Carolina is held up to the reprobation of the peoj)le for 
 what is called her pettilanc)-, her precipitanc\% her presumption, her arrogance, 
 has the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Auams) forgotten that, in 1815, the 
 Legislature of Massachusetts declared that the annexation of T«-.\as would jus- 
 tify Massachusetts in leaving this accursed Confederacy ? Has he forgotten 
 that that Legislature, by solemn resolution, declared that the annexation of 
 Texas would be a dissolution of the Union? The gentleman from Massachu- 
 setts was a member of that Legislature, and jet lie is the gentleman to come 
 forward low and declare against all ap])eals for concession and compromise, 
 and is ready to declare war against Stales which are only exercising rights and 
 powers on more tlian one occasion asserted by his own. 
 
 Mr. GUOCll. I desire to ask the gentleman from Arkansas whether he has 
 read the resolution of the Massachusetts Legislature to which he refers? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I have. 
 
 Mr. 0()0(^H, Will the gi-ntleman read it now in the House? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I have it not here. 
 
 Mr. GOOCIL When the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Cox) read a resolution 
 the other day as having been ])asscd by the Massachusetts Legislature, I could 
 not reiueniber that any such rcsolutitHi had ever been passed; and I have not 
 since been able to find any such resolution as lie then quoted. I hoped, if 
 there were any such'resolutiOn passed, that 1 might, by this inqiiir}-, ascertain 
 where to find it. 
 
 Mr. RUST. Very good. I expect I can put the gentleman in the way of 
 Bacertaining where that resolution is to be found. The gentleman from Massa- 
 chusetts, (Mr. Adams.) who admitted having introduced the resolution himself, 
 is now in his seat; and of course he is more competent to give information to 
 his colleague in regard to it than I am. I will yield the floor to him. 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Massachusetts. 1 say to the gentleman from Arkansas, that 
 he never heard from me any clear statement of what that resolution contained. 
 At the time he heard me speak of it, I had not seen it for fourteen or fifteen 
 years. If the gentleman will look it up, and present it to the House, then the 
 House will be the judge of what it contains. Until that time I beg him not to 
 make a representation of what he knows nothing about. 
 
 Mr. RUST. The gentleman from Massachusetts slates that I had no clear in- 
 timation from liim of what the resolution contains. I will admit that the gen- 
 tleman studiously avoided au intimation which I thought he was perfectly 
 competent to make. He seemed to think that that resolution, of which he was 
 himself the author, was a very delicate matter at this particular cri-is. I have 
 endeavored to get the resolution, and I hope the gentleman will aid me in get- 
 ting it. It is due to him and to me, either that he should contradict the pur- 
 
12 
 
 port of what T state the resolution to be, or else produce it, and let it prove 
 itself. I ask him now, if he does not know what the resolution was. 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of JIassael(|)setts. I know perfectly well. 
 
 Mr. RU-ST. I only want the purport, the substance, the intent of it. 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Massaehusptts. I know perfectly well what the resolution 
 is, and am ready here, at the proper time, lo repeat the resolution for the bene- 
 fit of the country. At this time 1 have it not within my control. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I'ask the gentleman if he cannot recollect the purport of the 
 resolution, of which he was himself the author. I do not want the precise 
 language, I only want the purport of it, as I desire to make it a part of my 
 speeck I do not want it to go forth to the country, that I have spoken on a 
 subject of which " I was perfectly ignorant" 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Ma^acJiusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am a pretty precise man m 
 regard to the language I use, both in resolutions and here ; and I am not going, 
 friTm mere reeolieetion, to say what the woids of that resolution are. if the 
 gentleman desires them, I will furnish a copy before he prints his speech. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I am obliged to the gentleman for that courtesy. I will say 
 now what my recollection is of the remarks the gentleman made to the com- 
 mittee on the occasion to wliich I have referred. He said the resolution as- 
 serted that the annexation of Texas furnished a sufficient cause to Massachu- 
 setts for seceding from the Union. 
 
 Mr. GOOCH. Will the gentleman permit ine to say a word? 
 
 Mr. RUST. I cannot yield any more of ray time. I did not intend, when I 
 set out, to occupy the flo'or more than twenty minutes, but in consequence of 
 these interruptions the greater portion of the hour to which I am entitled is 
 already gone, and I have not reached the topics which I desired particularly 
 to discuss. How much more time have I ? 
 
 Tiie SPEAKER. The gentleman has six or seven minutes yet remaining. 
 
 Mr. RUST. I was proceeding to remark that in what the State of South 
 Carolina has recently done, for which she has received such severe condenana- 
 tion on this floor, she had the example of the State of Massachusetts and her 
 New England sisters. Yet from the time that committee organized, neither 
 the houorable chairman, nor any member from his side of the conmiittee, talk- 
 ed of anything but the enforcement of the laws of the United States in the 
 States which have seceded. That I understand to be the programme of gen- 
 tlemen on the other side of the House, and of the Republican party. What, 
 Mr. Speaker, are the laws that gentlemen propose to enforce in South Cai-olina? 
 What laws are there upon j'our statute books which can be enforced upon 
 these people, unless it be the laws of taxation, the right of plunder, of robbery 
 and spoliation, which you have been exercising for many years? Are these 
 the laws which you consider vital to the Uni^u, and which the chairman of 
 the committee (Mr. Corwin) proposes (o enforce, without disturbing the peace 
 of the country? Are there any other laws which can be enforced tliero except 
 the laws of taxation? ReferVnce has been made to no other lawsv-and I sup- 
 pose gentlemen expect that the amiable, peaceable people of the southern 
 States, will submit to taxation bj' a Government in which they have no repre- 
 sentation. 
 
 The chairman of the committee has asserted in his remarks a proposition to 
 which, I presume, there will be no dissent; that no sane man. would go into a 
 Territory belonging to tlie United States north of 36° 30' with his slaves. I 
 fully assent to the proposition. I have ever been in favor of carrying the doc- 
 trine of popular sovereignty into all the Territories of the United" States; but 
 that has been opposed and denounced with unmeasured bitterness b}' the Re- 
 publican party; it has not prevailed in the southern States; its advocates were 
 overwhelmed in the recent canvass; and as one of the minority, I yielded to 
 the majority. I believe that the doctrine of popular sovereignty was the doc- 
 trine upon which this Government was formed. It is a doctrine which I en- 
 deavored to advocate with all my ability ; but which, as I said, has been repu- 
 diated by an overwhelming majority of the southern people. I not only assent 
 to the statemenT, of the gentleman from Ohio, but I told him that I had sub- 
 mitted to my constituents in the recent canvass, whether, for a bonus of $500 
 per capita, they would go intcf any of the Territories of the United States, north 
 of that line, carrying their slaves with them, and there was not an afhrmative 
 , response. I then put this question to the honorable gentleman — which he did 
 not answer, but which I hope will be answered; why, if Providence has so 
 
13 
 
 effectually gnarried the Territories of the United States against the invasion of 
 slave laboi-, will they ins-ist upon an insulting and unconstitutional interdict, 
 to the txtreinity of destroy ing the peace and prospeiity of the people, and pre- 
 cipitating tiic countiy into a civil war. 
 
 The tjentleinari furtlier said, the}' had the Almighty on their side. Then I 
 ask, that if, in addition to all the other advantages which we acknowledge you 
 possess, jou claitji this, why will you insist on breaking down the barriers which 
 the CoDstilulion has ei'ected, giving protection, at least in name and theory, to 
 the southern people? Wiiat justitication have J'ou, or can the Reptiljlican party 
 plead, fop its aggressive policy? If you have nature, po[)ulation, numerical , 
 strength, capacity for colonization, political power, and God Almighty with 
 yon, wliy do you find it necessaiy still to insist upon taking from the southern 
 people that shield which tbe Constitution has erected as a barrier against your 
 aggressions? 
 
 But ill regard to the territory south of 36" 30', a territory composed of Ari- 
 zona and ^ew Mexico, the honorable cliairmai) of the committee says "take it! 
 take it! lake it!" bir, tiie gentleman did not mean "take it! take it ! t^e it!" 
 His aciioii |nove8 the contrary. We ask him to let us take it; but he proposes 
 terms whicli aie not acceptable either to his party or to the South. We ask 
 him, if he is willing to give it to us, to allow us to prescribe the terms; allow" 
 us to draw u[> the articles of conve_\ ance. Xo, sir; he and his party (and that 
 is by no means iinaniiuous) will not give us iSew Mexico, exce|it on condition 
 that it shall be admitted into the Union as a Slate, It would not be a slave 
 State. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Sherman) would vote for this proposition, 
 though the Territory, with over two hundred thousand square miles — to quote 
 his own elegant" language — is not "able to support a turkey buzzard." Mr. 
 SuERMAN will vote lor this proposition, because there are oiily eleven slave 
 ■women and one slave man within the limits of this vast Teriitiuy. "She caa 
 change or modify her constitution at any time." This is a pregnant suggestion. 
 New ^lexico is ill no condition to assume the responsibilities i>f a sovereign 
 State, blie does not desire or seek admission into the Union ; and if she were 
 lo ajiply for it t.o-day, w-ith a pro-slavery constitution, I would vote against it. 
 All the principles that are deserving of respect and consideration are not, I take 
 it, embraced in the "Chicago platlorni." The gentleman from vUio, (Mr. StuR- 
 UAX,) while he disparages, and, as the lion<irable Delegate IVoiii that Territory 
 says, traduces and libels the Territory and her people, is willing to vote for her 
 admis-ioii i.ito the U iiion, ui>(in an equal looliiig with bis State ami luine, and all 
 the other States ot the Union, because, 1 sup[io8e, sir, "there are only twelve slaves 
 within her limits, and she could at any time alter or modily her coi;slitution." 
 
 Sir, there has been no intention, on the part of the gentleu en from the Jsorth, 
 to relinqiii.-h, in good f.iith, that Territory to the South. The northern press 
 has denounced the proposition as an aiteiiii)ted fraud upon the South or upon 
 the K-'publiean pan v. I do not choose to be a I'arly to a fraud ujion either. 
 If the majority of the committee, or the Kepubiican paity in this House, are 
 williiit; to adjust the territorial question upon the basis which the chairmaa 
 pretends to utter, it will be prom|>lly accepted by the southern llepreseutatives. 
 The geinlcmaii from Michigan, (Mr. Uowauu,) whom I regard as one of the most 
 conservative of his parly, declared that in voting for this proposition, he did 
 not Uhderstftiid himserf to have voted in opposition to the principles and policy 
 of the Uepublieuii puriy. I uin iiiloiuied that Mr. Adams, of Massucluisetts, 
 made the same dcclaraliun. But what a commentar}' it is upon the wisdom of 
 this Congress, and our ca|)acity for self government as a people, when we think 
 of the object of the controversy which is about to result in the uisiU|nion of 
 tills Government! The acquisition of this Territory cost the Government at 
 furtlusl a lew million dollars — perhaps less than one. 
 [Here the hammer fell.J 
 
 Air. liU^T. As 1 have submitted to a good manj- interruptions, I hope my 
 time will be extended to enable me to conclude some of the remarks which I 
 Blill dcjiie 111 make. I want lo replj- to some of the points made by the gentle- 
 inan tioni (.inio, (.Mr. Sherman,) in his speech delivered a Icw days ago, ai.d to 
 fasten a liirg« share of the respousibilily for the ditHcalties and dangers which 
 now l>e>et the country upon the present Chief Magistrate of the- naiiou. This 
 1 will not have time to do. 
 
 Mr. McCLKRN AND. it will be doing great injustice to the gentleman from 
 Arkansas not to allow him that privilege. 
 
14 
 
 A Member. How long do you want? 
 
 Mr. RUST. A few miuutes. 
 
 There being no ol'ieetion, the time wa3 accordingly extended. 
 
 Mr. RUST. When my time expired, I was commenting upon the paltry 
 cause (if the Republican party seek only to exclude slavery from the Territo- 
 ries, as they pretend) of this angry quarrel between the two sections. The 
 single city of New York has sustained losses already in consequence of it, 
 greater by far than the cost of all the territories which have been purchased 
 by the United States since the formation of the Government. If tlie disasters 
 and losses which have grown out of it could be arrested now, it would have 
 been a saving to any one of a dozen cities in the Union to have levied a tax 
 upon its people, necessary to buy the whole of the territory in controversy, 
 (that south of 36° 30',) and have given it to either one section or the otlier, as 
 a means of averting them. When v.e come to aggregate the losses of every 
 kind to the people of- the whole Union, which have resulted from the quarrel 
 over this miserable Territory, incapable, as Mr. Sherman says, "of supporting 
 a tu^kev buzzard," language is incompetent to the task of describing its folly 
 and wickedness. 
 
 The gentleman from Ohio asserted that the South had ruled this Government 
 for the last seventy years. If that be true, are you not satis6ed with the re- 
 sults <>f southern rule? If that be true, is it not alao true that during that 
 time the country has advanced more rapidly to greatness and power and influ- 
 ence among the nations, and the people have enjoyed a prosperity unequaled 
 in the history of the world — a [jrosperity which, on the day when your Presi- 
 dent was elected, was as universal as it was unparalleled ? We have made more 
 progress, in all that constitutes the greatness and glory of a nation, during 
 these sevf nty years, than any other people ia the history of tlie world. W« 
 enjoy more material, social, religious, and political blessings, than any peopla 
 on tlie face of the earth. Under southern rule, if your cliaige be true, w* 
 Lave enjoyed seventy years of happiness, of contentment, of domestic peaee, 
 and unexampled prosperity and progress; it has all vanished and disappeared 
 before the approach of your party to power. All has been blighted and with- 
 ered by the baleful influence of Black Republican rule, even before you have 
 taken the reigns of Government into your hands^ The South, though, has not 
 ruled the country for seventy years. During those seventy years, the North 
 has furnished seven of the Presidents of the United States, elected in every in- 
 stance by southern votes. And to-daj- there is hardly a northern State that 
 could not supply a man acceptable to the South for the first office in the gift of the 
 peo[)le. It is not against the northei-n people that the South I'cbels ; but against 
 a party which has gotten into power upon principles which threaten not only 
 her safety and equality, but her very existence as a free and self-governing people. 
 
 A Senator from Ohio, (Mr. Wade,) in discussing the question of secession and 
 disunion, said : 
 
 " Lot the Soutli go. We will tlien get Mexico, irreconcilaljly hostile to the South — anJ wilk 
 which bhe will euler into no frienJly relations — worth sevenfold more to the commerce of th« 
 North than all that she would lose by the secession of the southern Stales." 
 
 If it is your interest that a separation should take place, why threaten to 
 maintiiin the Union by force, by employing the Arm}', as we were notified by 
 the gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. Sherman,) chairman of the Committee of Way» 
 and Means, would be done? If, as the Senator fi'om Ohio (Mr. Wai>k) |>rofesse« 
 to believe, you gain seven-fold more than you loose by secession, why throw any 
 impeJi nents in the way of its consummation if Why threaten to punish seccssi<!U 
 by subjugation ? Is it in the mere wantonness of your vitidictive hatred of 
 the South that you declare you will "coerce" the southern States into the Union, 
 when youi interests, by your own admission, command you to encourage and 
 favor the sejiaration which those States are determined upon? 
 
 Much has b^en said about the free navigation of the Mississippi river by gen- 
 tlemen from the Northwest, of both political parties. They have claimed, with 
 much empliasis, the right of transit for their commerce through the Mississippi 
 to the Gulf of Mexico — a right which no one has denied, or would deny them; 
 the free exercise of whiah is just as essential to the interests of the people upoa 
 the lower as upon the upper Mississippi, and its tributaries. There is no antagon- 
 ism of interests between the people inhabiting diiferent poilions of the great 
 Mississippi valley. The prosperity and success of one section are essential to 
 and dependent, in a great degree, upon those of the other. The failure of a 
 
15 
 
 cotton crop, a destructive overHow, or any great disaster to the southern States! in 
 this region, would be felt almost as sensibly in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and the 
 othernorth western State3,i»3 annongthe people who were the immediate sufferers, 
 JThere are so many causes for friendly and intimate relations and iutereourse 
 among these people; they possess such capabilities for conferring mutual and 
 reciprocal benefits upon one another, that I cannot believe that there is to be 
 even a suspension of their social and commercial intercourse, if, unfortunately, 
 there should be of their political relations. But while their facilities for re- 
 ciprocating benefits are so great, their capacities for inflicting injuries, should 
 they be infatuated enough to allow piolitical demagogues, who may be willing 
 to sacrifice everything to their passions, interests, or ambition, to involve them 
 in a bloody strife, will be quite equal to them. The world has never witness- 
 ed a struggle between two such peoples^ It would possess this remarkable 
 fe^turt;: a ti-iumph achieved upon either side would be as disastrous to the vic- 
 tors as to the vanquished. Injuries inflicted by either side would be shared by 
 both. If the people of the Northwest could, in a spirit of vandalism, overrun 
 and lay waste and desolate the South, they would return to their homes a 
 ruined [)eople. They would then have little occasion for that free navigation 
 of the Mississippi, about which they are willing now to go to war. Southern 
 consumption of northern products would cease, and the vast products of the 
 fruitful !?oil of the great Northwest, for which we are now paying so liberally, 
 would Miolder and rokin their granaries and warehouses. 
 
 Jlueli has been 8ai<i about the Union of our fathers and the Constitution of 
 our fathers. Ay, sir, give us the Union of our fathers. Whence did it origi- 
 nate? In mutual interest* and kifidly and fraternal sentiments among all the 
 people whf> formed it. These were the bonds which united us together as one 
 people. When the Declaration of Independence was made, slavery existed in 
 every <ne of the thirteen colonies. When the present Coii.-ifitution was adojited, 
 it exifted in eveiy one of the old thirteen States but Ma.«9achusett.«. Now it is 
 local. Now every State and citizen who inaintains it is under the ban of the 
 part}' whicli has possession of all the powers of this f'fovernment. And yet 
 that party prates of the "Union of the fathers." A Union of jarring interesto 
 and iiiuIuhI di-strust, jealousy, and hatred, can never be maintained. Tlie-e 
 you have substituted for the feelings of mutual respect anil good will in wliieh 
 the UTiion originated, and you have dis-cdved it. We want no change of the 
 Oonrtiiulioii if you will |>l:ice us amid Uie same circunistances which attended 
 its adojilion. Force us not to renuiin in a [lulitical famil}" perpetually discord- 
 ant. Tlie Union of our fathers was a voluntary association of friendly people 
 and States. Ile-slore the intluences that attracted them to each otiier, and we 
 desire no nmt-ndm'ents to the Constitution. Do you suppose, sir, if the southern 
 fathers could have foreseen what is tianspiring liere to-day, tliey would have 
 becoMie parlies to this Union? No, sir. Arid do you suppose tin-ir sons are so 
 recreant and degenerate as to be forced to remain in a Union whieh they loathe 
 and <i.-pi-' because of its initistiee atid op;aissionf Never, sir. The fetlings 
 that gave birth lo the American Union, and which alone could maintain and 
 preserve it, no longer prevail among the people. .\s they iirHduaMy fueled 
 Bwav and gave place to others of a very dilferetit character, the bonds which 
 uniti'd us lia.e gradually relaxed, until the States have fallen asundtr and the 
 Union is no more. The man who wouM attempt by force, by the sword, to 
 reslori^ or reei>n>'triu'l it, so far from l.'irg entitled to the name of statesman 
 and Christian, would be a madman and a fiend. 
 
 I wish lo say a word, Mr. Speakii-, in reply to the gentleman from Ohio, 
 ho has assumed the mission to pr 
 earth and good will to man;" who professes to conform all his acti«)n8 to the 
 
 (^Ir. (JrRLiiV,) a gentleman who bus assumed the mission to preach "peace on 
 
 peaceful and ehai-itablc precepts inculcated by the Holy Word, and who made 
 a spetch a few tlays ago (piite in character with his professions. He had heard 
 that the Slate of Mississippi had erected batteries upon the bank of that river 
 to molest the commerce of his own and other northern States. He was trreatly 
 and pr.'peily indignant He threatened terrible vengeance, direful retribution. 
 In the t'ullnt'ss of his wrath, he declared if this thing were persisted in, (which 
 haa not been done at all,) no "power under Heaven could restrain the people 
 of liis State from making New Orleans a lake in which fishes should dwell, 
 rather than continue to be the abode of men." Yes, sir, New Orleans, the great 
 commercial emporium of the Southwest, with its population, wealth, and com- 
 merce, was to be made the abode of fishes, frogs, alligators, and other reptiles. 
 
16 
 
 Let me remind the gentleman of an incident in the history of New Orleans for 
 bis warning which he seems to have forgotten. Forty-six years ago the British 
 Government, prompted, no doubt, by the same Christian feelings which seem 
 to 'i'limate the gentleman from Ohio, fitted out an expedition to capUire New 
 Orleans, and wrest it from the (3^overainent of the United States. New Orleans 
 was then, compared to what it now is, a mere village. The States of Louisiana, 
 Mississippi, and Arkansas, then and now most accessible to it, were little more 
 than unexplored and uninhabited wildernesses. They now teem with a brave 
 and warlike people. The city was defended by a few undisciplined militia from 
 the southern States, commanded by a southern general. The expedition against 
 it was composed of the victorious veterans of the British army, before whom 
 the legions of Napoleon were invariably compelled to retreat throughout the 
 "reiiiiisHlar war." It was commanded by one of Wellington's favorite generals. 
 Its overthrow and discomfiture by the half-armed and undisciplined militia from 
 Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, was more sanguinary and disastrous than 
 any recorded in the military annals of the world. 
 
 Mr. iilNDMAN. Let me make a remark connected with the issue of fact 
 which lias arisen between my colleague and-the honorable gentleman from Mas- 
 sachusetts. . . 
 
 My colleague stated, upon newspaper authority, that, in 18 14, the Massaelui- 
 Retts l^efiislature n-solved that the annexation of Texas would be, ipno facto, 
 a dissolution of the Union. Tiie two gentlemen from ii^ssachusetts (Mr. Goociib 
 and Mr. Adajis) denied that such resolutions were passed ; and the senior gentle- 
 man from that State (Mr. Adams) read certain other resolutions, as the ones 
 actually passed at the time referred to. 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Massachusetts. Tlie gentleman will allow me to explain? 
 
 Mr! IIINDMAN". Certainly. 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Massachusetts. Tlie gentleman's colleague asked me, and 
 the only (uiestion he asked me in that connection was, as to tlie resolutions I 
 referred lo in the conversation which took place in the committee. Those are 
 the resolutions which 1 referred to as having been drawn up by myself. I do 
 not know as to any other. 
 
 Mr. IilNDMAN. Were those resolutions drawn up by yourself the ones 
 which you have read? • 
 
 Mr. ADAMS, of Massachusetts. Those I read were the ones. 
 
 Mr. IilNDMAN. i propose to show that these identical resolutions are the 
 same in substance with those to which my colleague referred, and the purport 
 of whicii he stated, upon newspaper authority, as amounting to a declaration 
 of disunion if Texas was annexed. 
 
 Mr. FERRY. 1 really cannot yield further to this discussion. 
 
 Mr. rilNDAlAN. Being already on the floor, am I not entitled to hold it? 
 ******* 
 
 Mr. HINDMAN. The floor being conceded to me, I shall be as brief as pos- 
 sible. 
 
 The issue is — Did the Massachusetts Legislature, in 1844, resolve that the an- 
 nexation of Texas v/ould be, ipso facto, a dissolution of the Union ? It is clear, 
 I think, that sucli is the fact, not going beyond the resolutions just read by the 
 senior member of the Massachusetts delegation, and of which he is the author. 
 Those res<^'"tions were passed. The first of them declares, that the "power 
 to unite .. independent foicign State with the United States is not among the 
 powers delegated to the General Government bj' the Constitution." The second 
 resolution declares, that " ;\lassachusetts is determined to submit to no undele- 
 gated powers in any body of men on earth." 
 
 Texas was an "independent foreign State." By the act of annexation she 
 was "united with the United States." Tlie Massachusetts resolutions declared 
 that the power to do this was not delegated b}' the Const itution to the General 
 Government, and that Massachusetts would not submit to the exercise of "un- 
 delegated jiowcrs." That means nothing less than that she would dissolve the 
 Union, as to herself, if Texas were annexed; and this is precisely what my 
 colleague charged, upon newspaper authority. 
 
 It is suggCfted to me, and I have the impression that it will turnout to be the 
 fact, that oilier disunion resolutions were adopted by the Massachusetts Legisla- 
 ture upon the same subject. But 1 will not now inquire further into the matter. 
 
 I thank the gentleman from Connecticut^, (Mr. Ferry,) and the liouse, for the 
 courtesy extended to me. 
 
 Note. — Not space for the Massachusetts resolutions. 
 
 54 III 
 

 
 ^"^-^4 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 ..^ 
 
 4 O 
 
 
 -*- • ^ / ■ O > 
 
 
 ^ t- . ^^^. 
 
 ^•^ ^-e 
 
 
 3.0 -T! 
 

 
 f'^- 
 
 "y^^ 
 
 ^^ /.'A 
 
 
 c^'^. ^^' 
 
 A 
 
 '^<^. 
 
 ^ 
 
 '5>*- -ov* 
 
 
 
 -^'■ 
 
 r-^; 
 
 
 ^Z'-, 
 
 ^ (.•'//,.<V';'» N- v7 1, 
 
 \^^ :^mx \ 
 
 1} 
 
 Vv>. 
 
 ,^'*^ ^^ ^. 
 
 
 ^^% 
 
 
 " ^ ^ ^^ - • - 
 
 -0^ 
 
 0^ .-^^V V .-^^ .'"' 
 
 
 
 f°-v^. 
 
 1^ ' 
 
 •^ 
 
 -^^^r'* 
 
 
 
 .<t>^-. 
 
 .-tV^ 
 
 

 '"1'^'^''^'^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 
 mm 
 
 W