44o EUoT, Tvk>s. T> E.42. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS I lilill iiillii III mil 011895 775 1 ^ ^ .E42 ^ WJ8H; ,„ ADDRESS OF THOMAS D. ELIOT, OF THE 1st CONGEESSIONAL DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, ^]^ TO HIS CONSTITUENTS. My Friends :— I feel impelled to address you by considerations which have nres'^ed themselves upon me recently with an earnestness that I am not able to with- stand They control wholly the unwillingness I have always felt to anticipate or to accompany what I deem it right, as a public servant, to say or to do by statements explanatory or defensive. These days develope rules of action inapplicable hereto- fore As your representative, anxious to advance, here at this time, by personal in- (luence and by vote, your real interests, I am desirous also that you shall know why I have not advocated and why I cannot support the " Compromises of this year. So far as thev are unreal or unsubstantial, or may be understood as surrendering or conferrincr some privilege or power which we do not intend to surrender or center, 1 object to Uiem as frauds upon those who are the other parties to the "Compromise. In this catef^ory must be included all propositions for concession which, it is claimed, do not surrender principle. The great question upon which the Southern slave- holders ioin issue with us is one of principle. If we yield anything that is substan- tial it must be something of principle. When it is said that we must, at this momentous crisis, be willing to concede and to surrender, provided only we remain faithful to principle, nothing is said, for if we yield nothing that costs us anything we give nothing that is of value. If it be deemed of value it is because the party who receives it is deceived and believes that more is conceded than we intend to yield. A compromise thus effected is secured by false pretences But some amun^ the proposed measures of adjustment which have been pressed with earnestness upon Northern men do manifestly involve serious surrender ot principle— of all, in lact, that is real and vital— of all that we have contended for, for the vindication of which the Republican party was organized, and in whose vin- dication it has achieved success. And so far as these propositions are concerned, 1 obiect to them as frauds upon the people of the North and West, as frauds upon freedom, whose commission presupposes faithlessness to duty and criminal violatioa of hi"h trust. As there are two classes of compromise, both objectionable upon the sener^al grounds above stated, so there are two classes of States sought to be affected by them. The Southern seceding States may, it is hoped, be reclaimed, and the middle adhering but threatening Slates may, it is urged, be retained if these conces- sions, or some of them, be made. But no one of the seceding States proffers return to allelation would presuppose legislation with intent to ob- struct. The Constitution provides for the delivery, on claim, of the person owing service who has escaped ; and legislation with intent to defeat that provision of the Constitution would be "in derogation" of it. But no one believes that after a month of labor thirty-three gentlemen have agreed to offer a resolution for the purpose of announcing that fact ! Who doubts that a law made for the purpose of defeatino- a provision of the Constitution is " in derogation " of it ? But the objection to that resolution is this: Every Southern man and every Northern Democrat, as I believe, who has discussed or referred to the "liberty bills" or the " laws preventing kidnap- ping," now upon the statute books of many of the Northern States, has spoken of 6 them as attempts to violate the constitutional provisions concerning the rendition of fugitives from service. And this resolution by the terms " all attempts to obstruct," means to affirm, and is understood to affirm, that all such liberhj laxos and latos agamst kidnapping are "attempts to obstruct" the surrender of fugitives " in derogatfon of the Constitution." Now that proposition is not true. It^is not true in fact or in law. My objection to the resolution is that it is either so weak that it ought not to be otTered or so deceptive that it ought not to pass. One of the resolutions calls upon the Northern States to " revise their statutes." It is not deemed worth while to invite the Southern States to revise or reconstruct their laws. Mas^sachusetts has been revising as far as she deemed it her duty to do so. I decline to advise her to do more. But if it were within the fair scope of my duty to advise my Commonwealth concerning her legislation to protect the per.^onal liberties of her citizens, I should say " repeal no law which assumes to protect our own citizens, and which no court of Massachusetts has declared to be in derogation of the Constitution, without providing also that the repealing act shall not go into operation until the fugitive slave act of 1850 shall be so amended that the citizens of Massachusetts may have the right to a trial by jury within their own State upon all ques- tions involving their right to personal freedom." The sons of Massachusetts have a right to such protection from their native Com- monwealth. Wiiat citizen of a southern State will hesitate within his own State to claim the same protection and assert the same right of legislation. Another resolution is a congressional recognition of slavery as now existing in fifteen States, and a declaration that no right exists outside of a slave State to interfere with slaves or slavery in disregard of the rights of their owners or the peace of societrj. Now, no one pretends that any such right to interfere exists. Every one understands that the Republican party disclaim such doctrine. And the real object of that resolution cannot be to announce a fact so baldly incontrovertible. The object of the resolu- tion must be to secure a congressienal recognition of the institution of slavery as now existing in our southern States. I will be a party to no such recognition. What Madison objected to have named in the Constitution, I am unwilling need- lessly to recognize by formal resolution. But I canuot criticise each resolution in detail. Two or three of them are unob- jectionable and appropriate. One of them is "that it is the duty of the Federal Government to enforce the Federal laws, protect the Federal property and preserve the Union of these States." I shall vote lor that resolution. But when these reso- lutions assert a proposition which no one denies, but contain recognitions or authorize inferences which will be understood by the southern slaveholder as meaning some- thing which the northern Republican would be unwilling to admit in terms that he did truly mean, I decline wholly to give them my support. Among the proposed measures of adjustment, is a resolution for an amendment of the Constitution. It is as follows: "Article XII. No amendment of this Constitution having for its object any inter- * ference within the States, with the relation between their citizens and those de- * scribed in section second of the first article of the Constitution, as ' all other persons,' 'shall originate with any State that does not recognize that relation within its owa ' limits, or shall be valid without the consent of every one of the States comprising * the Union." I cannot consent as a Representative of the people to propose to the State Legis- latures any such amendment to the Constitution. By the provisions of tne fifth ar- ticle of the Constitution, the ratification by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the States, or by Conventions in three-fourths of the States, are required to make valid any proposed amendments thereof. It is apparently not possible that any alteration of the Constitution which the proposed amendment would prevent could be made. It is not contended that such amendment is required because of any possible contin- gency which could eff'ect such alteration. But it is proposed as a measure of recon- ciliation. No southern Stale has asked for such amendment. There is no reason to believe that any southern State would be affected by it or satisfied with it. But if such amendment could have any practical effect, it must be because it would give constitutional sanction to slavery which it has not now, or would furnish guarantees to slavery additional to those now furnished. I am willing that all the States shall have for all their interests the protection which the Constitution now affords. I am aware that the progress of civilization, the vary- ing interests of society, and the course of events, may require change in our organic law. If a National Convention shall hereafter be called, upon application by the States pursuant to the terms of the Constitution, such amendment as now proposed, if it shall be deemed to furnibh additional and substantial guarantees to slavery, may be fitly discussed. But I am wholly averse to the uncalled for initiation by Congress of any amendments, at this period of Christian civilization, which shall give more strength or greater perpetuity to usages, customs, or laws which recognize a right in one man to oppress, or defraud, or enslave another. Next in the order of proposed compro- mises is the Act for the admission of New Mexico. When this Territory was ac- quired by the United Slates, it was free by means of Mexican legislation. Being organized into a Territory, the Territorial legislature wrongfully and by unauthor- ized assumption of power, enacted a slave code of peculiar, original, and unequalled severity. That code now operates within the Territory, and would operate wilhia the State we are called on to make. It is now a slave Territory. It is proposed to make it a slave State. It is said that slavery will not go there because slave owners can do better with their slaves elsewhere. So long as that is true, slavery will not be to any great extent introduced. How long it may be true no one can tell. But slaves are there now by force of Territorial law. The fact that the number is small cannot affect the principle. I do not believe it to be right, nor do I believe it to be for the welfare of the Union that another slave Slate shall be at this time admitted. If it shall come in as a free State, or if being admitted it shall, as is believed by many, repeal the slave code and abolish slavery, the South will say, and I think with good reason, that they have been deceived, and the precise question now disturbing the condition of the country when the next southern territory shall be acquired will again distract us. New Mexico is not fit to be a State. Her citizens have not asked to be admitted as a State. The slave interest of the South will be deceived if being admitted she establishes free institutions. The Republicans will be deceived if being admitted now, she adheres to the code by which the Territorial Legislature attempted to legalize slavery. The amendment of the act for the rendition of fugitives from labor, is advocated as being an improvement of the law of 1850. And it is, as a piece of legislation, an improvement upon that law. It would not be easy to change for the worse the law of 1850. And, until it can be repealed or more humanely amended, I prefer to leave it as it is. My own views upon this subject are well known to you. I am of the opinion held by Mr. Webster, and more recently expressed by the South Carolinian disunionists m their Convention, that it was not the intention of the framers of our Constitution to confer upon Congress the power to legislate concern' ing the rendition of fugitives from labor. Mr. Crittenden has proposed amendments to our National Constitution in six articles. The first article provides that in all territory now held or hereafter acquired by the United Slates south of the line of 36° 30', slavery of the African race is hereby re- bognized as existing, and shall not be interfered with by Congress, but shall be pro- Iected as properly by all departments of the Territorial government. That article would doom to slavery by law, in advance of our ownership of the erritory, all the regions of Mexico and Central America now free ! When the people of the United States shall consent to such an amendment of their organic law, they will become a " slave nation." That time has not yet come. The second article takes from Congress the power to abolish slavery in places under its exdusive jurisdiction within the slave Slates. The third article abolishes their power to act within the District of Columbia, while Virginia or Maryland hold slaves, without their consent, or without consent of the inhabitants of the District or compensation to dissenting owners. The next article provides that Congress shall have no power to hinder the trans- portation of slaves, by land or water, from one Stale to another where slavery is recognized. This amendment would secure a transit through the free Slates. There are other amendments proposed, but these are the most important. When the people of the free States of the Union are prepared to incorporate these provisions into their organic law, another "Preamble" should be made, for these amendments would not be to '• secure the blessings of liberty," but to inflict the curse of slavery upon ourselves and our posterity. No changes in our law could be suggested which would more truly make slavery a National Institution. These propositions can receive no favor, and I have slated 8 them now because I believe that no argument against them will be desired except what the statement itselt affords. Such are the compromises of this year ! The people have rendered their judgment in favor of freedom in the Territories. The political power of slavery thereupon sunders the Union, demanding concession and new guarantees; and being defeated at the polls, insolently requ-res that the principles of its own political platform shall become constitutional law. The crisis In our National affairs is one of gravest moment. I assume with awe the profound responsibility that rests upon those who now represent the People. I was not chosen by you in view of such events. But I have regarded with jealous watchfulness the causes that have produced them, and I recognize the duties they enjoin. I am entreated in your behalf to make "concession " to slavery — to make the slave power which has ruled us heretofore more potent by Congressional legislation and by Constitutional amendment — so that it shall rule us hereafter also. It is said the Union may be saved by concession. I believe the Union has been dismembered now, because of power gained by unwise concessions heretofore made. I believe that only firm adherence to the principles of our present Constitution will restore to us a more perfect union and establish justice and insure to us domestic tranquility. THOMAS D. ELIOT. Washinpton, February, J861. H. Polkinhorn. Printer, Washijigton. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 011 895 775 1 • LIBRARY OF CC 011 895; LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 011 895 775 1 ^ -J y pH83 N