^r.^a*- --.^^Av4 
 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 
 ^1^^. 
 
 .:^ 
 
 jassi 
 
 
 ;-i5».:-> 
 
 fc^ 
 
 ^:^ 
 
 
 
 ^ -is^. 
 
r« LIBIURY OF CONGKKSS. 5; 
 
 ^/.y,. t^V^^^ 
 
 j^^^iDf "Z- \ 
 
 t UNITRI> STATES l)K AMKIMCA. 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. ALEX. -W^'^UEL, 
 
 IN DEFENCE OF THE 
 
 CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION. 
 
 DELIVERED AT A PUBLIC DINNER GIVEN TO HIM BY HIS 
 FELLOW-CITIZENS, AT DETROIT, 
 
 November 19, 1850. 
 
 1 have taken an oath to support the Constitution — the whole Constitution, not a part 
 The Union was born by fraternity, and it must live by fraterniiy, or perish forever. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 THOMAS RITCHIE, PRINTER. 
 
 1851. 
 
^^^-i 
 3^^ 
 
SPEECH 
 
 To the following sentiment : — ■ 
 Our guest, Hon. A. W. Buel : Eepresenting faith- 
 fully the Union sentiment of Michigan, supporting 
 earnestly and ably those measures of compromise by 
 which alone we could reasonably hope to insure pros- 
 perity to our Union and " domestic tranquillity" to 
 the several States, aiding by vote and voice the 
 friends of freedom everywhere, fearlessly and elo- 
 quently defending our State and city against misre- 
 presentation and insult, and upholding manfully, upon 
 all occasions, the Constitution of his country, he has 
 won the noblest title to our respect and gratitude. 
 Michigan will sustain him. 
 
 Mr. Buel responded : — 
 
 Fellow-Citizens: If I should be silent on this 
 occasion, or fail to respond to the sentiment which 
 you have just received with such tokens of approba- 
 tion, I feel that I should disobey the first promptings 
 of a grateful heart. To those with whom I have 
 been politically associated, and who, in times past, 
 have often given me their generous support, I owe a 
 deep debt of gratitude, which I can never forget. But 
 
I owe them something more. I owe an unfaltering 
 devotion to the principles they have advocated, during 
 that trying period, which is testing the stability of 
 the republic. 
 
 To enjoy the confidence of one's party is a source 
 of satisfaction. But there are times and occasions, 
 when the voice of party is in a measure hushed, and 
 ancient political landmarks for a season lose their im- 
 portance in the all-absorbing thought of the pubHc 
 safety. I find myself surrounded now not merely by 
 those, who have hitherto been my political friends 
 and associates. I perceive something more, which 
 gives character to the occasion. Among those who 
 participate in it, I recognize many, who have left 
 behind them the lines which have hitherto separated 
 us, and I cannot but perceive, that in their estimation 
 there is something new and extraordinary in the state 
 of our public affairs, which calls for new and extraor- 
 dinary action. You are assembled, therefore, my 
 friends, I choose to believe, not to honor the humble 
 individual who addresses you, but the principles, 
 Avhich you in common with him advocate. I think 
 I am not mistaken, when I say, that you are assem- 
 bled to honor the noble feelings which inspire us, 
 and to cultivate a spirit of national patriotism in 
 opposition to that spirit of sectionalism, which is fast 
 severing the bonds of our Union. Parties must exist, 
 as they ever have existed in all republics. But when 
 our country is in danger; when there exists a very 
 general and painful apprehension for its future safety; 
 
in short, when measures are being concerted for the over- 
 throio of the Constitution and the Union, there ought to 
 
 he hut ONE PARTY, AND THAT PARTY OURSELVES, ONE AND 
 INSEPARABLE. 
 
 The circumstances of this occasion are such as, I 
 trust, will justify the allusions I have made to myself, 
 as well as those I may feel constrained to make in 
 the continuation of my remarks. I cannot fail to 
 recognize in them a personal compliment to myself, 
 for which I desire to offer you my sincere thanks and 
 gratitude. I can possess and transmit to others no 
 more precious testimonial of your approbation than 
 that, by which you have seen fit to connect my name 
 and my service in Congress with that struggle for the 
 Union, which enrolls amongst its defenders the wisest 
 patriots and statesmen of the country. 
 
 But you will, I trust, permit me to look beyond all 
 personal compliments involved in our present festi- 
 vities, for the purpose of submitting some observa- 
 tions upon those topics, which have of late so fearfully 
 agitated and still agitate the public mind. There is 
 no man in this republic, the value of whose position, 
 compared with that of preserving the Union, does not 
 sink at once into utter insignificance. The times call 
 for something more than mere personal expediency. 
 In my opinion, that patriotism is unequal to the 
 emergency, which dares not meet openly and boldly 
 the dangers that surround us, be the personal conse- 
 quences what they may. 
 
 I have but recently returned to mingle again with 
 
6 
 
 my constituency, after an absence of nearly a year. 
 During that period, I have passed through the most 
 exciting and eventful scenes, that have distinguished 
 any session of Congress since the organization of the 
 government. The country has enjoyed an unexam- 
 pled degree of prosperity; we have lived under the 
 happiest and freest government on the face of the 
 globe, in the full enjoyment of all the blessings of 
 civil and religious liberty. The minister of the Gos- 
 pel, the professional man of every kind, the mechanic, 
 the merchant, and the farmer, have been free to prose- 
 cute their respective pursuits, and enjoy the fruits of 
 their labor. Our firesides have been undisturbed by 
 the unwelcome sound of war. Yet, in the midst of all 
 this prosperity, the nation has been profoundly agi- 
 tated. Congress has for nine long months debated, 
 and thousands of our fellow-citizens have advocated 
 a dissolution of that Union, under whose blessings 
 we have been steadily advancing to a degree of pros- 
 perity and renown never before attained by any 
 nation. 
 
 The signs of approaching evil were manifested on 
 the first assembling of the present Congress. In the 
 short space of a month a dark cloud gathered over 
 the Capitol of our country. It was removed for a 
 season, but has now returned; and there it still hangs, 
 more pregnant than before with evil and ruin, and 
 threatening ere long, unless dispersed, to Inui its bolts 
 of wrath, and sweep away the fabric of our Union. 
 *' Disunion," and that other word "dissolution," which, 
 
as an eloquent senator said, ought to be considered 
 the ^'^ unpronounceaUe word of our language," became 
 familiar and hackneyed. On the loth day of Decem- 
 ber, it being less than two weeks after the commence- 
 ment of the session, those words were applauded in 
 all parts of the House with the most violent clapping 
 of hands, as they fell from the lips of a distinguished 
 representative from the South. The scene was, it is 
 true, one of passion and excitement; but its worst 
 omen for the future was, that many representatives 
 joined in the applause, who had hitherto been distin- 
 guished for coolness, deliberation, and patriotic devo- 
 tion to the Union. A few months rolled on; but 
 affairs, instead of growing better, became worse. The 
 oiant minds of the Senate — men who had seen their 
 thirty and forty years' service in the halls of Con- 
 gress — now began to tremble before the signs of the 
 times. In the strong language of Mr. Webster, " the 
 imprisoned ivinds seemed to have been let loase" 
 
 Such was the state of things, in which I found 
 myself involved, soon after the assembling of Con- 
 gress. I thought it well became us to pause, and turn 
 for a season from the usual excitements of business 
 and party, and consider, if there were not some means, 
 by which we could forever put to rest an agitation so 
 serious and alarming in its nature and consequences. 
 Extremists upon one side claimed everything for the 
 North, and extremists upon the other everything for 
 the South. It was evident, therefore, that there could 
 be no settlement without some mutucd concession. 
 
8 
 
 Such was the state of things, when, in the spirit of 
 concihation and a lofty patriotism, Mr. CLay brought 
 forward his compromise resokitions. They reLated 
 chiefly to the settlement of the Texan boundary, the 
 establishment of territorial governments for Utah and 
 New Mexico, the admission of California, the abolition 
 of the slave trade in the District of Columbia, and 
 the surrender of fugitive slaves. The resolution upon 
 the latter sul^ject was in these words : 
 
 ^'Resolved, That more effectual provisions ought to be made by law, 
 according to the requirements of the Constitution, for the restitution and 
 delivery of persons bound to service or labor in any State who may 
 escape into any other State or Territory in the Union." 
 
 These resolutions were referred to the compromise 
 committee, consisting of an equal representation from 
 the two great parties, and from both sections of the 
 Union, having Mr. Clay for chairman. The commit- 
 tee reported a series of compromise bills, usually call- 
 ed the "compromise system," or "peace measures." 
 These consisted of the so-called "omnibus bill," which 
 provided for settling the Texas boundary, establishing 
 territorial governments over New Mexico and Utah, 
 and for admitting California entire as a new State; a 
 bill for abolishing the slave trade in the District of 
 Columbia, and a bill providing for the more effectual 
 surrender of fugitive slaves. The "omnibus bill" was 
 first considered, and, after several months of exciting 
 and angry discussion, was defeated. The friends of 
 the Union, not yet despairing of being able to effect 
 some adjustment between the North and South, now 
 
rallied in support of each compromise bill or measure 
 by itself. I will not detain you with a detailed his- 
 tory of these bills in the Senate, and the various 
 amendments offered or adopted, and the further ex- 
 citing discussions, which were at last terminated with 
 the separate adoption by the Senate of each measure. 
 These measures came to the House as they passed 
 the Senate, the Texan boundary bill being first in the 
 series. I should weary your patience by undertaking 
 to analyze them on this occasion. I cannot say, that 
 I approved of every provision contained in these vari- 
 ous bills. But I felt, that there was a pressing neces- 
 sity for adjusting speedily in some form the difficult 
 questions, which now, more than ever, threatened the 
 future peace of the country. With time and angry 
 discussion, the aspect of affairs had become much 
 more alarming. Texas had been concerting measures 
 for occupying the disputed territory. Almost the en- 
 tire population of the South was beginning to sympa- 
 thize actively with her. Governor Quitman, of Mis- 
 sissippi, had published a letter to the effect that, in 
 the event of a collision of arms, or great danger 
 thereof, he would deem it his duty to convene the 
 legislature of his State, and recommend the adoption 
 of prompt and efficient measures to aid Texas. But, 
 in the mean time, the late President had taken mea- 
 sures for concentrating troops at Santa Fe, under the 
 apprehension of an open conflict with Texas, and the 
 present President had sent his special message to 
 Congress, earnestly urging upon that body the import- 
 
10 
 
 ance of a speedy adjustment, but at the same time 
 expressing his determination to maintain possession 
 of the disputed territory with the mihtary power of 
 the government, until the question should be settled. 
 The Texas legislature was holding a special session, 
 and devising means for raising several regiments of 
 troops to be marched to Santa Fe. Thus were mat- 
 ters rapidly approaching the crisis of civil war, the 
 end of which, when once commenced, no one could 
 foresee. 
 
 But there was much more now to excite attention 
 in the general aspect of affairs. The Nashville Con- 
 vention had been held, composed of representatives 
 from nearly every Southern State, and many of them 
 had been sent there, not by excited popular conven- 
 tions, but in pursuance of special State legislation. 
 That convention had issued its address to the coun- 
 trj^, which Mr. Webster, on the floor of the Senate, 
 pronounced a "disunion argument," and had adjourn- 
 ed, to meet again after the adjournment of Congress. 
 
 Besides, South Carolina, it was known, was quite 
 ripe for secession, and was waiting only for Southern 
 support. Georgia — even the patriotic State of Geor- 
 gia, which had stood by Jackson and the Union in 
 former days of trial — had at last yielded to the pres- 
 sure of agitation. Its legislature had declared her 
 settled hostility to the admission of California and 
 the passage of the Wilmot Proviso, in the most so- 
 lemn manner, by providing by lo.w for a special con- 
 
11 
 
 vention, to be elected and assembled upon the hap- 
 pening of either of those events. 
 
 There was another feature in Congress, that could 
 not fail to attract the attention of the friends of ad- 
 justment and of the Union — the progress of extreme 
 but opposite opinions — opinions, which were not in 
 themselves identical with disunion ; but which, being 
 utterly irreconcilable, if persisted in, must necessarily 
 lead to disunion. I cannot say, that, at the opening 
 of the session, there was a disunionist in Congress. 
 Even Mr. Calhoun was highly offended at an expres- 
 sion of a senator, which he understood as intimating, 
 that he was a disunionist. I do not wish or deem it 
 proper for me here to reflect upon any portion of the 
 honorable body, of which I am now a member; yet I 
 can truly say, that, since the meeting of Congress, ex- 
 treme opinions had made an alarming progress in that 
 body as well as amongst the people. These opinions 
 were so extreme but opposite, that, it was manifest, 
 they could never be reconciled without concession and 
 compromise. There were the Northern extreme and 
 the Southern extreme, both of which were as wide 
 apart as the poles ; and yet both in Congress for many 
 months joined hands and votes against the compro- 
 mise measures, as a scheme for adjusting all the diffi- 
 cult questions, and restoring peace and harmony to 
 the country. 
 
 As for myself, I was but a young and humble 
 member of the body. My influence might not pro- 
 ceed beyond my own vote ; but I felt even that to be 
 
12 
 
 a solemn responsibility, when I believed, as I did, 
 that, to its own extent at least, it might be a vote for 
 or against the preservation of the Constitution and 
 the Union. Between the friends of the compromise 
 measures from the North and South, there was an 
 implied faith, that they would sustain them all in 
 their essential features. Without such implication, 
 it is well known they could never have passed. 
 
 Under such circumstances, what was my duty? 
 Was it to vote with those, Avhose opinions and prac- 
 tice, if not designing, were at least, as I thought, fast 
 tending to a dissolution of the Union ? Was it to 
 vote with either extreme ? No. I would not, I could 
 not do it. I owed it to my honor, to sustain in good 
 faith the entire series of measures in their substantial 
 features. I owed it to myself, to my honest convic- 
 tions, to my sincere apprehensions as to the future; 
 yes, I owed it to my conscience, to my oath, to my 
 COUNTRY, to pursue such a course, as I thought w^ould 
 best restore peace and harmony to a divided people, 
 avert the dangers of civil war, and perpetuate the 
 Union with its unnumbered blessings. I determined 
 to do, what I thought was my duty as a national 
 representative, regardless of personal consequences; 
 and the consciousness of having been actuated by the 
 most sacred of all wishes and motives, is to me an 
 ample defence against the detraction and calumny, 
 which have recently been lavished upon me without 
 measure. 
 
 Nine months of angry discussion rolled away, before 
 
13 
 
 the first of the compromise measures finally passed 
 the House of Representatives. The others speedily 
 followed, and their passage was attended with such a 
 spontaneous outburst of public rejoicing, as never be- 
 fore had been witnessed at the Capitol. Heartfelt 
 congratulations, bands of music, public processions, 
 popular meetings and addresses in the streets, bon- 
 fires, and the firing of cannon testified to the common 
 joy; all seemed to speak out, "the Union is now 
 SAFE." Even many rejoiced, who had steadily op- 
 posed the adjustment measures. The country re- 
 joiced. The leading public journals of opposite poli- 
 tical parties rejoiced, with congratulations to their 
 readers ; and it was to me a source of personal satis- 
 faction and pride, that but few, if any, testified more 
 strongly their approbation, than those of my own 
 district and State. 
 
 But now the scene has suddenly changed, and the 
 theatre of nullification has been transferred from 
 others to ourselves. We cannot shut our eyes to the 
 fact, that a fresh storm of agitation has come upon 
 us, which, if not stayed, threatens most seriously the 
 continuance of the republic. The patriotic and in- 
 spiring language, which Jackson once addressed to 
 others, his spirit now addresses to us ; and the friends 
 of peace and fraternity are once more called upon to 
 stand by the Constitution and the Union. 
 
 Amongst the measures of adjustment was one for 
 the more efiectual surrender of fugitive slaves, accord- 
 ing to the requirements of the Constitution. It was 
 
14 
 
 well understood, that such a bill should pass, as part 
 of the system of peace measures. The Constitution 
 of the United States (art. iv., sec. 2) declares, that 
 fugitives from service or labor " shall he delivered up 
 on claim of the party to wliom such service or labor may 
 he duer Not may he, hut " shall he delivered up,'' is 
 the language. It does not simply confer upon Con- 
 gress power, but commands and makes it the duty of 
 Congress to act upon the subject, and pass such laws 
 as may effectually fulfil the requirement of the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 The Constitution, however, is not the only source, 
 to which we may apply for instruction and authority 
 upon the subject. The ordinance of 1787 has lately 
 Ijeen frequently invoked as high authority upon other 
 subjects, and by many, who now advocate an abso- 
 lute repeal of the law to which I allude. I have 
 o'reat respect for that ordinance, and to many, upon 
 questions of freedom, it has had almost the authority 
 of the Delphian Oracle. In regard to fugitive slaves, it 
 is almost an exact duplicate of so much of the Consti- 
 tution as pertains to the same subject; and here is to 
 be found, what has been recently called the Wilmot 
 Proviso, resting side hy side, in the same hed and same 
 paragraph, with a provision for the surrender of fugi- 
 tice slaves. 
 
 Ordinance of 1787, article G: '-There shall be nei- 
 ther slavery nor involuntary servitude in said terri- 
 tories, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes 
 whereof the party shall have been duly convicted: 
 
15 
 
 Provided, always, That any person escaping into the 
 same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed 
 in any one of the original States, such fugitive may 
 be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person 
 claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid." 
 
 It was in accordance with this provision of the or- 
 dinance of 1787, and that of the Constitution from 
 which I have quoted, that the fugitive slave act of 
 1793 was passed and approved by Washington. •■^' 
 
 * Amongst the acts of the hast day of John Adams's administra- 
 tion, may be found a remarkable one, upon the subject of the surren- 
 der of fugitive slaves, and to which the public attention has not 
 hitherto been called. It is the more remarkable, as it throws much 
 light upon the Constitution, as construed half a century since, by 
 placing fugitives from justice and fugitives from labor on a like foot- 
 ing, in respect to their rights in the district, to which they may escape. 
 
 An Act supplementary to the Act entitled " An Act concerning 
 the District of Columbia." 
 
 Sect. 6. And he it farther enacted, That in all cases where the 
 Constitution or laws of the United States provide that criminals and 
 fugitives from justice or persons held to labor in any State, escapin-^ 
 into another State, shall be delivered up, the chief justice of the said 
 district shall be, and he is hereby empowered and required to cause to 
 be apprehended and delivered up such criminal, fugitive from justice, 
 or persons fleeing from service, as the case may be, who shall be 
 found within the district, in the t^anie manner and under the same 
 regulations as the executive authority of the several States are required 
 to do the same; and all executive and judicial officers are hereby re- 
 quired to obey ail lawful precepts or other process issued for that pur- 
 pose, and to be aiding and assisting in such delivery. 
 
 Approved March 3d, 1801. 
 
 JOHN ADAMS. 
 
 (See Laws, U. S., 2 V. p. 116.) 
 
16 
 
 This law miglit have been sufficient for its purposes, 
 had its execution not been obstructed. But it is well 
 known, that certain individuals at the North, compa- 
 ratively few in numbers, entertaining extreme opin- 
 ions upon the subject of slavery, have thrown such 
 obstacles in the way of its execution, that it has 
 proved ineffectual for its designs. This led to earnest 
 complaints by the South, that the Constitution was 
 practically nullified in regard to this subject, and the 
 recent act of Congress is an amendment to the law of 
 1793, designed effectually to carry out its principles, 
 and in good faith comply with the requirement of the 
 Constitution. It originates no new principle in re- 
 spect to the liberty of the person claimed as a slave. 
 The essential difference in respect to him is really in 
 his favor, inasmuch as, by the law of 1793, the claim- 
 ant was authorized to arrest and seize his fugitive 
 slave by force and without process, whilst the law of 
 1850 authorizes legal proceedings in the first instance. 
 A seizure by force, even if legal, canuot but be repug- 
 nant to our feelings, and a resort to the forms of law 
 was considered as more in accordance with the spirit 
 of our institutions. 
 
 There are other respects, in which the late law 
 differs from that of 1793, but they do not change 
 substantially the rights of the slave. They are de- 
 signed chiefly to insure the execution of the law after 
 the right of the claimant has been established. 
 
 I ought not to omit to notice, in this connection, 
 some of the gross misrepresentations of this law, 
 
17 
 
 which have been industriously circulated by means of 
 inflammatory handbills, and by inflammatory articles, 
 contained in those journals, which were once loud in 
 praising the compromise measures, the fugitive slave 
 laio included. Many have doubtless honestly yielded 
 to these misrepresentations, but time and reflection 
 will correct the errors into which they have fallen. 
 Even some, I regret to say, of an intelhgent and 
 patriotic clergy, have been led astray by these inflam- 
 matory misrepresentations, and their weight has fallen 
 upon me even from the pulpit. I trust they will cor- 
 rect the error, not for my sake merely, bat for thc^ 
 sake of those, whom they have been instrumental in 
 misleading. I rely with confidence upon their readi- 
 ness to do justice to me, or at least to those of whom 
 they are spiritual advisers. 
 
 The law was charged with being unconstitutional. 
 That error has been dispelled, and no man of repu- 
 tation will now hazard it by denying the constitution- 
 ality of the law. It was said, too, that the \-d\\ 
 abolishes the right of trial by jury, a^s if the fugitive 
 enjoyed that right under the law of 1793, and it Avas 
 taken away by the law of 1850. He may test the 
 question of his freedom in the State from Avhich he 
 escapes, by jury trial, like an}' white citizen, but he 
 has never under any law of the Unitcxi States had 
 that right in the State to which he escapes. Thus in 
 this respect the laws of 1793 and 1850 are identicaUy 
 the same. I know of many upon mIioiu this error 
 has been succcssfidly imposed. Many were made to 
 2 
 
18 
 
 brieve too, that the law suspends the writ of haheas 
 corpus, and this error could not he corrected until it 
 had led to fixed prejudices, over which truth does not 
 easily prevail. It is now well understood and con- 
 ceded, that the law could not constitutionally, and in 
 fact does not, suspend the writ of habeas corpus. 
 But the list of gross misrepresentations does not stop 
 here. People were told, that the law of 1850 im- 
 poses a penalty of 81,000 on every one, who shall 
 refuse to aid in the arres^t of a fugitive slave. There 
 is no such provision in the law, and it does not 
 impose the penalty of a single farthing for such refu- 
 sal. It has been also represented, that all the fees and 
 expenses attending the proceedings under this law are 
 to be paid out of the public treasury. No grosser 
 misrepresentation could have been circulated, since 
 the law expressly provides, that all such fees and ex- 
 penses shall be ^^paid hy such claimants, their agents 
 or attorneys, whether such supposed fugitive from ser- 
 vice or labor be ordered to be deUvered to such claim- 
 ants bv the final determination of such commissioner 
 or not," and in the late case arising in this city, I am 
 informed, that such fees and expenses were paid by 
 the claimant to the amount of several hundred dol- 
 lars. It is true that, in the case of a threatened res- 
 cue by force, after a decision in favor of the claimant, 
 the marshal may be required to remove the slave out 
 of the State at the expense of the government. This, 
 however, cannot be done without proof of a threatened 
 rescue. If those, who make this complaint against the 
 
19 
 
 law, would allow it to be executed, the ground of the 
 comjjlaint would not exist. This provision evidently 
 assumes, that it would be unjust to compel the claim- 
 ant, to bear the expense of overcoming a mob assem- 
 bled to resist the execution of the law, after that law 
 has decided in his favor. 
 
 Such are some of the many errors, which have 
 been industriously circulated among the people con- 
 cerning the fugitive slave law. Many have no doubt 
 honestly confided in them, and they may justly hold 
 those responsible, whose sujDerio'r means of information 
 ought to protect themselves as well as others against 
 such misrepresentations. 
 
 I cannot with propriety further detain you with a 
 detailed legal exposition of the provisions of the law 
 of 1850. I desire, however, to quote a passage from 
 the opinion of Attorney-General Crittenden, given to 
 President Fillmore before he approved the bill. Says 
 he, in that opinion : — 
 
 " This bill, therefore, confers no right on the owner of the fugitive 
 slave. It only gives him an appointed and peaceable remedy," &c. 
 
 And again he says : — 
 
 "The act of February 12, 1793, before alluded to, so far as it re- 
 spects any constitutional question that can arise out of this bill, is 
 identical with it. It authorizes the like arrest of the fugitive slave, 
 the like trial, the like judgment, the like certificate, with the like au- 
 thority to the owner, by virtue of that certificate as his warrant, to 
 remove him to the State or Territory from which he escaped ; and the 
 constitutionality of that act in all those particulars has been affirmed 
 by the adjudications of State tribunals and by the courts of the United 
 States without a single dissent, so far as I know." — (Baldwin's C C 
 Pt., 577, 579.) 
 
20 
 
 I have thus far alluded to the fugitive slave law, 
 not for the purpose of defending it in every single pro- 
 vision, but for sustaining it as one of the great com- 
 promise measures designed for the pacification of the 
 country. It may in some respects he improved or 
 modified, and I shall be happy in returning to my 
 seat in Congress, a slave to no pledges, which will 
 prevent me from voting and acting upon any question 
 of amendment or modification, as my conscience, my 
 oath, and my best judgment may dictate. Few hu- 
 man laws are made perfect in the first instance. I 
 desire to see this law made as perfect as practicable, 
 with a view of rendering exact justice to the slave, 
 and at the same time standing by the Constitution of 
 my country. If it were a question of mere philan- 
 throj)y or humanity towards the slave, I would go as 
 far as any in his favor. But I will not go one step 
 with any, who desire to break down or leap over the 
 barriers of the Constitution. I know of no advantage, 
 which I can put in competition with that sacred in- 
 strument, as the basis — the sole basis — of the Ame- 
 rican Union. 
 
 The absolute repeal of the law, therefore, presents 
 a very different question ; and that leads me to sub- 
 mit a few remarks upon the present state of affairs. 
 Elections of a very exciting character have just been 
 held in several of the Northern States, and I have 
 been advised, that, in inan}^ instances — and I know 
 it to be true in some — members of Congress have been 
 elected upon solemn and written pledges to an abso- 
 
21 
 
 lute repeal of the law in question, without amendment 
 or modification. In some instances, all other ques- 
 tions have been overlooked, and repeal has formed the 
 single and only issue. It is this fact, which now gives 
 just cause for fresh apprehension to the friends of the 
 Union, both North and South. Eepeal, repeal, re- 
 peal, is now the watchword of new agitation.* 
 
 What in substance are the questions thus present- 
 ed? They are, whether peace and fraternity shall 
 reign between the States of this confederacy, or agita- 
 tion triumph with all its present evils and future dan- 
 gers ; whether we will stand by the compromise mea- 
 sures of Congress, or undo all that was done, after 
 nine months of incessant and intense agitation; in 
 fact, whether we will stand by the Union and the 
 Constitution. Every candid observer must see, that 
 repeal is disunion. I have had some advantages for 
 knowing the exact state of public sentiment amongst 
 our Southern brethren; and it is my sincere convic- 
 tion, that an absolute repeal of the law would inevi- 
 tably lead to disunion, and disunion must lead to the 
 horrors of a civil war, such as has never before been 
 witnessed, and the end of which no man can foresee. 
 
 * Mr. Buel's eoiupetitor for Congress at the late election in Miclii- 
 gan, published a letter, in which he denounced the Fugitive Slave 
 Law in strong language, and, without suggesting or alluding to any 
 amendment or modification of it, closed with the following words : — 
 
 " I AM FOR ITS SPEEDY REPEAL." 
 
 (Signed) E. J. PENNIMAN. 
 
 (Dated) Plymouth, Oct. 18, 1850. 
 
22 
 
 Whoever, therefore, is for repeal, is for disunion, 
 though he may not design it. Whoever is for repeal, 
 must resolve to disregard the positive requirement of 
 the Constitution, that fugitive slaves "shall be deli- 
 vered up," In the language of Mr. Webster : " I put 
 it to all the sober and sound minds at the North, as 
 a question of morals and a question of conscience. 
 What right have they, in all their legislative capacity 
 or any other, to endeavor to get round this Constitu- 
 tion, to embarrass the free exercise of the rights se- 
 cured by the Constitution, to the person whose slaves 
 escaped from them ? None at all — none at all. Nei- 
 ther in the forum of conscience nor before the face of 
 the Constitution are they justified, in my opinion." 
 
 For myself, therefore, entertaining such views, I 
 cannot join in the agitation cry of repeal. Upon this 
 question, I say it boldly, I am a peace man, an anti- 
 agitation man, a compromise man, a Uxion man. I 
 stand before you as such, and wish to address you 
 as such, by whatever party name you have hitherto 
 been designated. All other party questions, in my 
 opinion, sink into insignificance, compared with those 
 raised by any issue, that involves ultimately the peace 
 of the country and the dissolution of this Union. 
 
 But absolute repeal of one of the adjustment mea- 
 sures is demanded. I put this question to the North, 
 as a question of justice, of right and wrong : Is it just 
 for the North now to hold on to all she gained by the 
 compromise, and take back what she or rather what 
 the Constitution gave to the South? Has not the 
 
23 
 
 Nortli great reason for being satisfied with tlie com- 
 promise measures? We gained the admission of the 
 free State of Cahfornia without any division of her 
 territory. We gained territorial governments over 
 Utah and New Mexico without recognition of slavery. 
 We gained the abolition of the slave traffic in the 
 District of Columbia. And, as a compensation for all 
 this, what did we do? We agreed to abide by the 
 Constitution, and passed a law to carry out its require- 
 ments in respect to the surrender of fugitive slaves. 
 
 It is plain to see wdiere the difficulty arises. It 
 comes from a species of extremism, peculiar to each 
 section of the Union. From this extremism has sprung 
 that most baneful of all ideas, the idea of sectionalism ^ 
 of geograpliical parties, against which we have been 
 warned by the Father of our Country, and which he 
 seemed to foresee as the rock of our future danger. 
 This sectionalism claims on one side everything for 
 the North, and on the other everything for the South. 
 Hence it is the natural mother of national feud and 
 discord. Here are our Scylla and Charybdis. If we 
 would avoid them in the future, this spirit of section- 
 alism must be supplanted wdth that of nationalism. 
 We must think more of the whole Union, I do not 
 say, less of its parts. We must cultivate a national, 
 instead of a sectional patriotism; and, above all, we 
 must cultivate that spirit of fraternity, in icJiich the 
 Union had its birth, hy whicli it lives, and icithout ichich 
 it must die. 
 
 Can there be a false.r standard of patriotism than 
 
24 
 
 that erected by the sectionalism to which I have 
 alluded? It is the standard oi lyroscriptwn — for it 
 proscribes every locality save that in Avhich it origin- 
 ates. It is the standard of extremism — for it allows 
 no middle course. It is the standard oi partiality and 
 Injustice — for it seeks legislation to benefit a part, ra- 
 ther than the whole. It exists equally on both sides 
 of the Union, and hence comes the danger. It calls 
 upon Southern representatives to stand up and claim 
 all for the South, and Northern representatives to 
 stand up and claim all for the North. Well, suppose 
 this shall be done. What, then, will become of the 
 Union ? Who will be left to stand up and claim any- 
 thing for that ? None — none. She will cease to exist, 
 for she will be converted into two hostile sections, 
 each battling for itself, and none for her. Such is 
 the inevitable tendency of that sectionalism, which 
 has already well nigh severed the bonds of the Union. 
 Where, tlicn, ought I to be found in Congress? 
 Shall I act with either sectional extreme? I cannot 
 do it, since I regard the spirit of sectionalism as the 
 parent of our greatest dangers. I say now, as I have 
 said in the House of Representatives, that I am not 
 "merely the representative of the district, State, or 
 region of country from which I come, but of the ivhole 
 Union, and I am proud of it — all and every partr 
 You will pardon, I trust, these personal allusions to 
 myself. The occasion and circumstances b}^ which I 
 am attended will, I am sure, justify them in ^-our 
 estimation. I can now recur with satisfaction to 
 
25 
 
 my sentiments, as they were openly avowed to the 
 convention by which I was nominated, as a candidate 
 for election to Congress in 1848. I quote from my 
 remarks on that occasion : 
 
 "If elected, I shall approach the discharge of my duties with diffi- 
 dence, but firmness; and in that event offer a pledge of all my time 
 and services, that I may render myself a worthy representative of the 
 flourishing emporium of our flourishing State, worthy of the district 
 whose interests may be more immediately confided to me, and worthy 
 of the peninsular State. 
 
 "With a view to other and wider interests, I should hope to render 
 myself a worthy representative of the North and West; but with a 
 still more comi^rehensive vision, I should hope not to overlook my du- 
 ties and ohUgations to the Constitution. I should hope to become a 
 worthy representative of the Union. The Union— there is a power in 
 that word, which with me overcomes all. It has a charm, which I can- 
 not resist. It speaks with a siren voice, that wins to its embrace. 
 From childhood I have been taught to venerate it; and that, which 
 was worthy of veneration then, now hangs in the memory holier still, 
 as a household treasure upon the family altar. I hope never to assist 
 in marring that national picture, which is adorned with the deeds and 
 heroes of the Revolution, and with the glorious achievements of two 
 subsequent wars, that have covered us over with imperishable fame 
 and renown. I hope never to aid in drawing that black line of dis- 
 union, which can never be drawn without dividing asunder the graves 
 of the Revolution." 
 
 At the same time, in all my public addresses imme- 
 diately preceding my election, in respect to legislation 
 hy Congress against slavery in the new and free terri- 
 tory, I held to the expediency of non-intervention. I 
 then fully believed, and endeavored to show, that this 
 plan, if carried out, would result satisfactorily to the 
 country; and the condition of affairs in Congress has 
 
26 
 
 proven it to be the only plan, upon which the danger- 
 ous question could be settled. For this view of the 
 question I received no small share of censure from 
 my political opponents and their leading journals, and 
 I was even publicly and in writing invited to a dis- 
 cussion of it through the district, by my competitor, 
 who pledged himself in the letter of invitation to the 
 opposite opinion. Having apprehension of the dan- 
 gers, which have now nearly overtaken us, I then 
 indulged in and stood committed to the sentiments 
 above referred to, and I endeavored to secure their 
 success in the passage of the late peace measures of 
 Congress. 
 
 But, gentlemen, we hear it constantly said "there 
 is no danger." What do people expect? Shall we 
 look for signs in the heavens to warn us of the future? 
 Must an earthquake come to arouse us from our slum- 
 ber? We go about inquiring "what new advices?" 
 Can anything be more new, than that Americans 
 should be debating the dissolution of the Union ? We 
 may meet the danger when it is actually upon us, but 
 it may then be beyond our control. It may then be 
 too late. It is far wiser to prevent than to combat 
 the dangers of the future. 
 
 Our greatest cause of danger is our blindness to our 
 actual condition and to the events that are passing 
 around us. We have seen Congress unable to legis- 
 late for a period of nhic months. The wheels of go- 
 vernment were almost stopped for the want of appro- 
 priations. For a long period the government, with 
 
27 
 
 all its officers, civil, military, and executive, was 
 without money. The army was unpaid. The navy 
 was unpaid. Our foreign ministers were unpaid; and, 
 in fact, every branch of the government was threat- 
 ened with dissolution, not by the sword, but by simple 
 stoppage. Conventions have been held, one after 
 another, all over the country, some for Union and 
 some for Disunion. The laws of the Union are threat- 
 ened with resistance in the South and with resistance 
 in the North. 
 
 Shall we look further into the sad picture? What, 
 then, is now going on at Nashville ? A convention 
 from the Southern States reassembled and reopened 
 with the language of secession. What is Georgia 
 doing? Engaged in electing a convention to delibe- 
 rate upon secession. What is Mississippi doing? Her 
 governor has called a special session of the legislature 
 to consider of secession. Look at the progress of se- 
 cession sentiments in Alabama. I need not allude to 
 the state of things in South Carolina. Hear the lan- 
 guage of the patriotic State of North Carolina, and 
 many other States, which have never before faltered 
 in their attachment to the Union, all solemnly declar- 
 ing, that, upon this fresh agitation, if successful, hangs 
 its final destiny. Brethren of one great family are 
 beginning to look upon each other as enemies. The 
 fraternal cords of the Union have been broken— the 
 religious cords have been partially sundered. The 
 process of social and religious disorganization has 
 commenced even amoug ourselves. Ancient party 
 
28 
 
 lines and landmarks are beginning to disappear, and 
 former party questions are fast sinking into the vortex 
 of sectionalism. Yet we go on, as if thoughtless of 
 the present or future, hlind to luhat is actually hefore 
 our eyes, deaf to the sounds hrougld to our ears upon 
 every hreeze, and dumb, exceft to lull ourselves to sleep 
 with the soft tuords, " there is no danger." 
 
 Whilst such is the fearful progress of disorganiza- 
 tion about us, we maybe able to measure the j^resent ; 
 but who can measure the future ? Who can tell, when 
 and where it is to stop? From what is passing around 
 us we should draw some useful lessons. Our danger 
 springs not so much from the adoption of aggressive 
 measures against either section of the Union, as 
 from threatening and agitating them. Agitation has 
 brought us to our present condition, without the adop- 
 tion of that measure, which our Southern brethren 
 regarded with so much hostility. But there is now a 
 renewed agitation, started upon a more dangerous 
 basis than the former. If persisted in, who can tell 
 to what point it may drive us, that shall be short of 
 anarchy and civil war — civil war, not only with our 
 Southern brethren, but at last with ourselves ? 
 
 I am aware, fellow-citizens, that I have used strong 
 language ; but supineness and timidity are unequal to 
 the times. I may err in my apprehensions of the 
 future. I wish I could be assured of it. But if I do, 
 I err in connnon with the ablest and wisest states- 
 men and patriots of the land. They have thought 
 and declared that there was and is danger. I have 
 
29 
 
 read the warning language of McLean, that "there is 
 enough in the general aspect of our affairs, if not to 
 alarm, at least to admonish us, that every cord which 
 binds us together should be strengthened." 
 
 I have seen Cass standing up, like the strong oak 
 of the forest, breasting the storm of sectionalism from 
 the North and the South -, and there, too, side by side 
 and shoulder to shoulder with him, stood Clay and 
 Webster. To this list might be added the names of 
 Cobb and Boyd, of Dickinson, Douglass, Houston, 
 Foote, and many others, too numerous to mention, of 
 both 23olitical parties and both sections of the Union. 
 I have seen all these with true patriotism leaping over 
 the boundaries of party, forgetting all personal or 
 party feuds, and mingling their voices in one common 
 effort to turn away the storm. Ought we, my friends, 
 to hesitate in following their patriotic example? 
 
 But we are told, that we can fight for the Union. 
 So we can, and we may be successful. But what 
 kind of a republic — Avliat sort of a free government — 
 what sort of an American Union will that be, bound 
 together by the sword and by cords drenched in fra- 
 ternal blood? If needs be, I trust that the Union 
 contains enough of strong arms and brave hearts to 
 sustain it under all contingencies. Let us hold on to 
 it, as the dearest object of our affections. Let us 
 cling to it the stronger, as the storm rages more 
 fiercely. It is the property of our children as well as 
 of ourselves. It is the property of the world, and is 
 the world's minister of Christianity, civilization, and 
 
30 
 
 liberty. I ^visll to see it preserved at all hazards, but 
 preserved by the ties of affection rather than by the 
 sword. I wish to see its great arsenal of defence in 
 our hearts. The Union was born by fraternity, 
 
 AND IT MUST LIVE BY FRATERNITY, OR PERISH FOREVER. 
 
 [Mr. Buel was here presented by David Stewart, 
 Esq., in behalf of the committee of arrangements, 
 with a copy of the Constitution of the United States, 
 printed upon parchment, and bearing the inscription, 
 
 " PRESENTED TO 
 
 HON. ALEXANDER W. BUEL, 
 
 REPRESENTATIVE IN THE THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS FROM MICHIGAN, 
 
 As a testimonial of regard for his consistent support in Congress 
 of the Constitution of his Country, 
 
 AT A PUBLIC DINNER GIVEN TO HIM BY HIS FELLOW-CITIZEKS AT DETROIT, 
 
 November 19, 1850." 
 
 Mr. Buel thus continued his remarks : — ] 
 
 I desire to express to those, in whose behalf I have 
 been presented with this testimonial of regard my 
 most grateful acknowledgments. I can possess no 
 more valuable evidence of the regard of my fellow- 
 citizens than that, by which they have seen lit to con- 
 nect my service in Congress with the defence of the 
 Constitution of my country. I shall thereby be ever 
 reminded afresh of my duty and obligation to sus- 
 tain it. 
 
 I regard this sacred instrument as the bond of our 
 national Union, the basis of our national safety. Its 
 fabric was raised by the hands of our revohitionary 
 
oi 
 
 fathers; its foundations were cemented bj their 
 blood. Ought we to do less for it than they ? They 
 have transmitted it to us as the most precious legacy 
 they could bequeath, and not for us alone, but for our 
 children and our children's children. Let us, then, 
 swear to stand by it and defend it to the last extre- 
 mity, in these the days of its trial. It is better to 
 contend for the first than the last line of the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 For myself, I have taken an oath to support that 
 Constitution — the loliole Constitution, not a part. 
 What right have I to hold on to one-half and reject 
 the other? None at all — none at all. I shall endeavor 
 faithfully to fulfil my oath, my whole oath. He has 
 read history to but little advantage, who has not 
 learned the wisdom of the maxim — "Zea? suprema, 
 salus poindiy It is my present and will be my last 
 hope, that the independent rights of the States, as 
 secured by this instrument, may not be violated — that 
 each may hold fast upon the Constitution — that its 
 guarantees may be ever held sacred and inviolable — 
 that the Union, with its unmeasured blessings, may 
 be perpetuated as our most precious inheritance, and 
 its Star of Promise fulfil the just expectations of our 
 children and an admirins: world. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 C<^,u 
 
 2' S-* 
 
 
 ^i:^.