04 
 
 g55. 
 
 
aass_-L 4 3 
 
"*f 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 EOS. SALMOS P. CHASE 
 
 DELIVERED AT THE 
 
 REPUBLICAN MASS MEETING 
 
 In Cincinnati, August 21, 1855 ; 
 
 TOGETHER WITH EXTRACTS FROM HIS SPEECHES IN THE SENATE 
 ON KINDRED SUBJECTS. 
 
 PRINTED BY THe'^O^HW^^A^E^JOURNAL COMPANY. 
 
 18 5 5. 
 
MR. CHASE'S SPEECH 
 
 AT THE REPUBLICAN MASS MEETING, 
 ClDcionat], Aagast 21, 1S55. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Ftllnw Cititens : 
 
 More than thirty years have passed away 
 Bince I, thea a mere boy, became a dweller ia 
 this city. Few of those whom I now see before 
 me have been here so long: to none of you, I 
 am sure, is the prosperity of this beautiful city, 
 or the advancement, in all respects, of her noble 
 institutions, more dear. A boy citizen of the 
 city before most of you were born, I have wit- 
 nessed her progress with mingled pride, joy and 
 gratitude; and in roy measure and sphere have 
 diligently sought, and shall always seek, to pro- 
 mote her welfare. Here in Cincinnati are all 
 my interests centered. If she prospers. I par- 
 take in her prosperity. If she suffers, I, as well 
 as the rest of you, must share the reverse. 
 
 Bound thus to you by common interests, and 
 common hopes, and common affections, I stand 
 before you to night in a position which, not 
 many months since, I little dreamed of occupy- 
 ing: as the nominee of a great and powerful 
 party for a high and responsible position-— not 
 one, it is true, invested with any control over 
 Legislative action, nor indeed with any consid- 
 erable power of any kind; but high and respect- 
 able nevertheless, because he who tills it must 
 be taken to represent, in the great leading prin- 
 ciples which he avows, the opinions of the people 
 by whom he is elected. 
 
 You are aware, fellow citizens, that it has been 
 my fortune, since my nomination as a candidate 
 for Governor, to be assailed with envenomed bit- 
 terness. My whole past life — my entire politi- 
 cal history has been ransacked for topics of accu- 
 sation. Why I am thus pursued it seems hard 
 to conjecture. I have never been the enemy of 
 those who now start u;-» as my enemies. They 
 have suffered no wrong, no unkindness from me. 
 And while I do not claim any immunity from 
 error or freedom from faults, I dare boldly say 
 that there is nothing in my political life which 
 I hesitate to submit to the severest scrutiny. 
 
 The convention which placed me in nomina- 
 tion was composed of citizens from all political 
 organizations, united by a common determina- 
 tion to resist the aggressions of the Slave Power, 
 and especially to right the great wrong of the 
 repeal of the Missouri Restriction. Among its 
 members were numerous citizens whose expe- 
 rience in public affairs, genuine love of country 
 and eminent abilities, entitled them to that 
 large share of public confidence which they en- 
 
 joyed. By this convention, and by a majority 
 unusually large. I was placed in nomination. I 
 had asked no human being to support me. I 
 had even sought the permission of my friends 
 to withdraw my name from tiie canvass, i 
 would cheerfully and zealously have supported 
 either of the distinguished gentlemen who were 
 proposed for nomination. Nominated under 
 such circumstances, I could not but be sensible 
 that it was not because of any superior merit of 
 mine, but because circumstance which have 
 transpired during the last two years hare iden- 
 tified me with a strgggle in which the peo- 
 ple of the country take a deep and abiding 
 interest. In the Senate of the United States I 
 have labored incessantly and to the uttermost 
 of my ability to resist and arrest the greatest 
 outrage of our generation, the ruthless subver- 
 sion of that guarantee of Free Institutions 
 which our Fathers !iad provided for the North- 
 west in the Missouri Prohibition. It was to 
 mark its owu abhorrence of this outrage, and to 
 afford to the people of Ohio an opportunity of 
 testifying their al>horrence of it, that the con- 
 vpution selected me as the standard bearer of 
 Freedom during the political campaign in which 
 we are now engaged. 
 
 It gratifies me to know that whatever may 
 have been the political diiferences lietween my- 
 self and great numbers of those whom the Re- 
 peal of the Missouri Prohibiton aroused to a 
 lively sense of the necessity of resisting the ag- 
 gressions of Slavery, the vast majority of the 
 People who united last fhll in the People's 
 movement against Slavery, acquiesced cheerful- 
 ly in the action of the Convention, and are giv- 
 ing me a cordial and vigorous support. Dis- 
 contented men there must be in all organiza- 
 tions. In an organization like ours, such men 
 are necessarily somewhat more numerous than 
 in^parties hardened by time and consolidated 
 by interest. Opposition from such men was to 
 be expected ; and such opposition we encounter. 
 
 We had a right, however, to expect that it 
 would be conducted with fairness and candor. I 
 had a right to expect that in dealing with my pulv 
 lic conduct and character, the obligations ot truth 
 and justice would not be wholly disiegarded. 
 But the most reckless charges are^perseveringly 
 made, without foundation. These charges are 
 not all new. Some of them are old calumnies 
 revived for the new occasion. 
 
Hitherto, fellow citizens, I have never noticed 
 these calumnies. My lime, I thought, might be 
 more profitably devoted to the public service. 
 I felt, also, an abiding confidence that if it 
 i^hould please God lo continue my life, I should 
 live down these imputatious ; while, on the oth- 
 er hand, if I descended to a premature grave, 
 Death, the great revealer, would bury all these 
 calumnies in my grave. 
 
 T!)e position in which I now stand before the 
 P'MJide of Ohio, imposes upon me, however, a 
 diiferent duty. As the representative of a 
 great political organization, which may receive 
 damage from a belief in the truth of these char- 
 ges, it becomes my duty to repe! them. I breaii, 
 therefore tlie sileuce which I sbould prefer to 
 maintain, and will reply briefly but decisively 
 to tbtse accusations. 
 
 Y<iu, my fellow citizens, are my judges. Yea 
 conslitule that great tribunal of the country to 
 which every public man must appeal. I know 
 you are just. My appeal is to your justice. I 
 do not invoke your sympathy. I wish only to 
 be assured, and of that I am assured, that in 
 your hearts there is no disposition to condemn 
 me unheard, without reason and against proof. 
 
 The first charge which I shall dispose of to- 
 night, relates to my election to the Senate six 
 years ago. It has been made in this place, 
 from the platform, during my absence in the 
 Eastern States, and reiterated in the public 
 prints by the same accuser. I never saw a pa- 
 per containing tills revamped accusation over a 
 respouPii)le name, until to day. I mean to re- 
 ply to it frankly, to-night. It would have giv- 
 en me more pleasure could I have seen the au- 
 thor, and convinced him of it before. But as 
 that has been impossible, I now repel it public- 
 ly, and leave it to the author to retract it if he 
 sees fit. 
 
 The charge is this : that Messrs. Townshend 
 and Randall decided the constitutional question 
 whether Mes.srs. Fugh and Pierce, or Messrs. 
 Spencer and Rnnyan, were entitled to seats in 
 the Ohio Legislature, at the 'session of 1848-9, 
 in favor of Messrs, Pugh and Pierce, in consid- 
 eration that " Mr. Chase should be elected to 
 the United States Senate ;" that " this decision 
 was in pursuance of express contract, reduced 
 to writing, signed b'y the parties;" that "this 
 contract was in Mr. Chase's own hand-writing, 
 and for many months on exhil)iliou at a print- 
 ing oHice in this city." This is the charge. 
 
 Now, it so happens that Mr. Randall was not 
 a member of the House, but of the Senate, that 
 winter, and uniformly from fir.st to last oppo- 
 sed my election. This, however, is an inaccu- 
 racy which is only worth mentioning, because it 
 shows how carlessly the charge was made. It 
 is with the main cliarge that 1 have to deal, and 
 thatcliarge 1 meet witli a broad, unqualified de- 
 nial of its truth. No such contract was ever 
 made. No such decisjcni was ever made upou 
 any such consideration. No such contract ex- 
 i>ls or ever exi.-'led in my handwriting, or in t!)e 
 hai;dwriling of any i)iidy (;l.-e. I will not say 
 that the maker of the ctiar;;e did not believe it 
 to bo true; fur I will not f(dlo\v hisexam[ile, and 
 impeach motives; but I will say that thi; charge 
 was ra!-hly and curelesaly made -more rashly 
 
 and carelessly than became a man who has once 
 occupied a judicial station. It is untrue iu all 
 its parts. 
 
 What was the transaction which actually took 
 place? The Legislature had passed an act di- 
 viding Hamilton county into two districts, and 
 had assigned to the county five Representatives 
 — two to be elected by the city district and 
 three by the county district. The democrats 
 denied the constitutionality of this division, and 
 voted for five Representatives from the whole 
 county. The whigs. on the otiier haad, asser- 
 ted its constitutionality, and voted for two 
 Representatives from the city district, and for 
 three from the county district. The democrats 
 hid a majority in the wifole county; the whigs 
 had a majority in the city district. If the act 
 was constitutional therefore, the whigs had 
 elected two members; if the act was uncons- 
 titutional the democrats had elected five. — 
 The question finally assumed this form: are 
 Messrs. Speucer and Runyou, whigs, having re- 
 ceived a majority of votes in the city district, 
 entitled to seats as Representatives from Ham- 
 ilton county, or are Messrs. Pugh and Pierce, 
 who received a majority of all the votes ia the 
 county, entitled to those seats? 
 
 Now, the House of Representatives is the sole 
 judge, under the Constitution, of the returns 
 and qualifications of its members. The question 
 which arose was therefore to be decided by the 
 House, and by the House alone. If the House 
 should adjudge the division law unconstitu- 
 tional, the two democrats must necessarily be 
 admitted to their seats — ^if constitutional, the 
 whigs must be admitted. 
 
 Now, the question whether this division law 
 was constitutional or not had been much deba- 
 ted. Some eminent whigs had declared that 
 the Legislature possessed no power to divide 
 counties for election purposes. Of this opinion 
 were nearly all the democrats. The great ma- 
 jority of the whigs asserted the contrary po- 
 sition. 
 
 It was my opinion, never concealed from any 
 body, that the Legislature possessed no power 
 to divide a county. It is now no sort of conse- 
 quence whether this opinion was right or wrong. 
 1 oidy mention it because I understand that 
 some persons have been reckless enough to say 
 that I declared myself at first in favor of the 
 division, and afterwards took the opposite 
 ground. 
 
 Well, the constitutional question which then 
 arose was decided in favor of the democratic 
 claimants, and they were admitted to their 
 seats. And it was this decision which is al- 
 leged to have been " made upon express con- 
 tract, reduced to writing" — ''in Mr. Chase's own 
 hand writing." 
 
 If there were truth in this charge, no man 
 should vote for me for any office. Such a con- 
 tract would be as oVyectionable as a contract 
 with a Judge, that some friend or relation 
 should be appointed to an ofiice in considera- 
 tion of a jutlieial decision in favor of parties 
 able to control the appointment. I give up 
 such a character to whatever reprobation my 
 assailant may choose to bestow upon it. But, I 
 repeat, no such condemnation touches me. The 
 
charge that such a contract was written by me 
 
 that such a coatract was written by any body 
 
 that eucb a coatract was «ver made at all — 
 
 has not a word of truth in it. No such writing 
 exists, unless such a writing has been forged 
 for villainous ends. Neither I nor any friend 
 of mine knew how either of the gentlemen then 
 admitted to feats would vote in the Senatorial 
 election, until weeks afterwards. The gentle- 
 men live among you. and one of them (Mr. 
 Pugh) is my successor in the Senate ; the other 
 (Mr. Pierce) is well known in this coinmunity. 
 Both are now political opponents of mine — hut 
 neither would hesitate to speak the truth in this 
 behalf. Why did not my assailants ascertain the 
 truth from them before they ventured upon his 
 accusation? Was it fair, or just, or manly, to 
 seek the injury of me, who had never injured 
 bim, by making charges, even though he be- 
 lieved "them to be well-founded, without the 
 ability to produce evidence in support of that 
 belief ? Let him now produce his evidence, if 
 he has any, or let him retract his accusation. 
 I defy him or any other accuser to show in my 
 whole action in reference to this matter of my 
 election, any deviation whatever trom the path 
 which honor or duty would prescribe. 
 
 It is true that my election, as well as all the 
 other elections of that winter, were effected 
 through the joint action of the Democratic and 
 Independent Democratic orFreesoil members of 
 the Legislature ; and that this joint action was 
 the result of a political understanding or ar- 
 rangement. There were three parties in the Leg- 
 islature—the Old Line Democrats, the Inde- 
 pendent Democrats or Freesoilers, and the Whigs. 
 The Freesoilers were anxious to have a Senator 
 independent of old party organizations, who 
 would resist the aggressions of the slave Power, 
 without being trammeled by party associations. 
 They did not care what party the Judges of the 
 Supreme Court should belong to, provided they 
 were qualified for their stations. They were 
 willing to elect Whig Judges or Democratic 
 Judges, if otherwise capable and fit, provided 
 either Whigs or Democrats would unite with 
 them in the election of an Independent Senator. 
 The Whigs could not agree to vote for any man 
 whom the Freesoilers wished to elect — the Dem- 
 ocrats were willing to vote for me. Of course 
 I was elected. On the same day Judge Spald- 
 ing and Caldwell were elected to the Supreme 
 Bench. The former is now among the ablest 
 and truest champions of the Republican cause 
 — the other enjoys the confidence and respect of 
 the People in as large a measure as he. This 
 was the whole arrangement, so far as Senator 
 and Supreme Judges were concerned. 
 
 There was a further understanding in refer- 
 ence to the other appointments to be made by 
 the Legislature. I do not remember its details, 
 I do remember, however, that ttie plan which I 
 thought equitable, and which I took the liberty 
 of suggesting to some prominent members of 
 the Legislature, was to elect Associate Judges 
 for the counties according to the political char- 
 acter of the respective counties, as indicated by 
 the pluralities at the Presidential election — giv- 
 ing to counties where Democrats had plurali- 
 ties, Democratic Associates ; to Whig counties 
 
 Whig Associates, and to Freesoil counties, Free- 
 soil Associates. Such, however, was the force 
 of party feeling, that the suggestion was disre- 
 garded, and the Associate Judges, as well as all 
 other public officers, to be appointed by the 
 Legislature, were selected from the Democratic 
 and Freesoil parties. 
 
 Now, will anybody tell me how any appoint- 
 ments at all could have been made without 
 some such union as actually took place ? No 
 one could be appointed to any office, without a 
 majority of votes. Neither party by itself 
 had a majority. Each party by itself was in a 
 minority. To effect any appointments at all 
 therefore, two of the minorities must unite. 
 They would naturally and almost uecessarily 
 select their appointees from one or the other of 
 the parties represented by them. This is what 
 actually took place, and this is all that did take 
 place at the session of 18-iS-'49. The union 
 was then between the Democrats and Freesoil- 
 ers. The very next session the Legislature was 
 again divided between the same three parties, 
 neither having a majority. What then took 
 place ? The Whigs and Democrats made an 
 agreement for united action, and divided the 
 appointments between Whigs and Democrats, 
 excluding the Freesoilers altogether. 
 
 The ditference between the last arrangement 
 and the first was only in the fact that the for- 
 mer was between parties holding at that time 
 the same general political principles, though 
 differing in organization, while the latter was 
 between parties decidedly opposed in principle 
 as well as in organization. 
 
 After all, the great question in regard to ap- 
 pointments made by such unions, is the same 
 as that which should be made in respect to ap- 
 pointments made by a majority party : — Are 
 the appointees fit and capable? Do they rep- 
 resent the principles — will they be faithful to 
 the interests of the People of the State ? It is of 
 very little consequence whether they represent 
 a majority organization or not. 
 
 Now, as to the J udges appointed at the ses- 
 sion of lS48-'9, I have heard no complaint. It 
 is not denied that they were all able and upright 
 men. As to the fitness or capability of the 
 Senator, it is not for me to speak. It is enough 
 for me to know, that during my term of service, 
 no one las reproached me with want of fidelity, 
 either to the interests or to the people of 
 Ohio. No one accuses me of having lost an 
 opportunity of promoting the interests either of 
 the State or of this great city, or of any place 
 or citizen needing my services. It was my hand 
 which drafted the first appropriation for the 
 erection of Public Buildings in the West for 
 the accommodation of Customs, the Courts, 
 and the Post Offices in the United States. In 
 virtue of that first appropriation, the United 
 States Public Buildings are now rising in this 
 city. Similar structures are soon to be erected 
 under provisions drafted by me, in several of 
 the Lake cities. Through my exertions a bill 
 to cede to the State all the Public Lands of the 
 United States was twice carried through the 
 Senate. Uniformly, zealously, perseveringly I 
 have supported the policy of improving the 
 Rivers and Harbors of the West. Through 
 
the weary hours of the night I hare ■watched, 
 even till the dawn of day, for an opportunity 
 to propose an appropriation for these and other 
 objects beneficiaL to Ohio. During the very 
 last session, I had the pleasure of carrying 
 through the Senate an approropriation of two 
 hundred thousand dollars for the improvement 
 of the Ohio, and tWHiuyfive thousand dollars 
 a year to make the Louisville and Portland Ca- 
 nal free, and keep it in repair. Let me be par- 
 doned, fellow-citizens, fur referring to them. — 
 I do it only that you may be induced to ac- 
 quaint yourselves with the whole course of my 
 public life. I feel a proud consciousness that 
 it will bear investigation, and the more you 
 investigate, the less you will be -willing to per- 
 mit one who has served you faithfully to be 
 prejudiced iu your esteem by misrepresentation 
 and detraction. 
 
 I shall proceed now to expose another ground- 
 less charge. I find copied in the Ohio States- 
 man a resolution which it is alleged sanctions 
 the doctrine that a public officer may take an 
 oath to support the Constitution of the United 
 States, with a mental reservation that he will 
 set at nought any part of it which, in his judg- 
 ment, is inconsistent with moral duty. I will 
 read the resolution if any one desires it. (Cries 
 of Read, Read.) Here it is : 
 
 "JResolvtd, That we hereby give it to be dis- 
 tinctly understood that Abolitionists'" — [here 
 the' Statesman editor inserts the injunction to 
 his readers, 'Mark the emphatic and deliberate 
 language'] — "considering that the strength of 
 our cause lies in its righteousness, and our hopes 
 for it in our conformity to the laws of God and 
 our support of the rights of man, we owe to the 
 Sovereign Ruler of the universe as a proof of our 
 allegiance to Him in all our civil relations and 
 ofBces, whether as friends, citizens, or as public 
 functionaries sworn to support the Constitution 
 of the United States, to regard and treat the 
 third clause of the instrument, whenever ap- 
 plied in the case of a fugitive slave, as utterly 
 null and void, and consequently as forming no 
 part of the Constitution, whenever we are called 
 upon or sworn to support it." 
 
 Now the editor of the Statesman, in the ar- 
 ticle from which I have ju.st read, speaking of 
 this very resolution, ?ays: " We happen to have 
 at our hand a resolution, drawn by his own 
 hand and presented by him to a State Conven- 
 tion of his old peculiar party, in which he ap- 
 plies the term Abolitionist to him.^elf and his 
 party. In this resolution Mr. Chase confesses it 
 to be his duty as an Abolitionist, "when he 
 takes an oath to support the Constitution of the 
 United States, to resolve at the same time to vi- 
 olate a portion of that iustrument.'' He theu 
 quote.s the resolution itself just as I have read it. 
 Now, fellow-citizens, would anybody suppose 
 that a charge like this would be deliberately 
 put forth witiiout a single particle of evidence 
 ill support it? Observe how circumstantial it 
 jp : — " We happen to have at hand a resolution 
 drawn by his own /I'lnd.'' Would you not sup- 
 pose that the editor had lying befm-e him a res- 
 olution in my hand writing? (Cries of Yes, 
 certainly.) What then must you think of this 
 editor, when I tell you neither this resolution 
 
 nor any similar one was ever written by me at 
 all. (Laughter.) I uuder.'<tuiid that he has 
 since explained that he only meant to be under- 
 stood as saying ttiat he hart at hand a printed 
 resolution, the original of which was written 
 by me. But 1 ncvrr wrote the resolution at all, 
 and he ought to know it. 
 
 Why, this resolutioii wa" fir.tt attributed to 
 me some ten yearns ajo in the Cincinnati Ga- 
 zette, then edited by Judge Ji-lin C. Wright. I 
 knew him to be an upright and hononii-le gen- 
 tleman, and that he mu-^t have been nii.sinforra- 
 ed. I therefore addressed a note to him deny- 
 ing the authorship, which was printed iu the 
 Gazette. There I supposed the thing would re.st. 
 Some years afterward?, however, wheu 1 enter- 
 ed the Senate of the United States, some wretch- 
 ed scavenger, such as the North always furnish- 
 es to purvey materials for attacks on Northern 
 men who will not bow the knee to the Slave 
 Power, raked up this resolution and handed it 
 to Mr. Butler of South Carolina, who made it 
 the basis of an assault upon me. I repelled the 
 charge at once, and so decisively that it was 
 never afterwards alluded to even in the Senate. 
 Here is part of what I said, taken from the Ap- 
 pendix to the Congressional Globe for 18-t9. -ikl 
 am not sorry, Mr. President, that the Senator 
 from South Carolina has deemed my humble 
 life worthy of his investigation. He can find 
 nothing in the history of that life which I am 
 unwilling to have known — nothing in any opin- 
 ions advanced by me which I am not ready to 
 defend. But, Sir, I do not choose to be held re- 
 sponsible for opinions not mine. This newspa- 
 per ascribes to me the paternity of a resolution 
 supposed to recognize the propriety of a mental 
 reservation in a certain case. I have only to 
 say that I never proposed the resolution — never 
 voted for the resolution — never would propose 
 or vote for such a resolution." 
 
 Later in the same debate, in reply to some in- 
 quiry from Senator Mason of Virginia, I said : 
 
 "The resolution was presented at a mass con- 
 vention of what was called the Liberty party. 
 I was present, and was a member of the com- 
 mittee on Resolutions. The resolution in ques- 
 tion was submitted to this committee, who de- 
 clined to report it for the action of the conven- 
 tion. It was opposed by me in the committee 
 room, but I cannot say how far the action of 
 the committee was attributed to this. It was 
 afterwards introduced to the convention when 
 I was not prt'sent, and was adopted, after a 
 speech, as often happens iu such cases, without 
 discussion or examination. It did not express, 
 in my judgment, the views of the convention 
 or of the party. Is the Senate satisfied ?" 
 
 To this question Mr. Mason responded, "Per- 
 fectly, sir," and there the matter rested. 
 
 Now the editor of the State.'</nan is an active 
 and veteran politician. Is it possible that the 
 refutation of this charge in the Gazette and in. 
 the Senate could have escaped his notice ? His 
 own files furnish the evidence that it did not. 
 Not only so, Inil after the correcliou in the 
 speech to which I have just referred, he noticed 
 its occurrence iu the Statesman, slated that I 
 denied the charge made, and that "Southern 
 members expressed themselves satisfied." 
 
What excuse, under these circumstances, can 
 the editor of the Stategmau give for reviving 
 this charge? Why, if it was made iuadvertent- 
 Jy, has he not manfully and honorably retract- 
 ed it? The great English poet, enumerating the 
 different degrees of falsehood, mentions the lie 
 circumstantial, the lie inferential, etc , and tin- 
 ally the lie direct. This lie in the Statesman 
 may not come under the third head, but certain- 
 ly, if uttered understindingly and persevered 
 in after a knowledge of the facts, is included 
 in both the others. 
 
 Next comes the charge of Dipunionism. This 
 is the great cry by which the adherents ot the 
 administration.'irabecile lor good and powerful 
 only for evil, hope to arrest the great popular 
 movement for freedom, which endangers their 
 political ascendency. This too is the cry by 
 which the bolters from the ranks of the People 
 seek to justify the aid and comfort which they 
 give to the administration party in the State 
 and in the Nation. This cry is directed against 
 me alone, not because I hold any opinion or 
 propose any course of action not held or propos- 
 ed by every other nominee upon our State tick- 
 et, but because they well know that if they can 
 defeat the Republican nominee for Governor, 
 future union among the opponents of the State 
 and National Administrations will be rendered 
 well nigh impossible, and the power and pat- 
 ronage ot the State and Nation will be perma- 
 nently secured to the party which now exercises 
 and abuses both. 
 
 But this accusation is as groundless as the 
 others. I a disunionist ! Much that I have 
 written, much that I have spoken, has found its 
 way into the public prints. Many addresses 
 and speeches of mine have been published and 
 widely circulated. What I have said in the 
 Senate remains and must remain in the public 
 records of the country, open to the inspection 
 of all men. Let my accusers point to a single 
 paragraph, a single sentence, a single word, 
 containing a disunion sentiment. Let tliem 
 point to a single paragraph or a single sen- 
 tence upon the subject of the Union, that is 
 not full of loyalty to it. Let them do this, or 
 else forever hereafter hold their peace. 
 
 N"o man, fellow-citizens, cherishes a warme 
 or more earnest devotion to the Union of these 
 States, than the man who now stands before 
 you. Founded on the principles of the Decla- 
 ration of Independence, cemented by the Con 
 stitution, and protected by the patriotism of the 
 People, it seems to me fit to endure forever. 
 God himself prepared this place for it. In the 
 place which he prepared, our Fathers framed it. 
 Here it has expanded, and strengthened as it 
 has grown into a mighty confederacy of thirty- 
 one States, stretching from the gulf of Mexico 
 to the Northern extremity of Maine, and from 
 the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. Its great 
 Mountains and their vast range from North to 
 South, seem to keep guard over it. Grand 
 Rivers flowing through every part, unite, while 
 they divide its States. Iron bands, provided 
 by the genius of commerce, gird all round the 
 mighty structure. Nothing but madness and 
 folly, trampling on freedom, and contemning 
 justice, can ever justify, can ever destroy or 
 
 weaken it. God grant that it may endure for- 
 ever, a monument of his goodness, of the wis- 
 dom of our Fathers and the patriotism of their 
 sons. 
 
 It is true, fellow-citizens, that in both sec- 
 tions of our country, there are men who lightly 
 esteem the Union. Mr. Garrison and his asso- 
 ciates in the North, despairing of the redemp- 
 tion of our land from the evils of Slavery, 
 while the Union remains, seek the deliverance 
 of the Slave through its dissolution. With the 
 disunion doctrines of Mr. Garrison and his as- 
 sociates, I have no sympathy. The nuUifiers of 
 the South, insisting that through the Union the 
 system of Slavery is endangered, cry also for 
 dissolution. With the disunion doctrines of the 
 nuUifiers of the South, I have no sympathy. 
 
 But there is one remarkable difference be- 
 tween those who cry disunion in the North, and 
 those who utter the same cry in the South. 
 The disunionists of the North take no part in 
 political conflicts, and exert no political influ- 
 ence. The disunionists of the South engage 
 actively in political strife, and at the present 
 moment control the action of that party in the 
 Slave States which dictates to the present ad- 
 ministration its policy of slave propagandism. 
 
 I have a sample of the sentiments of the 
 Slave State disunionists, taken from the Charles- 
 ton Mercury, a paper which sustains Franklin 
 Pierce. It is an account of a meeting of a party 
 of these nuUiflers at Whippy Swamp — sugges- 
 tive name — in South Carolina. It was held on 
 the 4th of July, and this was one of the ap- 
 plauded sentiments : 
 
 "The Bay we celebrate — It was consecrated 
 to Freedom by the Disunionists of 1776. We 
 do well to keep the day — we should do better to 
 imitate the deed.-' 
 
 These gentlemen of Whippy Swamp, you see, 
 not only brand our Fathers who made the Un- 
 ion, as disunionists, but broadly intimate that 
 our Republican Government is as obnoxious to 
 them as the British Monarchy, and propose to 
 get rid of it by disunion ! 
 
 Have our political opponents — the supporters 
 of the existing State and National administra- 
 tions — any thing to say against the Whippy 
 Swamp disunionists ? Do you not know that 
 when they say any thing at all of these men, 
 they always speak under the whole apprehen- 
 sions which the name of Whippy Swamp inevit- 
 ably suggests ? Do you not know that when 
 the Whippy Swamp disunionists get to Wash- 
 ington, they are invited to the highest seats at 
 the Democratic — I beg pardon — the Administra- 
 tion feast ? Do you not know that from the 
 Whippy Swamp disunionists ai'e selected Chiefs 
 of Committees in the Senate and in the House 
 of Representatives, Foreign Ministers, and heads 
 of Departments ? Why, the disunionists of 
 Whippy Swamp are the rulers of our National 
 Rulers. Not in the N'orth — not in free Ohio, 
 where the Nebraska-Kanzaa outrage was greet- 
 ed with thunder tones of indignation— does the 
 National Administration find its chief strength 
 and main support, but in the Whippy Swamps 
 of the Carolinas and the Slave States. 
 
 This disunionism is very tolerable to our po- 
 
8 
 
 litical opponents ; for these disunionists supply 
 their leaders. 
 
 Btit neither this disunionism nor any disun- 
 ionism is acceptable to me. 
 
 In Whippy Swamp, and elsewhere in South 
 Carolina, there are expert calculators of the val- 
 ue of the Union. Their political economists and 
 political mathematicians have cyphered it all 
 out. They can tell you how much the Union is 
 worth to a very vulgar fraction. 
 
 I have no skill iu such computations, and I 
 want none. Standing in the Senate, and aa- 
 dressing its presiding officer as your Represen- 
 tative, fellow-citizens, I said : '• Mr. President, 
 I have never calculated the value of the Union. 
 I know of no arithmetic by which the computa- 
 tion can be made. We of the West are in the 
 habit of looking upon the Uuicn as we look 
 upon the arch of Heaven, without a thought 
 that it can decay or fall." — '' Sacred to Ohio," 
 I exclaimed on another occasion, " is the Union 
 of the States." Did I misrepresent you, my fel 
 fow-citizens, wheo I thus declared my own sen 
 timents and yours? (Cries of no, no.) If then 
 hereafter any propagator of slander shall charge 
 me with disunion, I feel that I may safely rely 
 on your justice as well as your generosity to re- 
 buke the calumniator aud vindicate the truth. 
 And now let me say a few words about Abo- 
 litionism—that word of terror, by repeating 
 which, in every variety of intonation, our oppo- 
 nents hope to scare full grown men. 
 
 I shall not undertake to define abolitionism, 
 or to describe an abolitionist. But I will tell 
 you frankly what my position is now, and- ever 
 has been, in relation to slavery. 
 
 It is that of Washington, Jefferson and Frank- 
 lin ; it is that of the founders of the Republic. 
 The great men who framed our Constitution, 
 conferred on Congress no power to institute 
 or maintain slavery by national legislation ; nor 
 did they confer on Congress any power to in- 
 terfere by national legislation with slavery in 
 the States. 
 
 At the time of the promulgation of the Con- 
 stitution, slavery was allowed in most of the 
 States by State Constitutions, and regulated by 
 State Laws — but there was not a foot of Na- 
 tional territory in which a slave could be held, 
 unless in violation of positive law. At that 
 time there was no national territory except that 
 Northwest of the Ohio, and in that territory, 
 by the Jefferson proviso, incorporated into the 
 Ordinance of 1787, aud by the unanimous con- 
 sent of all the States in the Congress of the 
 Confederation, slavery had been forever pro- 
 hibited. Our National Government, therefore, 
 went into operation upon the principle of No 
 Slavery Outsiuk of Slave States— upon the 
 principle that Slavery is local, not National. 
 At that time, also, there were seven free 
 States in the Union — not, it is true, of States 
 in which slavery had been absolutely abolished, 
 but of States in which the ultimate extinction 
 of slavery was certain, and the State policy was 
 on the side of Freedom. The number of slave 
 States was only six, and in some of them it was 
 confidently expected that provision would soon 
 be made by law for the eradication of slavery. 
 Then there was a majority of free States in 
 
 the Union at the outset of the national career, 
 and the Ordinance of 1787 made provision for 
 the permanence of the majority by declaring 
 that not less than three nor more than fiv(! States 
 should be created out of the territory in which 
 by its own action Slavery was forever prohibit- 
 ed. 
 
 Thus fellow-citizens, our National Govern- 
 ment may be fairly said to be based on three 
 great principles in respect to Slavery — non- 
 interference by the National Government with 
 Slavery within slave States — non-extension of 
 Slavery beyond the limits of the slave States — 
 a perpetual majority of free States in the Union. 
 Our actual history demonstrates the fact, 
 that only one of these three principles has been 
 practically applied. Tlie national government 
 has never interfered with Slavery iu tbe slave 
 States, but, slavery has been extended far be- 
 yond State limits; aud the slaveholders have 
 ini-isted, and during much the greater part of our 
 historical period, have actually been allowed 
 to have as many slave States as there have been 
 free States in the Union. 
 
 The original policy of the fathers of the Re- 
 rpublic has been subverted. We simply de- 
 mand its restoration. We "want indemnity for 
 the past and security for the future." (Cheers.) 
 Neither I nor.any other Republican, so tar as I 
 know, proposes any inteiference with slavery in 
 any State. What we demand is, that slavery 
 shall not be extended or permitted in any terri- 
 tory outside of slave Slates. None among us 
 would change any constitutional right or priv- 
 ilege now belonging to a State allowing slavery 
 within its limits; but we insist that no such 
 right or privilege shall be abused to the subver- 
 sion of liberty in free States. Ohio Freedom 
 will not interfere with Kentucky Slavery- 
 Kentucky Slavery must ?wt interfere with Ohio 
 Freedom. (Earnest applause.) 
 
 If this be abolitionism, then Washington, 
 Jefferson, Henry, Madison, Adams, Franklin, 
 and a great host of patriots, of names only kss 
 conspicuous than these, were abolitionists. All 
 these illustrious men hated slavery. Most of 
 them have left on record to be transmitted from 
 generation to generation, their stern condemna- 
 tion of the system. All of them longed for the 
 coming time in which the whole land should be 
 delivered by the constitutional action of the Na- 
 tional and State Government, from this its 
 greatest curse. Where they stood, I stand.— 
 What they felt, I feel. What they labored to 
 accomplish, I labor— but oh ! with what dispro- 
 portionate energy and ability, to accomplish. 
 In the methods and by the rules also which they 
 observed, I aim to act— not seeking or expecting 
 to interfere by national legislation, or by the 
 legislation of any free State, with the mternal 
 aUairs of any slave Slate ; but firmly resolved 
 to "to resist the spread of slavery," to "oppose 
 its existence in any national territory," aud to 
 oppose also "the further increase of slave terri- 
 tory or slave States in this Republican confed- 
 eracy." . 
 
 If this be abolitionism, who of you is not abo- 
 litionist? But we well know that the charge of 
 abolitionism is always intended to convey more 
 than this. It is always designed to impute a 
 
rash, headlong znal to get rid of slavery, by 
 whatever meaas, fair or unfair, without regard 
 to the constitution, without respect to the rights 
 of the States, and in contempt of our obligations 
 to the Union. In this sense, 1 certainly am 
 not, and I think that none of you, my fellow- 
 citizens, are abolitionists. When therefore, you 
 hear such a charge made against me herealter, 
 treat it, I beseech you, with the contempt it 
 merits. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, I have endeavored to state to 
 you with clearness and precision, the princi- 
 ples and policy of the Republican party on the 
 great and prominent question of slavery. What, 
 on the other hand, are the principles and policy 
 of our opponents? — of the supporters of the 
 existing State and National Administrations ? 
 They claim to be the Democracy — but their De- 
 mocracy is like the play of Hamlet with the 
 part of Hamlet omitted. It is the thing in 
 name only — nothing more. They go no longer 
 up to the Jerusalem of the true worship, but 
 have made for themselves calves at Bethel and 
 Dan. They have abandoned the creed taught 
 by Jefferson, the great apostle of the Democratic 
 faith, and have hitched themselves to the teach- 
 ings of the new political saints, St. Stephen and 
 St. Franklin. With these new leaders, instead 
 of battling for equal rights and exact justice 
 for all men, they boldly march upon a crusade 
 against Freedom. 
 
 Is not this true? Let history answer. In 
 1848 the democratic party in Ohio assumed a 
 bold and decided anti-slavery position. Here 
 is their resolution, adopted in State Conven- 
 tion on the 8th of January of that year: 
 
 ^•Resolved, That the people of Ohio, now as 
 they have always done, look upon the institu- 
 tion of Slavery in any part of the Union, as an 
 evi4, and unfavorable to the lull development 
 of the spirit and practical benefits of our free 
 institi^tions; and that, entertaining these senti- 
 ments, they will at all times feel it to be their 
 duty to use all power clearly given by the 
 terms of the National compact, to prevent its 
 increase, to mitigate, and finally to eradicate 
 the evil." 
 
 This was the year in which Gen. Taylor was 
 elected. The incoming of a whig administra- 
 tion left the democracy free from temptation to 
 bow down to the slave power, and for a time 
 they maintained their anti-slavery position with 
 apparent courage and decision. When the com- 
 promise nieasures of 1850, abrogated the Mexi- 
 can prohibition of slavery in New Mexico and 
 Utah, and placed the Fugitive Slave act on the 
 Statute Book, democratic presses took strong 
 ground against them. Governor Wood, in his 
 message, declared for the repeal of the fugitive 
 slave act and for the abolition of slavery in the 
 District of Columbia. At this time, the demo- 
 cratic party, having no pro-slavery national 
 administration with immense revenues and 
 thousands of offices at its disposal to check or 
 thwart the natural action of democratic princi- 
 ples, seemed resolved to throw off the domina- 
 tion of the slave power, and to restore the Jeffer- 
 Fonian policy of restriction and denationaliza- 
 tion in respect to slavery. It now seemed to 
 •ue and to many other democrats who had stood 
 o 
 
 aloof from the democratic organization on u 
 count of its pro-slavery action, that we ought to 
 waive our separate organization, and unite in 
 endeavoring to uphold the Ohio democratic 
 platform and the liberal anti-slavery policy 
 which the party proposed to adopt. In con- 
 formity with this view I acted, and in a letter 
 which was printed with approbation in nearly 
 every democratic paper in the State, gave my 
 reasons for my action. At the same time, in the 
 same letter, 1 distinctly declared that should 
 "sinister influences hereafter prevail with any 
 future democratic convention to set up another 
 slave platform, either State or National, either 
 by resolutions or nominations," I, for one, should 
 resume my independent position, and refuse 
 support to platforms and candidates of princi- 
 ples antagonizing "those now proclaimed by the 
 Ohio democracy." 
 
 This was in 1851. In 1852 the National Dem- 
 ocratic Convention assembled at Baltimore, and 
 did set up a national platform utterly irrecon- 
 cilable with that of the Ohio democracy, and 
 nominated a candidate for the Presidency whose 
 boast was that no" act of his life was inconsistent 
 with the national platform. The candidate was 
 Franklin Pierce. The platform on slavery was 
 contained in these three resolutions: 
 
 "Resolved, That Congress has no power un- 
 der the Constitution to interfere with or control 
 the domestic institutions of the several States, 
 and that such States are free to be and proper 
 judges of their own affairs, where not prohibit- 
 ed by the Constitution; that all efforts of the 
 Abolitionists or others to induce Congress to 
 interfere with questions of slavery, or to take 
 incipient steps in relation thereto, are calcula- 
 ted to lead to the most alarming and dangerous 
 consequences, and that all such efforts have an 
 inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness 
 of the people and endanger the stability of the 
 Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any 
 friend of our political institutions. 
 
 Resolved, That the foregoing proposition cov- 
 ers and was intended to embrace the whole sub- 
 ject of slavery agitation in Congress ; and 
 therefore the Democratic party of the Union, 
 standing on this National platform, will abide 
 by and adhere to the faithful execution of all 
 the acts known as the Compromise Measures, 
 settled by the last Congress, the act for the re- 
 claiming of fugitives from service or labor in- 
 cluded, which act being designed to carry out 
 an express provision of the Constitution, cannot 
 with fidelity thereto be repealed, or so changed 
 as to destroy or impair its efSciency. 
 
 ''Resolved, That the Democratic party will 
 resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or 
 out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, 
 under whatever shape or color the attempt may 
 be made." 
 
 I was present at the Convention, not as a del- 
 egate, but as a deeply inteiested spectator, 
 when these things were done. 
 
 Not a moment did I hesitate as to the course 
 which fidelity to true democratic principles re- 
 quired of me. I repudiated at once both the 
 platform and the candidate. My opponent in 
 the present canvass, Col. Medill, was also pres- 
 ent in this Baltimore Convention. He was a 
 
10 
 
 delegate. He did not vote against the platform, 
 and he did support the candidate. 
 
 Many earnest democrats, also, reluctant to 
 give up th ir party organization, and hoping 
 on against hope that the Democracy of Oiiio 
 would remain on the whole, true to their own 
 platform and to freedom, notwithstanding the 
 inconsistency of supporting a Presidential candi- 
 date of opposite principles, adhered to the or- 
 ganization and supported the nominee. 
 
 The Baltimore nominee was elected, and then 
 the patronage of the National Government was 
 employed to induce the Ohio Democracy to en- 
 dorse the Baltimore Pro slavery Platform. In 
 
 1853, at the first State Convention of the new 
 administration, an attempt was made to add the 
 Baltimore to the State Platform, but was un- 
 successful. At the next State Convention, in 
 
 1854, the attempt was renewed and was success- 
 ful. Hire is the Resolution by which the Ohio 
 Democracy bound itself to the banner of the 
 Slave power: 
 
 '^Resolved, That the Democrats of Ohio, in 
 Convention assembled, hereby recognize and 
 adopt as our creed, the Baltimore platform of 
 1852, adopted by the Convention which nomi- 
 nated Franklin Pierce for President of the Uni- 
 ted States." 
 
 This resolution was adopted after the intro- 
 ductian of the Nebraska bill, with clauses re- 
 pealing the Missouri Prohibition, into the Sen- 
 ate of the United States, by Stephen A. Doug- 
 las, and was a fitting prelude to the election 
 of a Nebraska Senator by the Legislature then 
 in session. 
 
 Hitherto, since the adoption of the liberal 
 resolution of 1848, the Ohio Democracy had tri- 
 umphed at every election. In the fall of 1848, 
 indeed, its success was only partial — in the sub- 
 sequent year, however, it was complete. The 
 indorsement of the pro-slavery resolutions of 
 Baltimore, and the indorsement given to the 
 Kansas-Nebraska bill by the election of a Ne- 
 braska Senator, heralded its most disastrous 
 discomfiture. The people, o,utraged beyond 
 measure by the repeal of the Missouri prohibi- 
 tion, and alarmed by the dangers to freedom 
 everywhere, from the aggressions of the slave 
 power, rallied in overwhelming numbers, with 
 a generous oblivion of past party differences, 
 and overthrew the Administration party. Eve- 
 ry member of Congress who had voted for the 
 Nebraska bill was rejected by his constituents. 
 Several who bad voted against the bill were 
 also rejected because they adhered to the Ad- 
 ministration under whose auspices these outra- 
 ges against freedom had been perpetrated. An 
 unbroken delegation of twenty-one members, 
 pledged against the iniquity, was sent to the 
 next Congress to utter the voice and execute 
 the will of our great State. 
 
 Notwithstanding all this, the Administration 
 party, at its State Convention in January last, 
 as if in reckless contempt of the peojjle, re- 
 newed its aflirmation of the Baltimore Platform 
 in these words: 
 
 "Rfsolved, That this Convention, in behalf of 
 the Democracy of Ohio, here))y affirm the plat- 
 form of resolutions adopted at the National 
 Democratic Convention, which assembled in 
 
 Baltimore in June, 1852, as a clear and distinct 
 declaration of our political principles." 
 
 Not content with hopiua: apparently nothing 
 from the people, and determined to <!u whatev- 
 er was possible to conciliate the slavery propa- 
 ganda at Washington, in order to secure tor its 
 members and their friends the favors ol the 
 Administration, the Conveui ion adopted another 
 resolution, which I will read : 
 
 "Resolved, That, we recognize in the Demo- 
 cratic Administration, State and National, fear- 
 less, consistent imd patriotic auxiliaries in the 
 above and kindred measures of Democratic pol- 
 icy, and therefore worthy of the support and 
 confidence of every Democrat." 
 
 More than this. To leave no doubt as to the 
 fullness of its acquiescence in the schemes of the 
 propagandists of slavery, the Convention adopt- 
 ed this resolution also : 
 
 " Resolved, That we demand from the Demo- 
 cr tic majority in Congress : 
 
 4. The acquisition and annexation to the 
 Union of Cuba and^he Sandwich Islands at the 
 earliest moment consistent with our national 
 honor, and the securing of a passage across the 
 Isthmus for our commerce in peace and our ar- 
 mies in war." 
 
 The same resolution included ottier demands 
 upon the democratic maj(nity in Congress, 
 which the<vOnveutiou declared to be of "imme- 
 diate and urgent " importance ; but none of 
 which obtained the least notice from that demo- 
 cratic majority. 
 
 As if in order to prove the uttermost of its 
 contempt upon the old anti Slavery resolutions, 
 and to demonstrate the hollowness of all its pro- 
 fessions in favor of real progress and real re- 
 form, the Convention suffered the old anti- 
 slavery resolutions to i'ppear in the new pro- 
 slavery platform, crucified between the resolu- 
 tion endorsing the Baltimore platform and that 
 endorsing the Administration of Mr. Pierce. 
 
 The demand for the acquisition of Cuba and 
 the Sandwich Islands of course found favor with 
 the administration, which was ready enough to 
 create a National debt to the amount of two 
 hundred millions ot dollars to strengthen the 
 Slave Interest, and burden all other interests by 
 the purchase of Cuba, and ready enough also to 
 convert the Sandwich Islands, redeemed from 
 heathenism by the self-denying labors oi Chris- 
 tian Missionaries, into marts lor Slaves. Hap- 
 pily, the schemes ot the Administration lor the 
 extention of slavery in these directions, have 
 thus far proved unsuccessful, notwithstanding 
 the countenance and encouragement of this res- 
 olution of the Administration Convention in 
 Ohio. 
 
 It was quite natural that this Convention 
 should nominate for reelection all the members 
 of the State Administration which it indorsed 
 in the second iji'solution I have just quoted, as a 
 "fearless, i)atriotie and consistent auxiliary" in 
 the " measures of Democratic policy" set forth 
 in the Baltimore platform, as well as in this new 
 State platform. 
 
 It is thus clear, beyond all question, that the 
 Administration Ticket now presented to the 
 People represents the extreme pro-slavery pol- 
 icy of the existing Administration ; and that to 
 
11 
 
 vote for this ticket is to give a direct and po- 
 tential sanction to tljat policy. 
 
 I have already glanced at some of the features 
 of that policy. Permit me now to remind you 
 of them. 
 
 lu 1820 Missouri applied for admission into 
 the Union as a slave State. Her apolicatiou 
 was strenuously and persisteutly opposed. A 
 vast majoriiy of the people of the b^ree States 
 were against it. At length, however, by the 
 nearly unanimous votes of the ilave States, and 
 a few votes from the Free States, a Compromise 
 was forced through Congress. Its conditions 
 were that Missouri should cot^e in as a slave 
 State, and that the territory north ot 3G deg. 
 30 min. should be forever dedicated to freedom. 
 This Compromise in the prints of the day was 
 styled a compact, and was regarded as such, 
 when finally acquiesced in, by the people at 
 large. Not long after it was made, the slave 
 interest claimed that the compact embraced a 
 third stipulation not expressed in its terras ; 
 namely, that the territory South of 3f) dcg. 30 
 min. should be created into slave States. This 
 claim was conceded by the free States for the 
 sake of peace. Then Arkansas came into the 
 Union as a slave State, and, under the alleged 
 equity of the compact, Florida and Texas came 
 ill as slave States. The residue of the territory 
 South of 30 deg. 30 min. was partitioned among 
 several slaveholding Indian tribes. Thus the 
 slave interest had taken every loot South of the 
 line for slavery, claiming all the while under 
 the compact. Iowa, north of the line, had been 
 admitted as a free State, and Minnesota had 
 beeu created as a free territory. So far the 
 compact had been fulfilled. The slave interest 
 had realized all it was entitled to under it, and 
 now the lime had come for the organization of 
 a territorial government for the vast residue of 
 the country north of the line, large enough to 
 make twelve States, equal in size to Ohio. 
 
 Public faith demanded that this territorial 
 government should be organized with a prohi- 
 bition of slavery. The compact required it. 
 ' Religion and Humanity demanded it also. 
 Slavery is utterly inconsistent with the great 
 injuQClion " Whatsoever ye would that others 
 should do unto you, do ye even so unto them." 
 
 The principles of Democracy demanded it. 
 "All men are created equal, and are endowed 
 by their Creator with certaiu inalienable rights, 
 among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of 
 happiness." "To protect and defend their rights 
 governments are instituted among men." Con- 
 gress was to institute a government for the ter- 
 ritories. What could he plainer than its duty 
 to institute it that it would be incapable of de 
 stroying inalienable rights? 
 
 Sound policy required it. Free labor makes 
 great and prosperous States. Slave labor blights 
 the soil and retards the progress of the commu- 
 nities in which it is allowed. 
 
 The interests of commerce and manufactures 
 required it. In the territory organized without 
 slavery, agriculture would soon extort its treas- 
 ures from the earth ; and these would be found 
 along all the lines of railroad and through 
 every other channel of communication, quick- 
 ning industry iu all its forms everywhere. As 
 
 the settlements should multiply, ranges of States 
 stretching westward from Missouri and Iowa to 
 the borders of California would come into ex- 
 istence. In these States railroad systems would 
 spring into being. Missouri, a slave State, 
 with an immense grant of land from Congress, 
 has, as yet, been able to do next to nothing in 
 pushing her railroads west from the Mississippi. 
 Iowa, younger, with far less of natural resour- 
 ces, and without any aid whatever from Con- 
 gress, is fast pushing to completion two lines 
 of iron way from the Mississippi to the Missou- 
 ri. If the territorial governments of Kansas 
 and Nebraska should be organized under the 
 compact, the States to be afterwards created 
 would come in as free States, and not a railroad 
 only, but railroads, to the Pacific, would be 
 built by the irresistible energies of free labor, 
 even though Congress might never contribute a 
 dollar in aid. 
 
 Such, fellow-citizens, were some of the weighty 
 considerations which demanded that the com- 
 pact which prohibited slavery should be faith- 
 fully observed in the organization of territorial 
 governments for the vast Northwest. 
 
 But the slave power willed otherwise, and 
 we had, and yet tave, a National Administra- 
 tion entirely subservient to its will. Stephen A. 
 Douglas, placed by the Administration party at 
 the head of the committee of Territories, devo- 
 ted himself to the task of effecting the repeal of 
 that prohibition which, itself guarded by the 
 affections of the people, had protected through 
 thirty-four years the inheritance of Free Labor 
 against the approaches of slavery. His bad 
 zeal was seconded by the whole power of the 
 Administration. Every appliance was put in 
 requisition to seduce or intimidate Senators and 
 Representatives to di.sregard the wishes of their 
 constituents and vote for the repeal. The con- 
 test was protracted. In the Senate, every inch 
 of ground was disputed. You know the part I 
 took, and the courage and constancy with which 
 my colleague and other Senators resisted the 
 outrage. In the House, the struggle was equal- 
 ly earnest. The gentleman who now sits near 
 me [Mr. Campbell] always at his post and 
 ever ready in resources, was among the foremost 
 in that band of gallant spirits, who day after day 
 and night after night, struggled against the 
 wrong. At length, however, over violate(i rules 
 and outraged rights, the slave power and its 
 allies forced their way to nefarious victory. 
 The compact was broken. The barrier of free- 
 dom was broken down. The angel of prohibi- 
 tion, who through so many years had guarded 
 with flaming sword turning every way the en- 
 trance to the tree of life placed in the midst of 
 that Eden, was sacreligiously driven away; — • 
 and Death, the Death of Slavery, entered in. 
 
 Never — never can I forget with what feelings 
 I witnessed the final passage of the Repeal Bill 
 in the Senate, nor with what feelings when the 
 great Wrong had been consummated. Midnight, 
 tit hour ot darkness for a deed so dark, I, with 
 some brother Senators, descended the western 
 steps of the capitol towards our temporary 
 homes. A great sorrow filled my heart, but 
 even that was far less bitter than the doubt and 
 apprehension which would seize upon me lest, 
 
12 
 
 after all, you, the people, should acquiesce even 
 in this last outrage, and thus surrender the coun- 
 try, finally and forever, to the power which had 
 inflicted it. As I meditated on these things, the 
 thunder of a cannon which had been planted 
 north of the capitol by triumphant confederates 
 against Freedom, echoed and re-echoed over the 
 silent city, proclaiming the victory of Slavery 
 over Freedom. 
 
 But, thank God! the smoking thunder of that 
 night awoke the people. From our Northern 
 Maine — up the Allegheny crags, and over their 
 summits — across our broad prairies, and over 
 mighty rivers — till it reverberated from the 
 Rocky Mountains, and filled the ears of young 
 but gigantic Iowa— that mocking thunder pealed, 
 everywhere summoning the people to the re- 
 dress of the great wrong. Everywhere the peo- 
 ple obeyed the summons. 
 
 la our own noble State, with a unanimity and 
 stern decision worthy of the first-born of the 
 ordinance of Freedom, you rejected the servants 
 who had betrayed you in Congress — rejected 
 even men who had voted against the wrong, but 
 still purposed to adhere to the Administration, 
 and sent twenty-one Representatives to execute, 
 in the Legislature of the Nation, the will of the 
 people of Ohio. 
 
 Such, fellow citizens, was the occasion, and 
 such the result of the Union of the Freemen of 
 Ohio for the sake of Freedom last fall. 
 
 The simple questions for our present decision 
 are— Shall this union be continued, or shall it 
 be brokeu up ? Shall the twenty-one members 
 elected last fall to Congress, be sustained by 
 your judgment this fall, or sh.\ll they be allow- 
 ed to take their seats next winter with the dis- 
 heartening consciousness that you do not prove 
 by works the abiding nature of the faith which 
 you then professed ? 
 
 If there was reason for the union last fall, is 
 there not ten-told greater reason now ? Then, 
 the only consummated wrong was that of the 
 Repeal. Slavery had not actually entered Kan- 
 zas. Every where it was asserted by the parti- 
 sans of the administration, that Slavery never 
 would find admiss'on into the Territory. 
 
 Now, it is actually there. The great crime 
 of planting the curse of Slavery upon the soil 
 consecrated by compact as free homes for free 
 men, is a fact accomplished. And by what 
 shameful means! Many of our young men 
 went to the Territory, trusting to the declara- 
 tion of the supporters oi the administration, 
 that the people of the Territory would be left 
 to settle the (question for themselves. They 
 went, not with arms for murderous conflict, but 
 with arms for the conquest of nature. They 
 took with them the plough and the hoe, the plain 
 and the adze — the implements of agriculruie 
 and the mechanic arts. They took with them 
 the Spelling- Book and the Bible — intending to 
 establish th(( institutions of the Territory upon 
 the basis of ieiirning, morality an<l religion. 
 
 In March la^t. thi^y a~t<eml)led at the polls lor 
 the purpose of electing the nienibers ol Iheir Htm 
 Legihiaiure. But who m' t them there? Kitt- 
 lian bands of Missourians, armed with bowie 
 knives and rc^volvers, under the lead of Atchi- 
 son and Btringfellow, marched iuto the terri- 
 
 tory, seized upon the polls, and fraudulently 
 deposited their Missouri ballots a;^ Kanzas bal- 
 lots, and elected Missourians as Kanzas"men, to 
 be members of the Legislature. It was but a 
 few days ago that I saw in a nevvspap. r a letter 
 from a traveler in Western Missouri, who called 
 at a farmer's house, and found him actually 
 mounting his horse to ride iuto Kanzas, where 
 he was to take his seat as member elect of the 
 Kanzas Legislature. 
 
 When and where, in the history of the world, 
 was such atrocious outrage as this perpetrated 
 or endured ? 
 
 The whole action of this Legislature has been 
 a prolonged crime. Its enactments for the es- 
 tablishment of slavery, rival in atrocity the 
 worst edicts of Caligula or Nero. The red code 
 of Draco whitens in comparison with the Missouri 
 code of Kanzas. That terrible code was said 
 to be written in blood, but the puriisliraents it 
 inflicted were inflicted for crimes: the Missouri- 
 Kansas code denounces death for acts of mercy, 
 humanity and religion. 
 
 When the law itself is iniquity, what but vi- 
 olence and outrage is to be expected from its 
 authors and approvers? At this moment one 
 young man from Ohio lies in prison, charged 
 with murder, for having defended himself to 
 the last extremity against an unprovoked as- 
 sault of these confederates in crime ; and it 
 was but the other day that another citizen of 
 our state, who was lately described to me by 
 his neighbors of Ashland county as a Chris- 
 tian Minister of the Disciples Church, irre- 
 proachable in character and of a mild and for- 
 bearing spirit, charged only with avowing him- 
 self in favor of making Kansas a free state, and 
 with refusing to sign a declaration in favor of 
 Slavery, was seized b- a mob of ruffians led 
 by one Kelly, and dragged to the river's brink, 
 where his face was painted black, and marked 
 with the letter R, and then, upon two pine logs 
 lashed together, this Minister of Christ was 
 pushed out into the turbid waters of the Mis- 
 souri, to live or die, as the event might deter- 
 mine. But why speak further of these things ? 
 Who has forgotten the assault by this Missouri 
 mob on the Quarterly Conference of the Meth- 
 odist Church in Platte County — the seizure of 
 the minister whiU; preaching, amid shouts of 
 "Hang him! Shoot him !" — the escape of the 
 other ministers amidst threats of tar, feathers 
 and hemp, from the mob, amply provided with 
 tliese things ? 
 
 If there be any manhood left in us — if we 
 are not utterly bereft of understanding — if any 
 love of justice, if any touch of pity, if any 
 sense of right yet dwells in our hearts — can we 
 fail to see and feel that if there was cause 
 why wo should unite last fall to stay the deso- 
 laring march of slavery aggression, there is, at 
 this liour, tenfold greater occasion for such 
 union ? 
 
 But we ai'e often told that the administration 
 and its supporters are not responsible for these 
 infamous iiansactions. Not responsible I Is 
 not the f're.-ideiit charged with the duty of ex- 
 ecuting the laws of the United StatisV Is not 
 Franklin Fierce President V When has heat- 
 tempted to enforce these laws in Kansas ? If 
 
13 
 
 Anthony Burns follows the North Star from 
 his house of bondage in Virginia, to Bunker 
 Hill in Massachusetts, the army and navy are 
 put ill requisition, the City Military is ordered 
 out, ti:e telegraph wires tremble under the mes- 
 sages they bear from Washington to Boston, 
 and from Boston to Washington. The whole 
 energy of the. Government is exerted to force 
 the poor fugitive slave back to bondage. When 
 Kansas was invaded, the United States troops 
 were idle at Fort Leavenworth : not a soldier 
 was employed to protect the settlers. Not even 
 a proclamation was issued in condemnation of 
 the outrages : not even a smile of Presidential 
 favor or a crumb of executive patronage was 
 withdrawn from the iusligators and leaders. — 
 At the instance of the sham Legislature of Kan- 
 sas, backed by Atchison, Striiigfellow aud Jef- 
 ferson Davis, Reeder was removed from office. 
 Stringfellow and Kelly were rewarded for the 
 incendiary articles with which their paper, the 
 Squatter Sovereign, were crowded, with the 
 printing of the Laws of Congress, and other 
 governmental patronage. Kelly, one of the ed- 
 itors, was made Postmaster. And finally Wil- 
 son Shannon, one of the Ohio Members who 
 voted for the iniquity, and for that treason to 
 his constituents was rejected by the People, 
 was appointed Governor, to recognize the ille- 
 gal and fraudulent assemblage which undertook 
 to legislate for Kansas, as the actual lej/isla- 
 ture, and its acts as valid laws. 
 
 If these facts do not prove the complicity of 
 the Administration in the Kansas outrages, it 
 is impossible to establish any proposition by 
 evidence. 
 
 And now, my friends, what will you do ? 
 Hold on to the party and let the tide of aggres- 
 sion roll on ? Or will you, with the noble in- 
 dignation of men, whose principles have been 
 betrayed, whose rights invaded, whose liber- 
 ties endangered, rally to the rescue of freedom? 
 We make no war on the Constitution. Let 
 every section of the country have the lull ben- 
 efit of all its provisions. But let it not be wrest- 
 ed from its original intention to the sanction of 
 injustice and crime. Let it be construed and 
 administered rather, in the light of its own 
 great purposes, the establisment of justice and 
 the security of freedom. 
 
 We make no war on our brethren of the Slave 
 States. We would deal justly and generously 
 with them in every respect, even as we would 
 wish them to deal with us. We do not seek to 
 impose our Liberty upon them : let them not 
 seek to impose their Slavery on us, or to in- 
 volve us in Its support. This is the plain path 
 of duty for both sides, atd it is also the path of 
 peace. 
 
 There are thousands in the Slave States who 
 abh.ir that violation of plighted faith through 
 which the Missouri Prohibition was abrogated. 
 But they need the support of the United Free 
 States. A distinguished Southern gentleman 
 once said to me " Your Northern People never 
 sustain iheir own meu who faithfully represent 
 their principles. The only crown with which 
 ..fidelity to Northern Principles has been reward- 
 ed is the crown of Martyrdom. How theU can 
 you expect Southern men to resist such a meas- 
 
 ure as this Nebraska Bill, unjust and danger- 
 ous as it is, when proposed by a Northern Sen- 
 ator and sustained by a Northern President?' 
 Let the Free States ouly be true to themselves, 
 sustaining persistenlly their faithlul represen- 
 tatives, and there will be no lack of just and 
 generous Southern men to stand with them. 
 
 But more than this. There are thousands 
 also ill the Slave States Who abhor slavery 
 itself. Let the people of the Free States cease 
 from the extension of slavery: — let them with- 
 draw from it the support of National Legisla- 
 tion — let them place the fair and legitimate in- 
 fluence of the National Government on the side 
 of Freedom — and then thousands will take up 
 the work of emancipation at home, in their 
 respective States, and the glorious result of 
 Freedom for all will be reached at no very dis- 
 tant period, in modes entirely consistent with 
 the safety of all, the prosperity of all, and the 
 constitutional rights of all. 
 
 Permit me now, my fellow citizens, to direct 
 your attention to some other matttrs. of mo- 
 mentous interest to you, involved deeply in 
 the pending political contest. I rtfer to the 
 State Reforms which the Convention of the 13th 
 of July proposed in their Platform ; and to 
 certain National Reforms of a kindred charac- 
 ter. 
 
 The Platform of the 13th July demands re- 
 trenchment in public expenditures; athorough- 
 ly economical State administration ; a just and 
 equal basis of taxation, aud the election of mem- 
 bers of the Legislature by single Districts. 
 
 Other reforms are doubtless needed : but the 
 Convention deemed it best and wi-est to refer 
 all other matters to the people of the counties, 
 who, in the election of members of the Legisla- 
 ture will execute their own wishes, and to the 
 Legislature itself, whose members, comparing 
 opinions with a sincere desire to meet the wants 
 aud promote the welfare of all classes in the 
 State, will be able to mature and enact such 
 laws as will p;uard the rights and secure the 
 prosperity of all the great interests of the State, 
 Commercial, Manufacturing, Mechauical and 
 Agricultural. In respect to these matters I 
 have only to say, should I be chosen to fill the 
 office for which I have been nomiuated, that 
 whatever just and proper influence belongs to it 
 would be exerted in harmony with the will of 
 the representatives of the people. 
 
 Of the Reforms proposed by the Convention 
 I wish to speak more fully. And, first, of the 
 equalization of political power by the Single 
 District system. Hamilton county, under the 
 present system, elects eight Rei)resentatives aud 
 three Senators. ISo other county, except Cuy- 
 ahoga for this year ouly, elects more thau two 
 Represeatatives ; aud no other single couuly 
 elects a Senator except Cuyahoga. This sys- 
 tem, then, gives to whatever party may happen 
 to control Hamilton a vastly disproportioned 
 power. In most other counties each elector 
 votes for but one Representative; in Hamilton 
 county each elector votes for eight. The eight 
 when elected are substantially a unit, aud uni- 
 ted, have equal political power iu the Legisla- 
 ture with eight counties having each a single 
 Representative, and outweigh any number of 
 
14 
 
 counties so divided that the majority either way 
 is less ihau eight. Thus unjust to tlie other 
 counlies, this system is injurious to Hamiltoa 
 couuty also. It gives occat^ion to combiuations 
 auioag candidates by which the true expression 
 of the popular will is olleu defeated, and it 
 subjects all the various interests of city and 
 country to the accidental control of one partic- 
 ular i^tere^t, or, pA'haps, of influences hostile to 
 all. A Single District System would remedy 
 these evils, bringing each Representative into 
 the closest possible contact and sympathy with 
 his cou-tituenls, and compelling each to depend 
 upon his own merits and qualilicalions, rather 
 Uian upon mere politic^vl combinations. The 
 (A)iivention uf the 13lh, therefoie. thought 
 proper to demand an amendment of the Consti- 
 tution, establishing the Single District System. 
 
 [ic^form iu taxation and expenditure is also 
 urgently demanded. It needs no argument to 
 prove that the people are oppressed by taxation, 
 livery body feels the fact. Within a few short 
 years the burden of taxation has grown from 
 something over four millions of dollars, collect- 
 ed annually from the people, to over nine mill- 
 ions. We will be absolutely exact, and say 
 from 84,227.708 to S9, 092. 339. So enormously 
 has this burden increased that the people have 
 become tenants rather than citizens; liie State 
 a landlord rather than a Government; and the 
 charge upon industry and property a rent rath- 
 er than a tax. Ot course expenditure keeps 
 pace witli taxation, and is out of all proportion 
 to the outlay in better times. These facts call 
 loudly for reform. 
 
 I do not say indeed that any State Adminis- 
 tration can relieve the people from taxation. I 
 seek to create no illusive expectations. ^V'bat I 
 do say is that there is no necessity, in my judg- 
 ment, that its burdens should be so enormous, 
 or that the public expenditures should be so 
 lavish. 
 
 But not only is the amount of taxation ex- 
 cessive; but the principles upon which it is levied 
 are wrong. The statute permits the deduction 
 of debts from credits. In other words it allows 
 each individual, in listing his property for tax- 
 ation, to (ieduct what lie owes tVom wliat is ow- 
 ing to him It taxes each upon what he actu- 
 ally ha^, and not upon W'hat he has not. Dut the 
 provisions of the statute allowing these deduc- 
 tions have been declared' uncon.-titutional by a 
 majority of the Judges composing the Supreme 
 Court of the State, all of whom are members of 
 the Administration party, State and National. 
 The State Auditor has accordingly issued his 
 instructions to the township Assessors requiring 
 that all credits should be listed for taxation, 
 without iiny deduction whatever. In some 
 counties, I understand, these instructions are 
 obeyed and the statute is diriegarded, while in 
 other counties the statute is followed and the 
 instructions disregnrded. The necessary result 
 is confusion, inecpMljty, injustice. One county 
 is taxed upon all the credits of the people with- 
 out deduction; another county with perhaps an 
 ecpial amount of credits, is not taxed at all if 
 the dei>ts equal or exceed the credits. 
 
 In my judgment, all this is wrong. The judicial 
 construction of the Constitutiou which abrogates 
 
 the statute seems to me erroneous, and the Aud- 
 itor's instructions, iu my opinion, are founded ou 
 a principle which cannot be vindicated. 
 
 Let me state a case or two, in illustration of 
 the operation of the Auditor's rule. A man, 
 witiiout properly, borrows a hundred dollars 
 and gives his note for it; then lends the same 
 hundred dollars and takes a note. Is he any 
 richer than before? Has he here acquired any 
 property upou which he should be taxed ? Com- 
 mon sense answers in the negative; but the 
 Auditor's rule says he must be taxed upou a 
 hundred dollars. A shoemaker buys a hundred 
 dollars worth of leather, and gives his note to 
 the leather dealer. He converts the leather in- 
 to shoes, which he sells to his neighbors, and 
 thus creates small book accounts against a score 
 of persons. If he sells to safe customers and 
 at fair prices, he will have a little surplus af- 
 ter paying the leather dealer; but, if otherwise, 
 he may sustain a loss. The Auditor's rule is 
 inflexible iu either case, and requires him to 
 pay tax upon the whole value of the accounts, 
 witiiout any deduction of his outstanding debt, 
 although it may take all he can collect from 
 them to pay his creditor. A rule which oper- 
 ates thus, is manifestly unjust. 
 
 But we are told that it brings a large amount 
 of new taxaliles upon the graud levy. That is 
 true. A still greater amount might be obtain- 
 ed liy altering the principle of the rule a little. 
 Just list all the people own, and then add all 
 the people do not own, and you will have a very 
 respectable amount of property ou the grand 
 levy; and if you can make the people pay ta.xe3 
 on the whole, you will have a revenue as large 
 as the greediest hungerer after public plunder 
 could desire. 
 
 Let me illustrate. Let somebody in New- 
 York lend me a thousand dollars and take my 
 note; let me lend the same sum to my ueighbor 
 and take his note ; let the borrower from me 
 lend the same sum to another and take his note; 
 and thus let the process go ou until the same 
 thousand dollars shall have been lent to every 
 per.-^on in the State, the first lender being the 
 last borrower and taking back his money to 
 New-York. There are two millions of people 
 in the State, each of whom will then have bor- 
 rowed and lent a thousand dollars. The aggre- 
 gate amount of notes will be two thousand mil- 
 lions of dollars, and these notes will represent 
 not property, but debt. Now, according to the 
 rule, all these notes will go upon the grand 
 levy, and thus we shall have au addition of two 
 thou.sand millions of dollars of new taxables, 
 and not a cent of additional property in the 
 State. The insolvency of the people constitutes, 
 according to this rule, the weaKh of the State! 
 Now, ta.x those taxables— suppose the tax only 
 one per cent.; (we shall have suflirient cause of 
 thankfulness if we ever get our taxation down 
 to that rate)— and the result will be that each 
 person in the State, for the privilege of owning 
 a thousand dollars and having a thousand dol- 
 lars due to him, or iu other words for the priv- 
 iltfge of being worth just nothing at all, must 
 pay the sum of ten dollars. The aggregate will 
 be twenty millions of dollars— a very pretty 
 revenue to be raised by a tax upon nothing. 
 
15 
 
 Nobody can deny. I think, that this s'lpposi- 
 tioufnliy iUii.-trates the practical operatioa of 
 the rele 1 know of nothin.2 which is more like 
 it than the case of the two Yankees, who were. 
 f,.r some ofivuce. condemned to six months im- 
 prisonraiMU in the same jail. VVhen they went 
 in, one of them had an old jackknife, and the 
 other had nothing at all. iVow, Yankees, under 
 all circumstances, will trade ; and these Yan- 
 kees commenced trading on the jackknife ; and 
 so successriil were their operations, that, at the 
 end of their term, they came out of jail each 
 worth lilly dollars, but with nothing belon-iing 
 to either except the same old jackknife. They 
 had got rich by trading in debt, just as our 
 State'^is to get rich by taxing debt. Taxation 
 by the Auditor's rule may well enough be called 
 the jackknife theory of taxation. 
 
 Now, the party in power— the administration 
 party— which claiins to be the Democratic par- 
 ty, but certainly is not a Democratic party— 
 boldly challenges your approbation both of the 
 amount and the principle of this enormous and 
 oppressive taxation, by nominating for i-eelec- 
 tion all the members of the State administration 
 under whose auspices the present system has 
 been imposed upon the people. 
 
 What emboldens the party to do this it is 
 hard to tell. Perhaps they will insist that 
 those who have proved thetnselves so vigorous, 
 skillful and successful in levying taxes on, must 
 needs be most competent to take taxes off. I 
 have read somewhere, not I think in any ac- 
 credited medical work however, that the "sove- 
 reignest thing on earth" for the bite of a mad 
 dog is a hair of the same dog. Our opponents 
 seem to have availed themselves of the sugges- 
 tion afforded by this specific; for they recommend 
 as the true cure for the evils of a bad adminis- 
 tration, the reelection of all its members. They 
 improve indeed upon the hint ; for whereas a 
 single hair suffices in the case of the bite, they 
 generously offer, as a remedy for the bad admin- 
 istration, to continue nine of the same or sim- 
 ilar officials in power. 
 
 But it is hardly possible that the people will 
 feel inclined to take the administration nostrum. 
 They want some guarantee, not merely of the 
 ability to reform, but of a disposition to do so; 
 and they see no evidence of such a disposition 
 in any action of the party in power. 
 
 Nor are they satisfied with the excuses offered 
 by the administration apologists for the vast 
 increase of taxation. These apologists indeed 
 say that a large proportion of the nine millions 
 of taxes is imposed for county and township 
 purposes. This is admitted; but the question 
 recurs, who made the laws under which all the 
 taxes were levied? And the answer puts the 
 whole responsibility in the right place. That 
 answer is: The party which now endeavors to 
 fasten the existing State administration upon 
 the people for another term. 
 
 It cannot be denied, fellow citizens, that the 
 State officials now in nomination for reelection, 
 and the party which supports them, are respon- 
 sible for our present grievous taxation, and for 
 the oppressive and unjust principle upon which 
 it is levied. 
 
 We want a reform. If it can be efiPected 
 
 without an amendment of the Constitution, well 
 and good — if not, we want an amendment which 
 will effect it. 
 
 But it is not only in State matters that we 
 want reform. We demand it also in the action 
 of the National Administration. Our national 
 taxation has swidled to an enormous sum. More 
 than seventy millions of dollars are every year 
 collected by the Government from the people in 
 the form of duties. Of this vast revenue, the 
 people of Ohio pay at least one-tenth. Seven 
 millions of dollars a year, at least, are paid 
 into the coffers of the Federal Government by 
 the citizens of this State. 
 
 Now there is no necessity whatever for this 
 enormous taxation. The legitimate operations 
 of the Government — all of them — can be carried 
 on at less than half this cost. The necessary 
 effect of an overflowing treasury is extravagance 
 and corruption. Hence steam mail jobs costing 
 millions; and hence vast grants of lands to rail- 
 roads in some States, while similar grants 
 are denied to other States equally entitled, but 
 not so much in favor with the ruling power. 
 Hence, too, extravagant appropriations for army 
 and navy, out of all proportion to the benefits 
 derived from either; and hence such measures 
 as the assumption of the Texas State debt, and 
 the payment of Ten Millions of dollars to Santa 
 Anna for a Texan railroad route to the Pacific. 
 Hence, too, the armies of Federal officials 
 swarming over the land like the locusts ol 
 Egypt, and the tendency, so painfully visible 
 every where, to exalt the Federal and depress 
 the State Governments. 
 
 This is the direct road to consolidation — and 
 the road to consolidation is, for us, the road to 
 ruin. The old theory of our fathers is the true 
 theory. Let us have a poor Government and a 
 rich people — lifht taxes and abundant individual 
 enterprise— economical expenditure and steady 
 prosperity — a General Government strictly 
 limited to its sphere, and State Governments re- 
 spected and honored, because competent and 
 ready to protect the rights and guard the inter- 
 ests of the ptople. 
 
 There is another point of view from which we 
 of the West should heedfully consider this sub- 
 ject of National expenditure. I have already said 
 that the people of Ohio pay into the National 
 Treasury more than seven millions of dollars a 
 year. What do we get back ? Not the salaries 
 of the postmasters — these are paid out of the 
 postages; not the compensation of Marshals and 
 Clerks of the Federal Courts— they are paid 
 out of the fees of their offices. What then? Why, 
 the salaries of two District Judges, and a few 
 appropriations for public buildings. When we 
 ask for a small portion of the vast sum which 
 we pay for the improvement of our Rivers and 
 Harbors, in order that the products of our agri- 
 culture and manufactures may find safe and 
 cheap access to market, it is denied to us. It 
 was but a little more than a year ago that a 
 bill making appropriation for our Ohio river 
 and our Erie Harbors, passed both Houses; but 
 it encountered the veto of the President, or 
 rather of that slave power whose4ustrument the 
 President is. At the same session a bill for Cape 
 Fear river in North Carolina received the Pree- 
 
ideot's signature. At the last session, a bill 
 was passed to remove obstructions to the navi- 
 gation of the Savannah river in Georgia, ana it 
 was sigaed. Another bill was passed to remove 
 the obstructions to the navigation of the St. Clair 
 Flats, above Detroit, and it was not signed. It 
 was not vetoed. If it had Ijeen, it would prob- 
 ably have been passed, notwithstanding the ve- 
 to, i)y a two- thirds vote; and, therefore, to malce 
 .the denial of the appropriation certain, and to put 
 it in tbe most olfensive form, the President put 
 the bill in his pocliet and never returned it to 
 Congress at all. 
 
 It is in view of all those things, fellow citi- 
 zens, that we unite lor Freedom and R-^form. 
 Our oppoaeiils call us Fusionists. Well, there 
 is no harm in that name. We stand together; 
 Whigs, to whom the Whig principles of 1776 are 
 dear; Democrats, who believe in the deraoracy 
 of Jefferson, and do not believe in the democ- 
 racy of Pierce and Davis; Americans, who re- 
 gard Freedom and not Slavery as the corner 
 stone of American Institutions — we stand to- 
 gether to resist the spread of Slavery; to res- 
 (iue our national territories from the grasp of 
 the slave power; to relorm our State adminis- 
 tration; to reduce the mountainous taxation 
 under which all interests labor; to deliver our 
 country from the affliction of the Fierce admin- 
 istration; to punish the authors of the Nebraska 
 iniquity; and to vindicate for the West and its 
 great interests, their just claims upon the Na- 
 tional Government. For these objects we unite 
 and are proud of our union. Arrayed under the 
 banner of Freedom and Reform, with honest and 
 patriotic purposes, we are confident of triumph. 
 Assured that our cause is just, we conMe it 
 cheerfully to the support of the people. 
 
 There was a time, I confess, when I greatly 
 doubted of the future. The American Party 
 sprang suddenly into being. Old organizations 
 disappeared before its triumphant march. In 
 the Free States, it took the side of freedom; and 
 the election of an entire anti-Nebraska delega- 
 tion in Ohio, and the return of such men as 
 Wilson and Hale to the Seuate of the United 
 States, attested the reality of its sympathies. 
 la the Slave States, on the other baud, it as- 
 sumed the championship of slavery and of sla- 
 very e.xtension. For one I greatly feared, and 
 I know my apprehensions were shared by many 
 eulightened and patriotic members of the organ- 
 ization, that when its representatives from Slave 
 States and Free States should meet in National 
 Conventii^i, the Slave State members would 
 succeed as they have heretofore succeeded in 
 similar Conveulioua of other political parties, 
 in securing the adoption of a pro .slavery plat- 
 form, and the nomination of pro-slavery candi- 
 dates, and that the Free State members would 
 acquiesce. This fear of mine — these apprehen- 
 sions of others were realized in part. An Amer- 
 ican National Convention, as we all know, did 
 assemble in Philadelphia. The Slave State 
 members did succeed in securing the adoption 
 of a pro-slavery platform. But — and 1 de- 
 voutly thank God for it — the Free State mem- 
 bers nin NOT, ACCiUiKscK. The l)old and true- 
 hearted geutluman — whose name is -associated 
 with mine upon our Statu ticket, and who will 
 
 soon speak for himself to you — [cheers]— led 
 the van of freedom in denouncing the platforio 
 and called upon his associates from the Free 
 States to rally to the rescue of Freedom. 
 [Cheers.] From that hour hope revived. The 
 action of the intrepid Ford and his fearless asso- 
 ciates demonstrated the existence of a quality, 
 supposed to have become nearly extinct in Nor- 
 thern men— I mean back bone. [Loud ap- 
 plause.] And when ray friend and his fellow 
 delegates came home to Oliio and declared their 
 concurrence in the purpose already avov.ed by 
 the Cleveland State Council — to unite in open 
 Convention with all who were willing to unite 
 with them for Freedom and Reform, I felt that 
 there was but one course for me and those 
 who felt as I did, the paramount importance of 
 these objects, to meet this generous and patri- 
 otic movement half way, and, laying aside every 
 jealousy and every prejudice, go into the Con- 
 vention frankly and sincerely, and honestly 
 abide its result. We did so, and the result is 
 before the people in the platform and ticket of 
 the 13th ol July. 
 
 For myself I owe no allegiance to any other 
 than the Republican organization. I am not a 
 member of any other. I proscribe no man. The 
 rights of all my fellow-citizens, native or na- 
 turalized, are as dear to me as my own. For my 
 associates on the State ticket I dare vouch also 
 that they are govei-ned by no narrow or pre- 
 scriptive ideas. Some of them — perhaps all 
 of them — are members of the American organ- 
 ization, but they represent not the bigoted and 
 proscriptive spirit which can see no worth even 
 in any man born upon foreign soil, and whose 
 blind fanaticism seeks its ends even through 
 violence, and bloodshed ; but that liberal 
 Americanism which makes principles and char- 
 acter and not birth place the test of qualifica- 
 tion for citizenship, and which proposes to ac- 
 cord freely to^ all, wherever born, who are in 
 heart Americans, all the privileges of American 
 citizens. Whether I am mistaken in this or not 
 in one thing I cannot be mistaken. The Amer- 
 icans whom these gentlemen represent do at 
 this moment unite in regarding Freedom and 
 R-.'form as the paramount objects of political 
 action at this moment, and they do join with 
 all who, outside of their organization, are/williug 
 to join with them in the attainment of these ob- 
 jects. It is not, I am sure, an unreasonable ex- 
 pectation that men animated by such a spirit 
 will so revise their declaration of principles and 
 policy as to leave in them nothing justly ob- 
 noxious to the charge of proscriptiveuess or in- 
 tolerance. Let ns unite now for the great ob- 
 jects of our union, and generously aud fearless- 
 ly trust the luture. 
 
 But what are our opponents, who denounce 
 us as fusionists— who seek to hold us responsible 
 for the destruction of the ballot boxes at Ciu- 
 ciiniati, and for the blood.shed at Louisville— 
 who hurl at their fellow citizens throughout the 
 State such epithets as dark lantern conspirators, 
 midnight assassins, murderers of women and 
 children— what are they doing? Dave they not 
 a pet fusion of their own Y What says the 'Jin- 
 cinnati Enquirer, the principal administration 
 paper of Southera Ohio, edited by the United 
 
17 
 
 States Marshal tor the Southern District? Here 
 is a passage which I find credited, as I doubt not 
 correctly to that point. 
 
 "The Democrats, en masse, the old line Whigs, 
 the National Know-Nothings and Union-loving 
 men will combine in one great ma?s, forgetting 
 all distinction when the Union is in danger, and, 
 from the Ohio river to the great Lakes, will 
 charge Abolitionism with a vigor and spirit that 
 will be irresistible, and lead to a brilliant and 
 annihilating victory." 
 
 This looks very much like a fusion; and a fu- 
 sion, too, of a most remarkable character. Dem- 
 ocrats, Whigs and Now-Nothings arc to "cowi- 
 6me." That great master of language, Edmund 
 Burke, once said, "When bo.d men combine, good 
 men should unUe.'" I do not say that those 
 who, accoi'ding to the Enquirer, "will cotnbine," 
 are bad men, but certainly the editor isuot very 
 felicitous in his choice ot expression. Then 
 what is the object of the combination? It is to 
 "charge Abolitionism." By "Abolitionism'' 
 they mean Republicanism. It is to resist the 
 union of the people for the sake of Freedom, 
 that the Democrats are to combine with old line 
 Whigs and National Know-Nothings. Now, 
 who are the old line Whigs? Why, those Whigs 
 ■who, unmindful of the ideas of 1776, and care- 
 less of the great objects of the movement of the 
 people, prefer to give aid and comfort to the 
 party of thegadrainistratiou, rather than unite 
 with the great mass of tbeir patriotic Whig 
 brethren upon the platform and in support of the 
 ticket of the 13th July! Why, those members 
 of the American organization who prove by 
 their action, that they prefer the triumph of the 
 bitterest foes and most vehement denouncers 
 of the Order, rather than the election of a man 
 who stands shoulder to shoulder with nine- 
 tenths of its members in defence of its own de- 
 clared principle that "Freedom is national, and 
 Slavery local." Now, what is the bond of such 
 a combination as this? What can it be but hos- 
 tility to the cardinal principle of the Republi- 
 can Union — resistance to the spread of Slavery, 
 and opposition to the aggressions ot the Slave 
 Power? And in what an attitude do the admin- 
 istration advocates of such a combination pre- 
 sent themselves to the people? In the same 
 breath, almost, they call upon the naturalized 
 voters to come to the rescue of Democracy 
 against the Ivnow-Nothings, and upon the Know- 
 Kothings themselves — or rather upon the pro- 
 slavery Know-Nothings — the very men and the 
 only men in the American Order who insist on 
 the proscription of the foreign born citizens, 
 and who, if any body, are responsible for the 
 very violences which the administration men 
 denounce — to come to the rescue of Democracy 
 against Republicanism! What wonderful con- 
 sistency! The very heaven grows black with 
 storm — the tempest of the people's wrath dar- 
 kens round them — the great deep of popular in- 
 dignation threatens to engulph them — and then 
 the captains of the administration fleet, bound 
 South to Slavery and a market, cry out, in the 
 extremity of their distress, to "old line Whigs" 
 and "National Know-Nothings," to pro-Slavery 
 men of all sorts and colors, "Save, 0! save, us 
 or we sink!"' 
 
 And now, fellow citizens, notice with what 
 earnestness the Washington Union appeals to 
 the democratic crews not to aljandon the decks 
 and quit the ships in prospect of a combination 
 with buch allies. Here is an extract from that 
 paper, Pierce's organ, printed at Washington, at 
 the very door of the White House. Mark its 
 plaintive, beseeching tone: 
 
 "Will the democratic crew abandon the deck 
 or their guns because the man at the wheel be- 
 longs to this or that mess, or because the lieu- 
 tenants are suspected of keeping queer company 
 when ashore?" 
 
 Why, fellow citizens, it does seem as if the 
 leaders imagined that the democratic masses 
 were bereft of common sense and capable ot be- 
 ing led into any combination and used for any 
 purpose. 
 
 Where are the old democratic principles? 
 Where are the spirit-stirring cries of Reform ! 
 Equal Laws guarding Equal Rights! Exact Jus- 
 tice to all men! Eternal hostility to every form 
 of tyranny over the mind or body of man ? All 
 silent now. The grave is not more silent. The 
 lips which once uttered those watchwords are 
 silent in death. Jefferson is gone ! Instead of 
 the days when there were giants upon earth, 
 the days have come of small men with low aims. 
 Instead of Jefferson we have a Pierce. Instead 
 of justice behold oppression. Instead of the ex- 
 tension of Liberty we have the propagandism of 
 Slavery. 
 
 Is it not time for us fellow-citizens, to arouse? 
 Is it not time for us to discard personal prejudi- 
 ces and petty jealousies, and look at men and 
 events in the calm light of reason? Is it not 
 time for all true men to unite in defence of 
 Freedom and for the sake of Reform ? I rejoice 
 to be able to say that the people are everywhere 
 answering these questions in the afiirmative. 
 Here and there the efforts of disorganizers and 
 factionists have done some mischief; but the 
 great moss of the people are sound and immova- 
 ble. 1 have visited many of the counties. Among 
 others, I have been in old Ross, in Fairfield, in 
 Morgan, in Monroe, in Harrison. Everywhere I 
 find the people looking forward to the second 
 Tuesday of October iu the assumed confidence 
 of a glorious triumph. The same assurances 
 reach me from other counties which I have not 
 visited. All things augur victory. Let us then 
 go forward boldly. " Our cause is just." Let 
 our trust be in God. Let every man do his du- 
 ty and his whole duty. The event is eagerly, 
 anxiously awaited in every part of the land. 
 The vote of the second Tuesday of October is to 
 determine whether Ohio will remain faithful to 
 Freedom or succumb to Slavery. God grant 
 that on the coming of that day, upon the wings 
 of the lightnings, the glad tidings may be borne 
 to every part of the laud that the First bora of 
 the Ordinance still adheres and will forever be 
 true to its great principles. 
 
 NoTE.^-This speech has been hastily prepared for pub- 
 lication, as the best form in which to answer the most 
 prominent charges against Mr. Chase, as the Republican 
 candidate for Governor. Some of the topics are treated 
 perhaps more fully than they were in that particular 
 speech — but not more fully than they have been in other 
 speeches during the canvass. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM SPEECHES IN THE SENATE. 
 
 It has been charged that the views of Mr. 
 Chase on the Slavery q^e^tion. as set forth in 
 his speech in Cincinnati and in his speeches in 
 various other places, are not the same as those 
 he has heretofore entertained and expressed. 
 The following extracts from his speeches made 
 in the United States Senate, when he was a 
 member of that body, will show that this charge 
 is not true. His views on the subject of Slave- 
 ry are clearly set forth in the following extracts 
 made from his speeches in the United States 
 Senate, as reported in the Globe. In a speech 
 deJivered March 26th, 1850, he said : 
 
 " We have power to legislate on the subject 
 of Slavery in the States. "We have power to 
 prevent its extension, and to prohibit its exis- 
 tence within the sphere of the exclusive juris- 
 diction of the General Goverumeiit. Our duty, 
 therefore, is to abstain from interference with it 
 in the States. It is also our duty to prohibit 
 its extension in the National Territories, and 
 its continuance where we are constitutionally 
 responsible for its existence." 
 
 March 2(ith, 1850, he said : 
 
 " We llud on the contrary extreme care to 
 exclude these ideas from the Constitution. Nei- 
 ther the word 'slave' or 'slavery' is to be found 
 in any provision. There is not a single expres- 
 sion which charges the National Government 
 with any responsibility in regard to Slavery. 
 No power is conferred on Congress either to es- 
 tablish or sustain it. The framers of the 
 Constitution left it where they found it. exclu- 
 sively in and under the jurisdicti(m of the States. 
 Whenever Slaves are referred to at all in the 
 Constitution, whether in the clause providing 
 for the apportionment of representation and 
 direct taxation, or in that stipulating for the 
 extradition nt fugitives from service, or in that 
 restricting Conirress as to the prohibition of im- 
 portation or migration, they are spoken of, not 
 as persons held as prop(!rty, but as persons held 
 to service or having their conditions determined 
 under Stale laws. We learn, indeed, from de- 
 bates in the Constitutional Convention, that the 
 idea of property in men was excluded with 
 special solicitude. 
 
 "No person ' ♦ • * phall be deprived of life, 
 liberty, or property, without due process of 
 law." Cons, amend, art. 5. 
 
 In nsy judgment, sir, if this amendment had 
 never been made, Congress would have had no 
 
 power to institute Slavery; that is to say, to en- 
 force by its laws, the subjection of one man to 
 the absolute control and disposal of another 
 man; for no such power is conferred by the Con- 
 stitution, and the action of Congress must be re- 
 strained within its delegated powers. But the 
 amendment is an express guarantee of personal 
 liberty. It is an express prohibition against 
 its invasion. So long as it remains a part of 
 the Const.itution, and is obeyed, slavery cannot 
 be constitutionally introduced any where, by 
 the legislation of Congress. It must depend, 
 and depend wholly, upon State law, both for ex- 
 istence and support. Beyond State limits, with- 
 in the boundaries of the United States, there 
 can be constitutionally no slave." 
 
 In January, 1854, he remarked :— 
 
 "Sir, our offence is, that we deny the nation- 
 ality of slavery. No man can sliow that we 
 have ever sought to int(;rfere with the legisla- 
 tion of any State of the Union upon that subject. 
 All that we have ever insisted upon is, that the 
 Territories of this Union shall be preserved 
 from slavery; and that where the General Gov- 
 ernment exercises exclusive jurisdiction, its leg- 
 islation shall be on the side of liberty." 
 
 And again in February, 1854 — 
 
 "My general view upon this subject is simply 
 this: Slavery is the subjection of one man to the 
 absolute disposal of another man by force. Mas- 
 ter and slave, according to the principles of the 
 Declaration of Independence, and by the law of 
 nature, are alike men, endowed by their Creator 
 with equal rights. Sir, Mr. Piuckney was right, 
 when, in the Maryland House of Delegates, he 
 exclaimed, 'By the eternal principles of justice, 
 no man in the State has a right to hold his slave 
 for a single hour.' Slavery then exists no where 
 by the law of nature. Wherever it exi.sts at all, 
 it must be through the sanction and support of 
 municipal or State legislation. 
 
 Upon this state ol things the Constitution 
 acts. It recognizes all men as persons. It con- 
 fers no power, but on the contrary, expressly 
 denies to the Government of its creation all 
 power to e.'^tablish or continue slavery. Congress 
 has no more power under the Constitution to 
 make a slave than to make a king; no more 
 power to (establish slavery than to establish the 
 Inquisition. 
 
 At the same time the Constitution confers no 
 power on Congress; but on the contrary, denies 
 all power to interfere with the internal policy 
 of any State, sanctioned and established by its 
 
10 
 
 own Coastitution and by its own legislation, 
 in respect to the personal relations of its inhab- 
 itants. The States, under the Constitution, 
 are absolutely free from all interference by 
 Congress in that respect, except, perhaps, m 
 the case of war or insurrection; and may legis- 
 late as they please within the limitations of 
 their own Constitutions. They may allow sla- 
 very if they please, just as they may license other 
 wrongs, but State laws, by which slavery is al- 
 lowed and regulated, can operate only within 
 the limits of the State, and can have no extra 
 territorial effect." 
 
 As to his views on the subject of the territo- 
 ries, they are clearly set forth in the following 
 extracts taken from the same source. June 6, 
 1850, he said: 
 
 "For myself, I hold that the Constitution ex- 
 tends to the territories, and in this we nearly 
 all agree; but we differ widely as to the effects 
 of the Constitution upon personal rights. For 
 my own part, so long as the Constitution re- 
 tains unaltered that provision which denies to 
 Congress all power to deprive any person of lib- 
 erty without due process of law, I shall not be- 
 lieve that any person can be held in the territo- 
 ries as a slave without a violation of that instru- 
 ment." Cong. Globe, vol. 21, pt. 2, p. 1146, 
 June 6, 1850. 
 
 March 27, 1850, he said: 
 
 '■In my judgment, also, neither the Govern- 
 ment of the United States, nor any territorial 
 government is or can be constitutionally author- 
 ized to institute slavery, any more than a mon- 
 archy, or a national religion, or the inquisition." 
 Cong. Globe, vol. 22, pt. 1, App. p. 378. March 
 27, 1850. 
 
 "For myself I can not doubt upon the sub- 
 ject. The power to provide governments for 
 the territories, and to prescribe just limits to 
 their action, is clearly given by the Constitu- 
 tion. It has been exercised under every Ad- 
 ministration, and by nearly every Congress 
 since the organization of the Government. 
 Whatever differences of opinion there may have 
 been as to the existence or limits of other pow- 
 ers, there has been very little as to this. 
 The power to prohibit slavery in the territo- 
 ries, is, in my judgment, clear and indisputa- 
 ble, and the duty of exercising it is imperative 
 and sacred." 
 
 " But we are told that if Congress prohibit 
 slavery in the Territories, or abolish slavery or 
 the slave trade in this District, or fail to pro- 
 vide adequate securities for the return of runa- 
 way slaves, the South will dissolve the Union ! 
 This cry, Mr. President, neither astonishes nor 
 alarms me. I have never thought, nor do I 
 now think, that any man should be deterred by 
 it from an honest, fearless discharge of his duty 
 here. It is an old cry, not without profit to 
 those who have used it." From the same. 
 
 His confidence in the people, that they would 
 vindicate the cause of freedom against the sla- 
 very disunionists who were about depriving the 
 free States of all benefits arising from the Mis- 
 souri Compromise, is shown by the following 
 remarks made by him Feb. 4, 1854 : 
 
 " Sir, I believe we are upon the verge of an- 
 other era. That era will be the Era of Reac- 
 tion. The introduction of this question here, 
 and its discussion, will greatly hasten its ad- 
 vent. We who insist upon the denationaliza- 
 tion of slavery, and upon the absolute divorce 
 of the General Government from all connection 
 with it, will stand with the men who favored 
 the compromise acts, and yet wish to adhere to 
 them in their letter and in their spirit, against 
 the repeal of the Missouri prohibition. But you 
 may pass it here. You may send it to the other 
 House. It may become a law. But its effect 
 will be to satisfy all thinking men that no com- 
 promises with slavery will endure except so 
 long as they serve the interests of slavery, and 
 that there is no safe and honorable ground for 
 non-slaveholders to stand upon, except that of 
 restricting slavery within State limits, and ex- 
 cluding it absolutely from the whole sphere of 
 Federal jurisdiction. The old questions be- 
 tween political parties are at rest. No great 
 question so thoroughly possesses the public 
 mind as this of slavery. This discussion will 
 hasten the inevitable reorganization of parties 
 upon the new issues which our circumstances 
 suggest. It will light up a fire in the country 
 which may, perhaps, consume those who kindle 
 it. 
 
 I cannot believe that the people of this coun- 
 try have so far lost sight of the maxims and 
 principles of the Revolution, or are so insensi- 
 ble to the obligations which those maxims and 
 principles impose, as to acquiesce in the viola- 
 tion of this compact. Sir, the Senator from 
 Illinois tells us that he proposes a final settle- 
 ment of all territorial questions in respect to 
 slavery, by the application of the principles of 
 popular sovereignty. What kind of popular 
 sovereignty is that wMch allows one portion of 
 the people to enslave another portion ? Is 
 that the doctrine of equal rights ? Is that the 
 teaching of enlightened, liberal, progressive 
 Democracy ? No. Sir ; no ! There can be no 
 real Democracy which does not fully maintain 
 the rights of man, as man. Living, practical, 
 earnest Democracy imperatively requires us, 
 while carefully abstaining from unconstitutional 
 interference with the internal regulations of 
 any State upon the subject of Slavery, or any 
 other subject, to insist upon the practical appli- 
 cation of its great principles in all the legisla- 
 tion of Congress. 
 
 I repeat, sir, that we who maintain these 
 principles will stand shoulder to shoulder with 
 the men who, differing from us upon other ques- 
 tions, will yet unite with us in opposition to 
 the violation of plighted faith contemplated by 
 this bill. There are men, and not a few, who are 
 willing to adhere to the compromises of 1850. 
 If the Missovri prohibition, which these compro- 
 mises incorporates and preserves among its own 
 provisions, shall be repealed, abrogated, broken 
 up, thousands will say, away with all compro- 
 mises — they are not worth the paper on which 
 they are printed; we will return to the old 
 principles of the Constitution; we will assert 
 the ancient doctrine — that no person shall be 
 deprived of life, liberty or property, by the leg- 
 islation of Congress, without due process of 
 
law. Carrying out that principle into its prac- 
 tical application, we will not cease our efforts 
 until slavery shall cease to exist, wherever it 
 can be reached by the constitutional action of 
 the Grovernment." 
 
 Wo have italicised that part of his remarks 
 wherein he declares that men of all parties will 
 unite in resisting slavery extension, however 
 much they may differ politically on other ques- 
 tions. Let it be remembered that these remarks 
 were made in February 1854, before any steps 
 for a " Fusion "had been taken. In them will 
 be found the explanation of his present political 
 position. He is willing " to stand shoulder to 
 shoulder" with any man who will unite with 
 him in resisting the encroachments of the slave 
 power, however much he may differ froin him on 
 minor political questions. On this basis the 
 Republican party has been founded — on it, it 
 triumphed last year, and will triumph again 
 this. 
 
 The question is sometimes asked, is Mr. Chase 
 an Abolitionist ? The following debate which 
 took place between him and Mr. Clay, in Feb- 
 ruary, 1851, will throw light on that subject, as 
 well as his views of the Union. 
 
 Mr. Clay — At Springfield the other day, a 
 meeting declared that Constitution or no Con- 
 stitution, Union or no Union, law or no law, 
 they wished the non-execution of the Fugitive 
 Slave Law within the limits of that Common- 
 wealth. Did the Senator suppose we had under- 
 taken the Herculean task of pacifying his 
 friends, or at least those who think with him on 
 general subject of abolition ? 
 
 Mr. Chase — Does the Senator mean to enu- 
 merate me among those who have expressed a 
 wish for the dissolution of the Union ? 
 
 Mr. Clay — No sir, I only meant to say that 
 the Senator is in bad company. 
 
 Mr. Chase — If the Senator will bo so kind as 
 to allow me to add a word, I will say that if I 
 *am in bad companj' I do not know it. 
 
 Mr. Clay — I mean in the company of Aboli- 
 tionists. If the Senator will disavow and repu- 
 diate the Abolitionists of all shades and culors, 
 I should be truly happy to hoar him. 
 
 Mr. Chase — I do disavow most emphatically all 
 aseociation or connection Milh any class of per- 
 
 20 
 
 sons who desire the disssolution of this Union 
 say now, as I said at the last session, that "wf 
 of the West are in the habit of looking upon this 
 Union as we look upon the arch of Heaven, with- 
 out a thought that it can ever decay or fall." In 
 this sentiment I fully participate. I am aware 
 that there are some Abolitionists or anti-slavery 
 men — names are of little consequence — who re- 
 gard the Constitution as at war with moral obli- 
 gation and the supreme law. I am not of them 
 But if the Senator, when denouncing Abolition 
 ists, means to include in his reproaches all those 
 citizens who, within the limits of Constitutional 
 obligation, seek to rescue this Government from. 
 all connection with slavery, I can claim no ex- 
 emption. I am one of those who mean to exer- 
 cise all legitimate Constitutional power to re- 
 strict slavery within the limits of the slave 
 States, and in all places under the exclusive ju- 
 risdiction of the National Government, to main- 
 tain every person, of whatever race or origin, iu 
 the enjoyment of personal freedom. That is my 
 position. 
 
 Mr. Clay— Mr. President, I am perfectly 
 aware of the infinite variety of abolitionism. I 
 have not yet heard the Senator disavow aboli- 
 tionism. 
 
 Mr. Chase — I do not know what the Senator 
 means by the term. 
 
 Mr. Clay — Disunion abolitionism. 
 
 Mr. Chase — I do not know to what class of 
 persons the Senator means to refer, when he de- 
 nounces and stigmatizes people as abolitionists. 
 If he, by that epithet, intends to designate that 
 class of persons of whom I say I am one, who 
 wish to maintain the Union, but not to allow 
 slavery within the sphere of the exclusive juris- 
 diction of the National Government, then I am 
 doubtless an abolitionist. But, if by that term, 
 he intends only to describe those who would 
 brcaiv up the Union, or interfere with the State 
 legislations by which slavery is maintained with- 
 in State limits, I do not acknowledge its appli- 
 cability to me. 
 
 On the 22d March, 1852, referring to doctrines 
 advanced by Senator Rhett. of South Carolina, 
 on the Fugitive Law, he said: 
 
 "I will say, now, that, so far as the honorable 
 Senator a(]\ances the doctrines of State rights 
 which Jeflerson and Madison inculcate, I agree 
 with him; so far as he advocates the doctrine of 
 disunion, I dissent from him wholly, utterly, here 
 and every where." 
 
 i Ui^ L. 
 
 .■♦•SR \V(i. 
 
4i