E435 / A^^ ^^^ tf: -^o A S' ^oV" ^,;;^ .o^' ' " THE PARTIES OF THE DAY SPEECH OF WILLIAM H.'SEWARD. f AT AUBURN, OCTOBER 21, 1856. WASHINGTON, D. C. PUBLISHED BY THE REPUBLICAN ASSOCIATION OP WASHINGTON. Buell & Blanchard, Printers, 1857. SPEECH OF MR. SEWARD. Fellow-Citizk.n's : "We are neighbors and frieads. "W'e know each other well. I know- that you are sincere, and you know, as I trust, that I am not a man of ungrateful disposi- tion. AV'e have a common memory of many political storms through which we have pass- ed, not altogether without occasional aliena- tions and separations. You therefore can read- ily conceive, without the use of amplification on my part, how profoundly gratifying it is to me now to see not only a general brightening of the skies, auspicious of the triumph of the polit- ical principles which I have cherished through BO muny trials, but also troops and crowds and clouds of friends, more numerous, more earnest, and more confiding, than those Vjy whom I was surrounded in the most successful and happiest periods of my life. If politics were indeed, as many seem to sup- pose, merely an uncertain sea, bounded by rich ports and havens, tempting private adventure, T should not be one of those who, standing on the beach, would be inciting my fellow-titizeus to embark on board of this craft or of the other. If politics were, as others seem to think, merely a game cunningly compounded of courage, accident, and skill, in which prizes or crowns were to be won by the victors for their own glory and gratification, I certainly should not be found among the heralds of the contestants on either side. If, again, politics were only a forum in which social theories, without immediate bearing on the welfare and safety of the coun- try, were discussed, I might then be a listener, but I should not be a disputant. liut, although politics present these aspects to superficial observers^ they are nevertheless far more serious and practical. They are in re- ality the regulation and direction of the actual life of the American people. How much of in- dividual, domestic, and social happiness depends on the regulation and conduct of only one single human life 1 How much more of human hap- piness depends, then, on the regulation and con- duct of this whole nation's thousand-fold longer life! Since I have come before you on this occa- sion influenced by these sentiments, you will not expect from me either humorous, exaggerated, passionate, or prejudiced speech, but will calcu- late on an examination of the merits of candi- dates for public favor, and of the parties by whom those candidates are respectively sustained. It is not my habit to speak largely of candi- dates; I refrain for two reasons. First, because, being necessarily brought into personal combi- nation or conflict with public men, my judgment concerning them is liable to the biases of partial- ity and jealousy. Secondly, because it is not a habit of parties in our country to select unfit, unworthy, or unreliable men, to be their represent- atives. Whatever may be the personal merits or demerits of a candidate, he cannot act otherwise, if he be chosen, than as an agent of the majority to whom he owes his place. The real question, therefore, in every canvass, is, What are the merits of the party by whom a candidate is preferred ? And inquiries concerning the personal charaetert , dispositions, and conduct of candidates, are wast- ed on a false and delusive issue. You can try the truth of this position at once, by inquiring of whomsoever assails the character of the candi- date of your choice, whether he would give his support to that candidate, abandoning his own, if all his personal objections could at once bo removed. Your opponent, if a candid man, would probably answer in the negative. But the case is quite different with political parties or masses of citizens. A nation ac-ts at any one time through the consent and activit^, not of all its members, but of only a majority, who determine what shall be done, not only for themselves, but for all other citizens. By oui- individual suffrages, we express our choice, whether one class of citizens, with a specific poh- cy and peculiar principles, shall rule the country, directing it in a course of their own ; or whether a different class, with different policy and prin- ciples, shall conduct it in a contrary direction. I shall therefore discuss existing parties freely. You shall judge whether I perform this duty with moderation and candor. In the first place, I must ask you to notice the fact that American society is now in a transition state, so far as political parties are concerned. Two or three years ago, the American People were divided into two well-defined, distinct, and organized parties, the Whigs and the Democrats. To-day, instead of those two parties, we see three masses, uncertainly defined, and apparent- ly at least quite unorganized — namely, Ameri- cans, Democrats, and Republicans ; and we see portions of each of these easily detached, and passing over to the others, while a very consid- erable number of citizens stand hesitating whether to join one or the other, or to stand aloof still longer from all. Such a transition stage, although unusual, is not unnatural. Established parties are built on certain policies and principles, and they will re- main so long as those policies and principles are of paramount importance. They must break asunder and dissolve when new exigencies bring up new and difiFerent policies and principles, and the transition stage will last until the paramount importance of these new policies and principles shall be generally felt and confessed. In a healthy and vigorous Republic, the trans- ition stage I have described cannot last long, be- cause, in the absence of a firm and decided majority to direct its course, it would fall under the management of feeble and corrupt factions, under whose sway it would rapidly decline and speedily perish. Our Republic, God be thank- ed, is yet healthy and vigorous, and we already see that society is passing out of the transition stage, to the ancient and proper condition. This condition is one which tolerates two firm and enduring parties — no less, and no more. There must be two parties, because at every stage of national life some one question of national con- duct, paramount to all others, presents itself to be decided. Such a question always has two sides, a right side and a wrong side, but no third or middle side. The right side unites a party. The wrong side attracts a party. All masses which affect neutrality, as well as all masses which seek to stand independently on questions which have already passed and become obsolete, or which have not yet attained paramount im- portance, are crowded and crushed in the con- flicts between the two parties which occupy for the time being the whole field of contest. If such an emergency has now occurred, pre- senting a vital question, on which society must divide into two parties, and if those parties are actually found in the political arena, then we are now individually to decide whether to identify ourselves with a mass which will exist uselessly for a short period, or unite with one of two parties which will be enduring, and on whose conflict depends the welfare of tlie Republic ; and as between these parties, whether we shall attach ourselves to the party which will main- tain the wrong, and perish with it, or that which shall maintain the right, and immediately or ultimately triumph with it. You yourselves shall prove by your responses that tluit emergency has occurred, and that ques- tion id upon us. What has produced the disor- ganization and confusion which we have all seen and wondered at, involving the dissolution of the Whig party, and the disorganization of the Demo- cratic party, and given room and verge for the American or Know Nothing party ? Ywu all an- swer, the agitation of Slavery. And you answer truly. Answer again. What shall I discourse upon ? The contest of the American Colonies with Great Britain, and the characters of the Whigs and Tories? No; these are themes for the Fourth of July. The adoption of the Constitution, and the disputes between Federalists and Republi- cans ? No ; let them sleep. The Tariflf, National Bank, and Internal Improvements, and the con- troversies of the Whigs and Democarts ? No ; they are past and gone. What, then, of Kansas — the admission of Kansas as a free State or a slave State, the extension of Slavery in the territories of the United States ? Ah, yes ; that is the theme — the extension of Slavery, and nothing else. What are the Americans in ths North and in the South discussing in their secret coun- cils, so far as their debates are suifered to transpire? The abrogation and restoration of the Missouri Compromise, and nothiog else. The Democrats also, in the North and South — they talk of nothing else but saving the Union from destruction, by suppressing this discussion about the extension of Slavery. Is this question about the extension of ^avery new, unreal, and imaginary — the mere caprice of an hour? Is it a wind that " bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but cannot tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth ? " No ; it is an ancient and eternal conflict between two entirely antagonistic systems of hu- man labor combined with American society, and aot unequal in their forces ; a conflict for not merely toleration, but absolute political sway in the Republic ; between the system of free labor, with equal and universal suffrage, free speech, free thought, and free action, and the system of slave labor, with unequal franchises secured by arbi- trary, oppressive, and tyrannical laws. It is as old as the Republic itself, although it has never ripened before. It presented itself when the Con- stitution was adopted, and was then only tempo- rarily repressed by a compromise, which allowed to slaveholding communities three votes for every five slaves, while it provided at the same time for the aV)olition of the African slave trade. It pre- sented itself in the Constitutional Congress of 1787, and was then put aside only by the pas- sage of the Ordinance of 1787, dedicating all the Northwest Territory to free labor. It oc- curred again in 1820, threatening to distract the Union, and was then again put to rest by an- other compromise, which relinquished Missouri to slave labor, and gave over the Territory which now constitutes Kansas and Nebraska to free labor. It occurred again in 1844, when Texas was annexed, and was put to sleep for only a short space by the division of Texas — very un- equally, indeed — into slave soil and free soil. It arose again during the war with Jlexieo, and was quieted by the memorable Compromise of 1850, whose details I need not repeat. It occur- red again in 1854, on the opening of Kansa^and Nebraska Territories to civilization, and was put to sleep once more by the adoption in Congress of the specious delusion of popular soTereignty. The question, that is so old, that has presented itself so often, and never without disturbing, as it seemed, the very foundations of society, and that has deranged and disorganized all the political combinations of the country, fortified as they were by so many interests, ambitions, and tra- ditions, must be confessed to be a real and en- during, if not a vital, question. But a moment's examination will serve to satisfy you that it is also "a. vital question. It is really one in which the parties are a sectional, local class of slave- holders, standing on the unnatural principle of property in human beings on the one side, and the greater mass of society on the other, who, whether from choice or necessity, are not, cannot, and will not be, either slaves or the owners of slaves. A small minority, which cannot even maintain itself, except by means of continually-increasing concessions and new and more liberal guaranties, against a majority that could never have been induced to grant any guar- anties whatever except by threats of disunion, and that can expect no return for new and further concessions and guaranties, but increasing exac- tions and ultimate aggressions or secessions. The slaveholders can never be content without dominion, which abridges the freedom as well as circumscribes the domain of the non-slavehold- ing freemen. Non-slaveholding freemen can never permanently submit to such dominion. Nor can the competition or contention cease, for the reason that the general conscience of man- kind throws its weight on the side of Freedom, and presses the resistanls onward to oppose the schemes and aggressions of the slaveholding class. Heretofore, opposing political combina- tions, long established, and firmly intrenched in traditions and popular affections, have concurred in the policy of sujipressing this great and impor- tant question ; but they have succumbed under it at last. Henceforth, the antagonistical elements will l)e left to clash without hindrance. Hereto- fore, the broad field of the national Territories allowed each of the contending interests ample room, without coming into direct conflict with the other. Henceforth, the two interests will be found contending for common ground claimed by both, and which can be occupied by only one of them. One other condition remains to be settled — namely, that this great question is imminent and urgent; in other words, that it must be settled and determined, without further postponement or delay. How can it be further postponed ? If it could be postponed at all, it could be only by the same means which have been used for that purjiose heretofore — namely, corapromise. Where arc the agents necessary to make new compromi- ses ? The agents of the past compromises are gone. Although tliey sleep in honored graves, and the mourners over them have not yet quitted the streets, yet no new compromisers arise to occupy their places. A compromise involves mutual e((uivaleuts — something to give, and something to take in exchange. Will blavery give you any- thing? No ; it insists on a free range over all the Territories. What have you to give in e.xcliangc ? When you have given up Kansas, you will have relinquished all the Territories ; for the principle of the relinquishment is, that Slavery may con- stitutionally take them all. When compromise IS exhausted, what follows? Dispute, conten- tion, contest, conflict. Again, the question is imminent, and must be met now. Kansas, at the last session of Con- gress, voluntarily offered itself as a free State, and demanded to be admitted into the Union, and was rejected. Since that time, the Territory has been subjugated by slaveholders ; and they, having usurped its sovereignty, are organizing a slave State there, which will olfer itself for ad- mission into the Union at the next session of Congress. Utah, already organized as( a slave State, with iTeT Thcestuous soc ial system,' is lying concealed and waiting, ready to demand admis- sion so soon as Kansas shall have been received into the Union. The adoption of both, or even one of these States, will bear heavily, perhaps conclusively, on the fortunes of the entire conflict between Freedom and Slavery. Insomuch as the question, that is henceforth to divide society into two parties, is thus seen to be a vital and imminent one, let us fully possess ourselves of its magnitude. We have a sluggish, turbid, and desolating stream of slave labor, issuing from fifteen slave States. We have ever-increasing and commingled volumes of free labor, issuing from sixteen free States, swollen by a stream scarcely less full from European and Asiatic fountains. These two variant floods can- not be combined, but one necessarily repels and excludes the other. We have half a continent yet to be opened to the flow of the one or of the other. Shall we diffuse Slavery over the new region, to react upon and destroy ourselves, or shall we extend Freedom over it, and spread happiness throughout all its mountains and plains, and thus forever establish our own safety and welfare ? If this great question were disembarrassed of all personal and partisan interests and preju- dices, the universal voice of the American peo- ple would be pronounced for Freedom, and against Slavery. Freedom is nothing more than equality of political right or power among all the members of a State. It is natural, just, use- ful, and beneficent. All men instinctively choose the side on which these advantages lie. How true this is, you may infer from the fact that every one of the banners, borne to this field by one of the great contending masses, wears, as its inscription, a tribute to Freedom, while no ban- ner, borne by either of the other parties, is ever defiled with homages to Slavery. Nevertheless, while all avow themselves fa- vorable to Freedom, we have to choose, between the three existing masses, the one which will effectually secure its predominance in the Re- public. Shall we join ourselves to the Know Nothing or American organization? What are its creed and its policy ? Its creed is, that the political franchises of alien immigrants and Roman Cath- 6 olics in our country are too great, and its policy j crowded from a neutral position, and, with crum- is to abridge them Now I might, for argument sake, concede that this creed and this policy were just and wise ; still I could not unite with the Know Nothings, even in that case, because their movement is out of season and out of place. The question of the day is not about natives and foreigners, nor about Protestants and Roman Catholics, but about freemen and slaves. The practical and immediately urgent question is. Shall Kansas be admitted into the Union as a free State, or shall she be made a slave State, and so admit- ted? What have the franchises of alien immi- grants and Roman Catholics to do with that ? If the American people declare for Freedom, Kansas will be free. If the American people declare for Slavery, Kansas will be a slave State. If the American people divide, and one portion, being a minority, declare for Freedom, while another portion, being also a minority, declare against foreigners and Catholics, and a third, larger than either, declare for Slavery, nothing- is obtained against foreigners and Catholics, and nothing against Slavery, and Kansas becomes a slave State. Thus it is apparent that the issue raised by the Know Nothings, whatever is its merit, is an immaterial, irrelevant, and false is- sue. A false issue always tends to divert and mislead the people from the true one, and, of course, to prejudice the judgment to be render- ed upon it. I do not accuse the Know Nothings of designing so to mislead, because, first, I know nothing of the motives of others ; and, secondly, because the question is not upon motives, but upon effects. What have been the effects thus far? The Know Nothing members of Congress divided between the advocates of Freedom in the Territories and its opponents. Thf ir votes, combined with either, would have given it a complete triumph. Those votes reserved, and cast as some peculiar interest dictated, have left the question of Freedom in Kansas to the ordeal of the sword. What is the effect in the present canvass, on which depends the question of the admission of Kansas and of Utah, as slave States, in the next Congress? Distraction of the public mind. Such effects are inevitable. Whoever seeks to interpose an unreal or false issue, must necessa- rily, in order to gain even a hearing, affect neu- trality on the real one. At the same time, no party can practice neutrality on a vital issue with fairness. It will necessarily sympathize with the weaker of the two contestants, and, in some degree, co-operate with it to overthrow the stronger, which is the common adversary of both. Of course, as the two great contestants possess unequal strength in different States, the neutral will favor one in some of the States, and favor the other in other States. By virtue of a law that is irresistible, it will, sooner or later, betray each party, when its own peculiar ends require that course. The experience of the V/hig and Democratic parties has proved how impossible it is to practice neutrality on the great question of Slavery. The former has broken into pieces. bled ranks, has taken that of the extension and fortification of Slavery. The Know Nothing mass can expect no better success. The eHbrt will cost its life. Crowded and jostled between the two combatants, it will and must dissolve, giving up portions of its host here to Freedom, and there to Slavery, but not until it is too late to secure the triumph of Freedom. Thus you see that the Know Nothing mass is not really a political par- ty. It is only an ephemeral and evanescent fac- tion, as useless and injurious as a third blade in the shears, or a third stone which an ignorant artisan might attempt to gear in between the upper and the nether millstone. I3y another sign you shall know it to be not a party, but a faction. From the days of the land- ing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth, until now, every one of the great parties, which has been engaged in directing the life of the American people,, has recognised, from necessity, the fact that the po- litical system which exists and which must con- tinue to exist here is a Republican one, and is based on the principle of the rightful political equality of all the members of the State ; and has confessed that directness, publicity, and equality of voices, are necessary in the conduct of affairs. The Know Nothings reject these principles, and seek to exclude a large and considerable portion of the members of the State from all participation in the conduct of its afi'airs ; and to obtain con- trol and carry on the operations of the Govern- ment of all, by secret machinery, inconsistent with the Constitution of a Rejiublic, and appro- priate only to a conspiracy eitlier for or against despotism. It will, I think, be hereafter regard- ed as one of the caprices of politics, that a sys- tem of combination so puerile was ever attempt- ed in the United States. The absurdity of the attempt is rendered still more glaring, when it is considered that the grounds of persecution, as- sumed against the class to be excluded, are those of nativity and religious belief — grounds direct- ly in conflict witli that elementary truth an- nounced by the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, and are by na- ture endowed with certain inalienable rights^, to secure which Governments are instituted among men ; and with that other fundamental article of the Constitution, which declares that no system of religion shall ever be established. Who, then, will choose to enroll himself under the banner of an ephemeral, evanescent, and in- jurious faction, like this, to be compromised in its frauds for a day or a year, or two years, and then to be left by it to the pity and scorn of the nation whose confidence it haS sought to abuse? Certainly no one who values at its just worth the great interests of Freedom and Humanity, which are staked on the present contest, nor even any one who values at its just worth his own influence, or even his own vote, or his own character as a citizen. Our choice between parties, fellow-citizens, is thus confined to the Democratic and Republican parties. On what principle could we attach our- selves to the Democratic party ? Let us look the and perished in the effort. The latter has been I actual state of things full in the face. Seven years ago, when I entered Congress as a Senator Irom this State, there was not one acre of yoil ■within the national domain from which Slavery was not excluded by law. It was excluded from Minnesota by the Ordinance of 1787, which was then of fully acknowledged obligation and effect. It was e.\cluded from Kansas and Nebraska by the Missouri Compromise restriction, which also was then in full effect. It was equally excluded from California, including New Mexico and Utah, by Mexican laws, which had never been impair- ed, and were of confessed obligation. It was excluded from Oregon by the organic law of that Territory. Now, there is not an acre of the public domain which Congress has not opened to the entrance of Slavery. It has ex- pressly abrogated the Missouri Compromise, on the ground that it was void, for want of power in Congress under the Constitution to exclude Slavery, and also on the ground that the Com- promise of 1 850 had already settled its invalidity. This legislation, if acquiesced in by the people, will henceforth be irresistibly claimed as abro- gating alike the Ordinance of 1787, the Missouri ('ompromise restriction, and the Mexican laws. Thus, the whole of the Territories have been al- ready lost to Freedom by the legislation of the last seven years ; and the controversy before us is one not to save, but to reclaim. During the first six years of the period I have named, there were only two parties — the Democratic and Whig parties — in Congress and in the country. During the last year, there were three — the Dem- ocratic, Know Nothing, and Republican parties. Every one will at once acquit the Republican party, and those who now constitute it, of all agency in the betrayal and surrender of Freedom, which have thus been made. The responsibility for thera, therefore, belongs to the Democratic party and to the Whig party. Now, you may divide this responsibility between the Democratic and Whig parties, just as you like. The Whig party has perished under its weight, but a still greater responsibility lies upon the Democratic j)arty. It was the Democratic party that refused to admit California, without condition or com- ])roniise, in 1850 ; that forced on the Whig party the Compromise of that year, and adopted it as its own permanent policj', and elected Franklin I'ierce the present President of the United States. It was the Democratic party that invented the new, plausible, deceptive, and ruinous policy of abnegation of Federal authority over Slavery in the Territories, and the substitution of the theory of Popular Sovereignty ; and it was the Democrat- ic party that, with the co-operation of a portion of the know Nothings, rejected the appeal of op- pressed and subjugated Kansas for relief and res- toration to Freedom by admission into the Union fts a free State. The Democratic party did in- deed, in some of its Conventions in Northern States, for a time hesitate to commit itself to the policy of Slavery Propagandism, by a breach of public taith, and by fraud and force, but it has finally renounced all opposition, and it now stands boldly forth, avowing its entire approval of that policy, and a determination to carry it through to ita end, whatever that end may be. Nor will any candid person claim that anything better is to be hoped fiom the Democratic party in the future. It is a party essentially built on the interests of the slaveholding class. De- prived of that support, it would instantly cease to exist. The principle of this class is, that prop- erty in man is sanctioned by the Constitution of the United States, and is inviolate. All that has been won by this class from Freedom has been won on that principle. The decisions of Judge Kane and other Federal Judges, and the odious and tyrannical laws of the usurpers in Kansas, are legitimate fruits of that principle. To that principle the Democratic party must adhere or perish, and it accepts it as the least fearful of two alternatives. But the principle, when established in the Territories, will then be with equal plau- sibility extended to the States, and thenceforth we shall have to contend for the right of the free States to exclude Slavery within their own bor- ders. If these arguments be sound, we are shut up to the necessity of giving our support to the Re- publican party, as the only means of maintaining the cause of Freedom and Humanity. Why, then, shall we stand aloof from it, in this election, or for a day or an hour? I will review the argu- ments urged from all quarters, and you shall see, in the first place, that every one of them is friv- olous and puerile ; and, secondly, that it involves nothing less than a surrender of the entire ques- tion in issue, and acquiesces in the unrestricted domination of Slavery. First. We are conjured, by those who, in Bos- ton, New York, and elsewhere, call themselves Straight-out Whigs, to wait for a re-organiza- tion of the National Whig party, to rescue the cause of Freedom. But is it written, in any book of political revelation, that a resurrection awaits parties which have fulfilled the course of na- ture? Secondly. The Whig party perished through a lack of virtue to maintain the cause of Free- dom. Amongst all of those who are waiting and praying for its resurrection, there is not one that to-day yields his support to that cause. What, then, but new betrayals can be expected, if it is destined to a resurrection ? We are told, on all sides, that the Republican party is new and partially organized, and merely experimental. It is indeed new, and • as yet imperfectly organized. But so once was the an- cient Whig party, that gave to the country its In- dependence. So once was the Federal party, that gave to the country its Constitution. So once was the ancient Republican party, that gave to the country a complete emancipation of the masses from the combination of classes. So once was the Whig and the Democratic party. It is the destiny of associations of men to have a be- ginning and an end. If an association is born of an enduring political necessity, it will con- tinue and wax in vigor and power until it sup- plants other and superfluous, though more aged combinations. That such is to be the case with the Republican party, is seen in the fact that all existing combinations are uniting against it, on the ground that such a union is necessary to 8 prevent its immediate and overwhelminfr ascen- dency. This union is an effective answer to tlie common argument, tliat the Republican party is an eplieraeral and evanescent one. Thirdly. We are favored with criticisms, by the Democrats and Know Nothings, on the course of the Republican members of the Housq of Repre- sentatives, in voting for Mr. Dunn's bill, to restore the Missouri Compromise, and against Mr. Toombs's bill, for pacifying Kansas ; which votes, it is said, prove the Republicans insincere in their devotion to Freedom. These are of the same class of arguments with those which are urged by infi- dels against the Christian Church, on the ground of the short-comings of its members. Suppose we abandon the Republican party for its short-comings, will Freedom then have any party left ; and if so, what party, and where shall we find it? Certainly no other party but the Democratic Party, of which Franklin Pierce and Stephen A. Douglas are the Apostles. But that is the party of Slavery. Fourthly. "We are warned that Mr. Fremont is an improper man to represent the Republican Party; that his accounts with the Government are wrong; that he is a Roman Catholic ; and that otherwise he was improperly chosen as a candi- date. Now, these accusations are newly trumped up, and have been already a thousand times dis- proved. Nevertheless, neither Democrats, nor Know Nothings, nor Straight-out Whigs, have be- come any the more Republicans on that account, nor would they, were Mr. Fremont proved to be an angel descended from above, to rescue the cause of Freedom. Suppose, on the other hand, that we should give up Fremont upon these cavils, what would follow but the ascendency of the American party, which substitutes a false issue for the true one, and so betrays the cause of Freedom ; or that of the Democratic party, which is the party of Slavery ? Fellow-citizens : I have discussed parties with- out asperity and with no partiality — for I know that masses and individuals are alike honest, well meaning, and patriotic. I have no animos- ities and no griefs. While I have tried to pursue always one steady course which my conscience has approved, friends have often been alienated, and adversaries have become friends. The char- ity of judgment to which I feel that I am enti- tled — that is the charity I extend to others. I do not predict the times and seasons when one or other of the contending political elements shall prevail. I know this — that this State, this nation, and this earth, are to be the abode and happy home of free men. Everywhere the hills and valleys are to be fields of free labor, free thought, and free suifrages. That consumma- tion will come when society shall be prepared for it. My labors are devoted to that preparation. I leave others to cling to obsolete traditions, and perish with them, if they must ; but, in politics as in religion, I desire to be with that portion of my fellow-men who hold fast to pure truth and equal justice with hope and confidence, enduring through all trials in their ultimate and eternal triumph. W46 IT /I, o ^* *jj^ "^ •^i^r* 41 c 'o ♦ * • A^ ^ 4 o^ ..* ^ "*" „f° >> V. v-^^ .3^, Ao^ ^o. ■^ <^, ._^'^- >j^. ^-iV^^ -i; ,•!>" %._ :*#%•. %.*" :" •1 0-^ ^o ^^ 6" A ^^ "^o . -r , I 'o , , A ^ <". 3^ <^*. '^ "^ ^^. >' A '^ \>'-^l^ v "^^ -^'