F 685 .S512 Copy 1 SPEECH HON. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, IMlViEDIATE ADMISSION OF KANSAS INTO THE UNION: \ DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES> APRIL 9, 1S56. WASHIMGTDN : MtNTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFP^lCE. 1856. F^B^' ADMISSION OF KANSAS INTO THE UNION, The Senate, as in Commiueeof Uio Whole, having uiidef "Consideration the bill to uuthoiize the people of the T^^eiri- lory of Kansas to form a constitution ;ind State government, preparatory to their admission into the Union, Vihen they have the requisite populations- Mr. SEWARD said: Mrs President, to obtain empire is easy and common; to govern it well is difficult and rare indeed^ I salute the Congress of the United States in the exorcise of its most important function, that of extending the Federal Constitution over added domainvS.-) and I salute especially the Senate in the most august of all its manifold characters, itself a Congress of thirty- one free, equal, sovereign States, assembled lo decide whether the majestic and fraternal circle shall be opened to receive yet another free, equal, and sovereign State. The Constitution prescribes only two qualifica- tions for new States, namely — a substantial civil conimunity, and a republican government. Kan- sas has both of these. The circumstances of Kansas, and her relations towards the Union, are peculiar, anomalous, and deeply interesting. The United States acquired the province of Louisiana (which included the present Territory of Kansas) from France, in 1803, by a treaty, in which they agreed that its inhabitants should be incorporated into the Fed- eral Union, and admitted as soon as possible, according to tlie principles of the Constitution, to the enjoyment ot all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States. Nevertheless, Kansas was, in 1820, assigned as a home for an indefinite period to several savage Indian tribes, and closed against immigration and all other than aboriginal civilization, but not without a cotemporaneous pledge to the Ameri- can people and to mankind , that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude should be tolerated therein forever. In 1854 Congress directed a removal of the Indian 'tribes, and organized and opened Kansas to civilization; but by the same act re- ecinded the pledge of perpetual dedication to free- dom, and substituted for it another, which de- clared that the [future] people of Kansas should be left pert'ectly free to establish or to exclude slavery, as they should decide through the action of a republican government which Congress modeled and authorized them to establish, under the protection of the United States. Notwith- standing this latter pledge, when the newly-asso- ciated people of Kansas, in 1855, were proceed- ing with the machinery of popular elections, in the manner prescribed by Congress, to choose legisla- tive bodies for the purpose of organizing that republican government, armed bands of invaders from the State of Missouri entered the Territory, seized the polls, overpowered or drove away the inhabitants, usurped 'he elective franchise, de- posited false and spurious ballots without regard to regularity of qualification or of numbers, pro- cured ofiicial certificates of the result by fraud and force, and thus created and constituted legis- lative bodies to act for and in the name of the people of the Territory. These legislative bodies afterwards assembled, assumed to be a legitimate Legislature, .set forth a code of municipal laws, created pu"blic offices, and filled them witli officers appointed for considerable periods by themselves, and thus established a complete and effective foreign tyranny over the people of the Territory. These high-handed transactions were consum- mated with the expressed purpose of establishing African slavery as a permanent institution within the Territory by force, in violation of the natural j rights of the people solemnly guarantied to them by the Congress of the United States. The Pres- 1 ident of the United States has been an accessory ' to these political transactions, with full complicity in regard to the purpose for which they were committed. He has adopted the usurpation, and made it his own, and he is now maintaining it with the military arm of the Republic. Thus Kansas has been revolutionized, and she now lies subjugated and prostrate at the foot of the Pres- ident of the United States; while he, through the agency of a foreign tyranny established within her borders, is forcibly introducing and establish- ing slavery there, in contempt and defiance of the organic law. These extraordinary transactions have been attended by civil commotions, in which property, lii'e, and liberty have been exposed to violence; and these cominotions still continue to* threaten, not only the Territory itself, but also the adjacent States, with the calamities and dis- asters of civil war, I am fully aware of the gravity of the charges against the President of the United States which this statement of the condition and relations of Kansas imports, I shall proceed, without fear and without reserve, to make them good. The maxim, that a sacred veil must be drawn over the beginning of all Governments, does not hold under our system. I shall first call the accuser into the presence of the Senate — then examine the defenses which the President has made — and, last, suljniit the evidences by which he is con- Ticted. ■' Tile people of Kansas know whether these charges are true or false. They have adopted theni, and, on tiie ground of the high political necessity which the wrongs they have endured, and are yet enduring, and the dangers through which they have already passed, and the perils to which they are yet exposed, have created, they have provisionally organized themselves as a State, and that State is now here, by its two chosen Senators and one Representative, standing out- side at the doors of Congress, applying to be ad- mitted into the Union, as a means of relief indis- pensable for the purposes of peace, freedom, and safety. This new State is the President's respons- ible afcnser. The President of the United States, without waiting for the appearance of his accuser at the Capitol, anticipated the accusations, and submit- ted his defenses against them to Congress. The first one of these defenses was contained in his annual message, which v/as communicated to Congress on the 30th of December, 1855. I examine it. You shall see at once that the Pres- ident's mind was oppressed — was full of some- thing too large and burdensome to be concealed, and yet too critical to be told. Mark, if you please, the state of the case at that time. So early as August, 1855, the peo- ple of Kansas had denounced the Legislature, They had at voluntary elections chosen Mr. A. H. Reeder to represent them in the present Congress, instead of J, W, Whitfield, who held a certificate of election under the authority of the Legislature. They had also, on the 23d day of October, 1855, by similar voluntary elections, constituted at Topeka an organic convention, which framed a constitution for the projected Slate. They had also, on the 15th of December, 1855, at snnilar voluntary elections, adopted that constitution, and its tenor was fully known. It provided for elections to be held throughout the new State on the 15th of January, 1856, to fill the offices created by it, and it also required the executive and legislative otficcrs, thus to be chosen, to assemble at Topeka on the 4th day of March, 1856, to inaugurate the new State provisionally, and to take the necessary measures for the ap- pointment of Senators, who, together with a Rep- resentative already chosen, shouldsubmitthe con- stitution to Congress at an early day, and apply for the admission of the State of Kansas into the Union. All these proceedings had been based on tlie grounds that the territorial authorities of Kansas had been establi.'^hed by armed foreign usurpation, and were, nevertheless, sustained by the President of the United States. A constitu- tional obligation required the President " to give to Congress," in his annual message, " informa- tion of the state of the Union," Here is all " the information" which the President gave to Con- grpss concerning the events in Kansas, and its relations to the Union : " In the Territory of Kansas there have been acts preja- (iicial to good order, but as yet none liave occurred under circumstances to jiistify the interposition of the Federal. Executive. That could only be in case of obstruction to Federal law, oi- of organized resistance to territorial law, assuming the chararter of insurrection, which, if it should occur, it would be my dtity promptly to overcome and sup- press. I cherish ihe hope, however, that the occurrence of any such untoward event will bo prevented by the sound sense of the poopie of the Territory, wlio, by its organic law, possessing the right to deti^rmiiie their own domestic institutions, are entitled, while deporting themselves peace- fully, to the free exercise of that right, and must be pro- tected in the enjoyment of it, without interference on the part of the citizens of any of the Slates." This information implies, that no invasion, usurpation, or tyranny, -have been com)nittcd withm the Territory by strangers; and that tho provisional State organization now going forward IS not only unnecessary, but also prejudicial to good order, and insurrectionary. It menaces the people of Kansas with a threat, that the Presi- dent will "overcome and suppress" them. It mocks them with a promise, that, if they shall hereafter deport themselves properly, under the control of authorities by which they have been disfranchised, in determining institutions which have been already forcibly determined for then\ by foreign invasion, then they " must be protect- ed against interference by citizens of any of the States." The President, however, not content with a statement so obscure and unfair, devotes a third part of the annual message to argumentative spec- ulations bearing on the character of his accuser. Each State has two and no more Senators in the Senate of the United States. In determining the apportionment of Representatives in the House of Representatives, and in the electoral colleges among the States, three fifths of all the slaves in any State are enumerated. The slaveholding or non-slaveholding character of a State is determ- ined, not at the time of its admission into the Union as a State, but at that earlier period of its political life in which, being called a Territory, it is politically dependent on the United States, or on some foreign sovereign. Slavery is tolerated in some of the States, and forbidden in others. Affecting the industrial and the econonnica] sys- tems of the several States, as slavery and free- dom do, thii? diversity of practice concerning them early worked out a corresponding difference of conditions, interests, and ambitions, among the States, and divided and arrayed them into two classes. The balance of political power be- tween these two classes in the Federal system is sensibly affected by the accession of any new State to either of them. Each State, therefore, watches jealously the settlement, growth, and inchoate slaveholding and non-slaveholdiiig char- acters of Territories, v/hich may ujtimatcly come into the Union as States, It has resulted from these circumstances, that slavery, in relations purely political and absolutely Federal, is aa element which enters with more or less activity in to many niilional questions of finance, of revenue, of expenditure, of protection, of free trade, of patronage, of peace, of war, of annexation, of defense, and of conquest, and modifies opinions concerning; constructions of the Constitution, and the distribution of powers between the Union and the several States by which it is constituted. Slavery, under these political and Federal aspects alone, enters into the transactions in Kansas, with which the President and Congress are concerned. Nevertheless, he disingenuously alludes to those transactions in his defense, as if they were iden- tified with that moral discussion of slavery which he regards as odious and alarming, and without any other claim to consideration. Thus he alludes to the question before us as belonging to a "polit- ical agitation" "concerning a matter which con- sists to a great extent of exaggeration of inev- itable evils, or over-zeal in social improvement, or mere imagination of grievance, having but a remote connection with any of the constitutional functions of the Federal Government, and mena- cing the stability of the Constitution and the in- tegrity of the Union." In like manner, the Preisideiit assails and stig- matizes those who defend and maintain the cause of Kansas as " men of narrow views and sec- tional purposes," "engaged in those wild and chimerical schemes of social change which are generated one after another in the unstable minds of visionary sophists and interested agitators" — " mad men, rai.sing the storm of phrensy and fac- tion," "sectional agitators," "enemies of the Con- stitution, who have surrendered themselves so far to a fanatical devotion to the supposed inter- ests of the relatively few Africans in the United States, as totally to abandon and disregard the interests of the twenty-five millions of Americans, and trample under foot the injunctions of moral and constitutional obligation, and to, engage in plans of vindictive hostility against those who are associated with them in the enjoyment of the common heritage of our free institutions." Sir, the President's defense on this occa.sion, if not a matter sunply personal, is at least one of tem- porary and ephemeral importance. Possibly, all the advantages he will gain by transferring to his accuser a portion of the popular prejudice against abolition and Abolitionists can be spared to him. It would be wise, however, for those whose inter- ests are inseparable from slaver)'-, to reflect that abolition will gain an equivalent benefit from the identification of the President's defe"nse with iheir cherished institution. Abolition is a slow but irrepressible uprising of principles of natural jus- tice and humanity, obnoxious to prejudice, be- cause they conflict inconveniently with existing material, social, and pohtical interests. It belongs to others than statesmen, charged with the care of presentinterests,to conductthe social reformation of mankind in its broadest bearings. I leave to Abolitionists their own work of self-vifdicatioii. I may, however, remind slaveholders that there is a time when oppression and persecution cease to be effectual against such movements; and then the odium they have before unjustly incurred be- comes an element of strength and power. Chris- tianity, blindly maligned during three centuries by Pretors, Governors, Senates, Councils, and Emperors, towered above its enemies in a fourth; and even the cross on which its Founder had ex- pired, and which therefore was the emblem of its shame, became the sign under which it went forth evermore thereafter, conquering and to con- quer. Abolition is yet in its first century. - The President raises in his defense a false issue, and elaborates an irrelevant argument to prove that Congress has no right or power, nor has any sister Stable any right or power, to interfere within a slave State, by legislation or force, to abolish slavery therein — as if you, or I, or any other responsible man, ever maintained the contrary. The President distorts the Constitution from its simple text, so as to make it expressly and directly defend, protect, and guaranty African slavery. Thus lie alleges that " the Government" which resulted from the Revolution was a " Fed- eral Republic of the free white men of the Colo- nies;" whereas, on the contrary, the Declaration of Independence asserts the political equality of all men; and even the Constitution itself carefully avoids any political recognition, not merely of slavery, but of the diversity of races. The Pres- ident represents the Fathers as having contem- plated and provided for a permanent increase of the number of slaves in some of the States, and therefore forbidden Congress to touch slavery in the way of attack or offense, and as having there- fore also placed it under the general safeguard of the Constitution; whereas, the Fathers, by authorizing Congress to abolish the African slave trade after 1808, as a means of attack, inflicted on slavery in the States a blow, of which they expected it to languish immediately, and ulti- mately to expire. The President closes his defense in the annual message with a deliberate assault, very incongru- ous ill such a place, upon some of the northern States. At the same .time he abstains, with marked caution, from naming the accused States. They, however, receive a compliment at his hands , by way of giving keenness to his rebuke, which enables us to identify them. They are northern States " which were conspicuous in founding the Republic." All of the original northern States were conspicuous in that great transaction. All of them, therefore, are accused. The offense charged is, that they disregard their constitu- tional obligations; and, although " conscious of their inability to heal admitted and palpable so- cial evils of their own, confessedly within their jurisdiction, they engage in an offensive, hope- less, and illegal undertaking, to reform the do- mestic iiTStitutions of the southern States, at the peril of the very existence of the Constitution, and of all the countless benefits which it has conferred." I challenge the President to the proof, in behalf of Massachusetts; although I have only the interest common to all Americans and to all men in her great fame. What one corporate or social evil is there, of which she is conscious, and conscious also of inability to heal it .' Is it ignorance, preji»dice, bigotry, vice, I crime, public disorder, poverty, or disease, afiiict- ij ing the minds or the bodies of her people? There j| she stands. Survey her universities, colleges, 1 academies, observatories, primary schools, Sun- I day schools, penal codes, and penitentiaries. De- ;) scend into her quarries, walk over her fields and I through her gardens, observe her manufactories ; of a thousand various fabrics, watch her steamers 6 as lending every river and inlet on your own coast, .•md her ships displaying their canvas on every sea; follow her fishermen in their adventurous voyages from her own and adjacent bays to the icy ocean under either pole; and then return and enter her hospitals, which cure or relieve suffering humanity in every condition and at every period of life, from the lying-in to the second childhood, and wiiich not only restore sight to the blind, and heai-ing to the deaf, and speech to the dumb, but also bring back wandering reason to the insane, and teachlsven the idiot to think ! Massachusetts, I sir, is a model of Slates, worthy of all honor; and i though she was most conspicuous of all the States in the establishment of republican institutions here, she is eVen more conspicuous still for the municipal wisdom with which she has made tliem contribute to the welfare of her people, and to the greatness of the Republic itself. In behalf of New York, for whom it is my righi and duty to speak, I defy the presidential accuser. Mark her tranquil magnanimity, which becomes a State for whose delivery from tyranny Schuyler devised and labored, who received her political constitution from Hamilton, her intel- lectual and physical development from Clinton, and her lessons in humanity from Jay. As she waves her wand over the continent, trade for- sakes the broad natural channels which conveyed it before to the Delaware and Chesapeake bays, and to the Gulfs of St. Lawrence and Mexico, and obedient to her command pours itself through her artificial channels into her own once obscure sea-port. She stretche.s her v\fand again towards the ocean, and the commerce of all the continents concentrates itself at her feet; and with it strong and full floods of immigration ride in, contributing labor, capital, art, valor, and enterprise, to perfect and embellish our ever-widening empii-e. When, and on what occasion, has Massachu- setts or New York officiously and illegally in- truded herself within the jurisdiction of sister States, to modify or reform their institutions? No, no, sir. Their faults have been quite differ- ent. They have conceded too often and too much for their own just dignity and influence in Federal administration, to the querulous complaints of the States, in whose behalf the President arraigns them. I thank the President for the insult which, though so deeply unjust, was perhaps needful to arouse them to their duty in this great emerg- ency. I'he President, in this connection, reviews the acquisitions of new domain, the organization of new Territories, and the admission of new States, and arrives at results which must be as agreeably surprising to the slave States, as they are as- tounding to the free States. He finds that the former have been altogether guiltless of political -ambition; while he convicts the latter, not only of unjust territorial aggrandizement, but also of false and fraudulent clamor against the slave vStates, to cover their own aggi-essions. Notwithstanding the President's elaborated misconceptions, these historical facts remain, namely: that no acquisi- tion whatever has ever been made at the instance of the free States, and with a view to their aggran- dizement: that Louisiana and Florida, incident- a?iy acquired for general and important national objects, have already yielded to the slave States three States of their own class, while Texas was avowedly annexed as a means of security to slavery, and one slave State has been already admitted from that acquisition, and Congress has stipulated for the admission of four more: that, by way of equivalent for the admission of Cali- fornia, a free State, the slave States have obtained a virtual repeal of the Mexican law which for- bade slavery in New Mexico and Utah; and that, as a consequence of that extraordinary legisla- tion, Congress has also rescinded the prohibition of slavery, which, in 1820, was extended over all that part of Louisiana, except Missouri, which lies north of 36° 30' of north latitude. Sir, the real crime of the northern States is this: they are forty degrees too high on the arc of north latitude. I dismiss for the present tlie President's first defense against the accusation of the new State of Kansas. On the 24th of January, 1856, when no import- ant event had happened which was unknown at the date of the President's annual message, he submitted to Congress his second defense, in the form of a special message. In this paper, the President deplores, as the cause of all the troubles which have occurred in Kansas, delays of the or- ganization of the Territory which have been per- mitted by the Governor, Mr. Reeder. The organic law was passed by Congress on the 31st of May, 1854, but on that day there was not one lawful elector, citizen, or inhabitant, within the Terri- tory; while the question, whether slavery or uni- versal freedom should be established there, was devolved practically on the first legislative bodies to be elected by the people who were to become thereafter the inhabitants of Kansas. The elec- tion for the first legislative bodies was appointed by the Governor to be held on the 3flth of March, 1855; and the 2d day of July, 1855, was desig- nated for the organization of the Legislative As- sembly. The only civilized community that was in contact with the new Territory was Missouri, a slaveholding State, at whose instance the pro- hibition of slavery within the Territory had been abrogated, so that she might attempt to colonize it with slaves. Immigrants were invited not only from all parts of the United States, but also from all other parts of the world, with a pledge that the people of the new Territory should be left perfectly free to establish or prohibit slavery. A special election, however, was held within the Territory on the 29th day of November, 1854, withoutany preliminary census of the inhabitants, for the purpose of choosing a Delegate who might sit, without aright to vote in Congress, during the second session of the Thirty-Third Congress, which was to begin on the first Monday of De- cember, 1854, and to end on the 3d day of March, 1855. Mr. John W. Whitfield was certified to be elected. There were vehement complaints of illegality in the election, but his title was never- theless not contested, for the palpalole reasons, that an investigation under the circumstances of the Territory, during so short a session of Con- gress, would be impossible, and that the question was of inconsiderable magnitude. Yet the Pres- ident laments that the Governor neglected to order the first election for the legislative ijodies of the new Territory to be held simultaneously with that hurried congressional election. He assigns his reasons: " Auy question appertaining to the qualifications of per- «ans voting as the people of the Territory would (in that but not of emi^jrants, named the Platte county- case, incidentally) have necessarily passed under the sup- I Self-Defensive Association, assembled at Weston, ervision of Congress, (meaning the House of Representa- ^^^ ^j^^ western border of Missouri, in the inter- tives,) and would have been determined before conflicting passions had been inflamed by time, and before an oppor- tunity would have been aftbrded for systematic interference by the people of individual States." Could the President, in any explicit arrange- ment of words, more distinctly have confessed his disappointment in failing to secure a merely est of slavery, and it published through the organ of the President of the United States at that place a resolution, that "when called upon by any citizen of Kansas, its members would hold them- selves in readiness to assist in removing any and all emigrants who should go there under the aid formal election of legislative bodies within the I of northern emigrant societies." This associa Territory, in fraud of the organic law, of the tion afterwards often made good its atrocious people of Kansas, and of the cause of natural ] threats by violence against the property, peace., justice and humanity ? Il and lives of unoffending citizens of Kansas; but The President then proceeds to launch severe l{ the President of the United States, so far from denunciations against what he calls a propagan- || denouncing it, does not even note its existence, dist attempt to colonize the Territory with oppo- : The majority of the Committee on Territories nents of slavery. The whole American continent j ingeniousjy elaborate the President s charge, and has been undergoing a process of colonization, "' ■ ■■ ' - ' -•- •-- in many fornts, throughout a period of three j hundred and fifty years. The only common ele- ; ment of all those forms was propagandism. Were 1 not the voyages of Columbus propagandist ex- 1 peditions,underthe auspices of the Pope of Rome? I Was not the wide occupation of Spanish Amer- 1 ica a propagandism of the Catholic church.' The ' settlement of Massachusetts by the Pilgrims; of j the New Netherlands by the Reformers of Hoi- [ land; the later plantation of the Mohawk valley by the Palatines; the establishment of Pennsyl- i vania by the Friends; the mission of the Mora- j vians at Bethlehem, in the same State; the found arraign Massachusetts, her emigrant aid society, and her emigrants. What has Massachusetts done worthy of censure? Before the Kansas or- ganic law was passed by Congress, Massachu- setts, on application, granted to some of her citi- zens, who were engaged in "taking up" new lands in western regions, one of those common charters which are used by all associations, in- dustrial, moral, social, scientific, and religious, now-a-days, instead of copartnerships, for the more convenient transaction of their fiscal affairs. The actual capital is some $60,000. Neither the granting of the charter, nor any legislative action of the association under it, was morally wrong. ation of Maryland by Lord Baltimore and his !|To emigrate from one State or Territory singly -"•■-■• ■ • - or in company with others, with or without in- corporation by statute, is a right of every citizen of the United States, as it is a right of every free- man in the world. The State that denies this right is a tyranny— the subject to whom it is de- nied is a slave. Such free emigration is the chief element of American progress and civilization. Without it, there could be no community, ao political Territory, no State of Kansas. Without it, there could have been no United States of Amer- ica. To retain and carry into Kansas cherished political as well as moral, social, and religious convictions, is a right of every emigrant. Must emigrants to that territory carry there only their persons, and leave behind their minds and souls, disembodied and wandering in their native lands ? They only are fit founders of a State who exer- cise independence of opinion; and it is to the exercise of that right that our new States, equally with all the older ones, owe their intelligence and vigor. colony of British Catholics; the settlement of Jamestown by the Cavaliers and Churchmen of England; that of South Carolina by the Hugue- nots; — were not all these propagandist coloniza- tions? Was not Texas settled by a colony ofi slaveholders, and California by companies of! freemen? Yet never before did any prince, king, emperor, or president, denounce such coloniza- j tions. Does any law of nature or nations forbid i them? Does any public authority quarantine, on the ground of opinion, the ships which are con- | tinually pouring into the gates of New York j whole religious societies from Ireland, Wales, \ Germany, and Norway, with their pastors, and clerks, and choirs? But the President charges that the propagan- dists entered Kansas with a design to " anticipate and force the determination of the slavery ques- tion within the Territory," (in favor of freedom,) forgetting, nevertheless, that he has only just be- fore deplored a failure of his own to anticipate and force the determination of that question in favor of slavery, by a coup-de-main, in advance even of their departure from their homes in the At- lantic States and in Europe. He charges, more- over, that the propagandists designed to " prevent the free and naturat action of the inhabitants in the intended organization ofthc Territory, "when in fact they were pursuing the only free and | natural course to organize it by immigrating and becoming permanent inhabitants, citizens, and electors of Kansas. Not one unlawful or tur- bulent act has been hitherto charged against any one of the propagandists of freedom. Mark, now, an extraordinary inconsistency of the Pres- ident. On the 29th of June, 1854, only twenty- nine days after the opening of the Territory, and before one of these emigrants had reached Kan- sas, or evea Missouri, apropagandistassociation, " There are, who, distant from their native soil, Still for their own and country '.s glory toil ; While some, fast rooted to their parent spot, In life are useless, and in death, forgot." It is not morally wrong for Massachusetts to aid her sons, by a charter, to do what in itself is innocent and commendable. The President and the majority of the committee maintain that such associations are in violation of national or at least of international laws. Here is the Consti- tution of the United States, and here are the Stat- utes at Large, in ten volumes octavo. Let the President or his defenders point out the inhibi- tion. They specify, particularly, that the action of the State violates a law of comity, which reg- ulates the intercourse of independent States, and especially the intercourse between the members of the Federal Union. Here are Valtel and Bur- 8 lamaqui. Let them point out in those pages this law of comity. There is no law of comity which forbids nations from permitting; and encourag-ine: emigration, on the ground of opinion. Moreover, slavery is an outlaw under the law of nations. Still further, the Constitution of the United States has expressly incorporated into itself all of the laws of comity, for regulating the intercourse be- tween independent States, which it deems proper to adopt. Whatever is^ forbidden expressly by the Constitution is unlawful. Whatever is not forbidden is lawful. The supposed law of comity is not incorporated into the Constitution. With the'aid of the Committee on Ten-itories, we discover that the emigrants from Massachu- setts have violated the supposed national laws, not by any unlawful conduct of their own, but by provoking the unlawful and flagitious conduct of the invaders of Kansas. " They passed through Missouri in large numbers, using violent language and giving unmistakable indications of their hos- tility to the domestic institutions of that State," and thus "they created apprehensions that the object of the emigrant aid company was to abo- litionize Kansas, as a means of prosecuting a •relentless warfare upon the institution of slavery within the limits of Missouri, which apprehen- sion, increasing with the progress of events, ulti- mately became settled convictions of the people of western Missouri. Missouri builds railroads, steamboats, and wharves. It cani\ot be, therefore, that the mere "largeness of the numbers" of the eastern trav- elers offended or alarmed the borderers. I con- fess my surprise that the sojourners used violent language; it Seems unlike them. I confess my greater surprise that the borderers were disturbed so deeply )jy mer'fe words; it seems unlike them. Which of the domestic institutions of Missouri were those against which the travelers manifested determined hostility? Not, certainly, her manu- factories, banks, railroads, churches, and schools. Allthese are domestic institutions held in high respect by the men of Massachusetts, and are just such ones as these emigrants are now establishing in Kansas. It was, therefore, African slavery alone — a peculiar domestic institution of Missouri —against which their hostility was directed. Waiving a suspicious want of proof of the un- wise conduct charged against them, I submit that clearly they did not thereby endanger that peculiar institution in Missouri; for they passed directly through that State into Kansas. How, then, were the borderers provoked ? The Missouvians inferred, from the language and demeanor of the travelers, that they would aboUtionize Kansas, and thereafter, by means of Kansas abolitionized, prosecute a relentless warfare ag'ainst slavery in Missouri. Far-seeing statesmen are these Missouri borderers, but less deliberate than far- sighted. Kansas was not to be abolitionized. It j had never been otherwise than abolitionized. j Abolitionized Kansas would constitute no means for the prosecution of such a warfare. Missouri lies adjacent to abolitionized Iowa on the north, and to abolitionized Illinois on the east, yet neither of those Slates has ever been used for such designs. How could this fearful enemy prosecute a warfare against slavery in Missouri ? Only by buying the plantations of her citizens at their own prices, and so qualifying themselves to speak their hos- tility through the ballot-boxes. Could apprehen- sions so absurd justify the invasion of Kansas.' Are the people of Kansas to be disfranchised and trodden down by the President of the United States in punishment for any extravagance of emigrants, in Missouri, on the way to that Ter- ritory ? Such is the President's second defense, so far as it presents n«w matter in avoidance of the accu- sation of the new State of Kansas. I proceed, in the third place, to establish the truth of the accusations. Of what sort must the proofs be? Manifestly only such as the circum- stances of the case permit to exist. Not engrossed documents, authenticated by executive, judicial, or legislative oflicers. The transactions occurred in an unorganized country. All the authorities subsequently established in the Territory are implicated, all the complainants disfranchised. Only presumptive evidence, derived from the cotemporaneous statements and actions of the parties concerned, can be required. Such presumptive evidence is derived from- the nature and character of the President's defenses. Why did the President plead at all on the 31st of December last, when the new State of Kansas was yet unorganized, and could not appear here to prefer her accusations, until the 23d of March? Why, if he must answer so prematurely, did he not plead ageneraland direct denial? If he must plead specially, why did he not set forth the facts, instead of withholding all actual information con- cerning the case? Why, since, instead of defend- ing himself, he must implead his accuser, did he not state, at least, the ground on which that accuser claimed to justify the conduct of which he complained? Why did he threaten " to over- come and suppress " the people of Kansas, as insurrectionists, if he did not mean to terrify them, and to prevent their appearing here, or at least'to prejudice their cause? Why did he mock them with a promise of protection thereafter, against interference by citizens of other States, if they should deport themselves peacefully and submissively to the territorial authorities, if no cause for apprehending such interference had already been given by previous invasion? Why did he labor to embarrass his accuser by identi- fying her cause with the subject of abolition of slavery, and stigmatize her supporters with op- probrious epithets, and impute to thorn depraved and seditious motives? Why did he interpose the false and impertinent issue, whether one State could intervene, by its laws, or by force, to abol- ish slavery in another State? Why did he dis- tort the Constitution, and present it as expressly guarantying the perpetuity of slavery ? Why did he arraign so unnecessarily and so unjustly, not one, but all of the original northern States? Why did he drag into this case, where only Kansas is concerned, a studied, partial, and prejudicial history of the past enlargements of the national domain, and of the past contests between the slave States and the free States, in their rivalry for the balance of power? Why did not the President rest content with one such attack upon the character and conduct of the new State of Kansas, in anticipating her coming, if he felt assured that she really had no merit on which to stand? Why did he submit a second plea in advance ? Why in this plea 9 does he dsplore the delays which prevented the Missouri borderers from eftecting the conquest of Kansas and the estabhshment of slavery tliere- in, at the time of the congressional election held in November, 1854, in fraud of the Kansas law, and of justice and humanity? Why, without reason, or authority of public or of national law, does he denounce Massachusetts, her emigrant aid society, and her emigrants? If "propagan- dist" emigrations must be denounced, why does he spare the Platte County Self-Defensive Asso- ciation ? Why does he charge Governor Rceder with " failing to put forth all his energies to prevent or counteract the tendencies to illegality which are found to exist in all imperfectly organ- ized and newly-associated countries," if, indeed, no " illegality" has occurred there ? While thus, by implication, admitting that such illegality has occurred in Kansas, why does he not tell us its nature and extent? Why, when Governor Reeder was implicated in personal conduct, not criminal, but incongruous with his official relations, did the President retain him in office until after he had proclaimed at Easton that Kansas had been subju- gated by the borderers of Missouri; and why, after he had done so, and had denounced the Legisla- ture, did the President remove him for the same preexisting cause only ? Wliy does the President admit that the election for the legislative bodies of Kansas was held under circumstances inau- spicious to a truthful and legal result, if, never- theless, the result attained was indeed a truth- ful and legal one? On what evidence does the President ground his statement, that after that election, there were mutual complaints of usurp- ation, fraud, and violence, when we hear from no other quarter of such complaints made by the party that prevailed ? If there were such mutual accusations, and even if they rested on probable grounds, would that fact abate the right of the people of Kansas to a government of their own, securing a safe and well ordered freedom? Why does the President argue that the Governor [Mr. Reeder] alone had the power to receive and con- sider the returns of the election of the legislative bodies, and that he certified those returns in fifteen out of the twenty-two districts, when he knows that the Governor, being his own agent, gave the certificates on the ground that the returns were technically correct, and that the illegality complained of was in the conduct of the elections, and in the making up of the returns by the judges, and that the terror of the armed invasion pre- vented all complaints of this kind from being presented to the Governor ? Why does the Presi- dent repose on the fact that the Governor, on the ground of informality in the returns, rejected the members who were chosen in the seven other districts, and ordered new elections therein, and certified in favor of the persons then chosen, when he knows that the majority, elected in the fifteen districts, expelled at once the persons chosen at such second elections, and admitted those origin- ally returned as elected in these seven districts, on the ground that the Governor's rejection of them, and the second elections which he ordered, were unauthorized and illegal ? Why does the Presi- dent, although omitting to mention this last fact, nevertheless justify the expulsion of these newly- elected members, on the ground thatit was author- ized by parliamentary law, when he knows that there was no parliamentary or other law' existing in the Territory, but the organic act of Congress, which co)iferred no such power on the Legisla- ture ? Why was Governor Reeder replaced by Mr. Shannon, who immediately proclantied that the legislative bodies which his predecessor had 1! denounced were the legitimate Legislature of the ji Territory? Why does the President plead that 11 the subject of the alleged Missourian usurpation jjand tyranny in Kansas was one which, by its j nature, appertained exclusively to the jurisdiction i of the local authorities of the Territory, when, if I the charges were true, there were no legitimate local authorities within the Territory ? Is a foreign usurpation in a defenseless Territory of the United States to be tolerated, if only it be successful? I And is the government de facto, by whomsoever [usurped, and with whatever tyrainiy exercised, entitled to demand obedience from the people, and I to be recognized by the President of the United States? Why does he plead that "whatever I irregularities may have occurred, it is now too I late'to raise the question?" Is there nothing left I but endurance to citizens of the United States, I constituting a whole pohtical community of men, [women, and children — an incipient American j State — subjugated and oppressed ? Must they sit j down in peace, abandoned, contented, and des- I pised? Why does he plead, that " at least it is a question as to which, neither now, nor at any previous time, has the least possible legal authority ! been possessed by the President of the United j States?" Did any magistrate ever before make ! such an exhibition of ambitious imbecility? Can- I not Congress clothe him with power to act, and j is it not his duty to ask power to remove usurpa- tion and subvert tyranny in a Territory of the United States? Are these the tone, the tenor, and the staple, of a defense, where the accused is guiltless, and the crimes charged were never committed ? The President virtually confesses all the transactions charged, by thus presenting a connected system of maxims and principles, in- vented to justify them. I proceed, however, to clinch conviction by direct and positive proofs: First, the statements of the party which has been overborne. General Pomeroy and his associates, in behalf of the State of Kansas, make this representation con- cerning the congressional election held in the Territory on the 30th of November, 1854: " The first ballot-box tliat was opened upon our virgin soil was closed to us by overpowering numbers and impend- ing force. So bold and reckless were our invaders, that they cared not to conceal their attack. They came upon us, not in :i, :■ ;:m; !■ iil' voters to steal away our franchise, but li' i ■', i ; - lily, to snatch it with a strong hand. Till > IK im their own homes, and in compact and iiij I! .1 ':' I! i-. witli arms in hand and provisions for the exp 'iliiio;!. 111:11. -hi'i! i'l ■ |ii>li-. i;nd, when their work wasdnn.', vi'Hu-ji.nI w :, ,1 ■ n". It is unnecessary to enter intii il:i- il(!:iil- ili to say that, in three distrietti, in whi'-ii, li)- tii in" i i. na.u'able evidence, there were not one hundred and lil'ty voters, most of whom refused to participate in the mockery of the elective fran- chise, these invaders polled over a thousand votes." In regard to the election of the 30th of March, 1855, the same party states: " They (the ivrissourians) arrived at their several destina- tion'; t!i" iii'.-in f '-friro the election, and having pitched their cani|> ! 1 , ' 1 i ir sentries, waited for tlie coming day. Ba<.'^ : . ic there, will! arms and ammunition enciii';.:i In: :i ;,■ i: iirti'd fight, and among them two brass fiL'ld pieces, ready charged. Tlieycanie with dnuus boat- ing and flags flying, and their leaders were of the most 12 national pledge, which he concurred in giving, that they should be left perfectly free to reject and exclude that justly obnoxious system. It thus appears, that the President of the United States holds the people of Kansas prostrate and enslaved at his fvet. To complete the painful account of this great crime, it is necessary now to add, that there has not been one day nor night, since the govern- ment of Kansas was constituted and confided to the President of the United States, in which either the properties, or the liberties, or even the lives, of its citizens have been secure against the vio- lence and vengeance of the extreme foreign fac- tion which lie upholds and protects. At this day, Kansas is becoming, more distinctly than before, the scene of a conflict of irreconcilable opinions, to be determined by brute force. No immigrant goes there unarmed, no citizen dwells there in safety unarmed; armed masses of men are pro- ceeding into the Territory, from various parts of the United States, to complete the work of inva- sion and tyranny which he has thus begun, under circumstances of fraud and perfidy unworthy of the character of a ruler of a free people. This gathering conflict in Kansas divides the sympa- thies, interests, passions, and prejudices of the people of the United States. Whether, under such circumstances, it can be circumscribed with- in the limits of the Territory of Kansas, must be determined by statesmen from their knowledge of the courses of civil commotions, which have involved questions of moral right and conscien- tious duty, as well as balances of political power. Whether, on theotherhand,the people of Kansas, under these circumstances, will submit to this tyranny of a citizen of the United States like themselves, whose term of pol itical power is nearly expired, can be determined by considering it in the aspect in which it is viewed by themselves. Speechless here, as they yet are, I give utterance to their united voices, and, holding in my hand the arraignment of George III. by the Congress of 1776, I impeach— in tlie words of that immor- tal text— the President of the United States : " He has refused to pass laws for the accom- modation of the people, unless they would relin- quish the right of representation in their Legisla- ture, a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only: " He has called together legislative bodies at a place unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their publicrecords, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures: He has prevented legislative Houses from being elected, for no other cause than his conviction that they would " oppose with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people: " He has refused for a long time after" spurious legislative Houses were imposed by himself, by usurpation, on the people of Kansas, " to cause others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned t,o the people at large, for their exercise, the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the danger of invasion from without, and civil war within: "He has created 'a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance: "He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, to compel our submission to a foreign" Legislature," and hasaffected to render the military independent of, and superior to, the civil power: "He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation: "For protecting" invaders of Kansas " from punishment for any murders which they shall commit on the inhabitants" of this Territory: "For abolishing the free system of American law in" this Territory, "establishing therein an arbitrary Government, so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into" other Territories: "For taking away our charter," abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the powers of our Government: "For suspending our own Legislature, and declaring" an usurping Legislature, constituted by himself, "invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever." What is wanting here to fill up the complement of -a high judicial process? Is it an accuser.' The youngest-born of the Republic is before you, imploring you to rescue her from immolation on the altar of public faction. Is it a crime? Bethink yourselves what it is that has been subverted. It is the whole of a complete and rounded-oif republican government of a Territory indeed, by name, but, in substance, a civil State. Consider the efl['ect. The people of Kansas tcerc "perfectly free." They now are free only to submit and obey. Consider whose system that republican government was, and the ]iower that established it. It was one of the constitutions of the United States, established by an act of the Congress of the United States. Consider what a tyranny it is that has been. built on that atro- cious usurpation. It is not a discriminating tyranny, that selects and punishes one, or a few, or even many, but it disfranchises all, and reduces every citizen to abject slavery. Examine the code created by the Legislature. All the statutes of the State of Missouri are enacted in gross, without alteration or amendment, for the gov- ernment of Kansas; and then, at the end, the hasty blunder of misnomer is corrected by an explanatory act, that wherever the word " State" occurs, it means" Territory." And whatacode! One that stifles not, indeed, the fruits of the womb, but the equally important element, of a State, the fruits — the immortal fruits — of the mind; a code that puts in peril all rights and lib- erties whatsoever, by denying to men the right to know, to utter, and to argue, freely, according to conscience — a right in itself conservative of all other rights and liberties. Is an oftendcr want- ing? He stands before you, in many respects the most eminent man in all the world — the Pres- ident of the United States — the constitutional and chosen defender and protector of the people who have been subjugated and enslaved. Is there anything of dignity or authority wanting to this tribunal? Where elsewhere shall be found one more august than the Senate of the United States? It is the ancient, constant, and undoubted right and usage of Parliaments — it is the chief purpose of their being — to question and complain of ail 13 persons, of what degree soever, found grievous to the Commonwealth, in abusing the power and trust committed to' them l)y the people. Does this tribunal need a motive ? We have that, too, in painful reality. These usurpations and op- pressions have hitherto rested with the President of the United States, and those whom he has abetted. If they shall be left unredressed, they will henceforth become, by adoption, our own. The conviction of the offending President is complete, and now he sinks out of view. His punishment rests with the people of the United States, whose trust he has betrayed. His con- viction was only incidental to the business which is the order of the day. The order of the day is the redress of the wrongs of Kansas. How like unto each other are the parallels of tyranny and revolution in all countries and in all tunes! Kansas is to-day in the very act of revo- lution against a tyranny of the President of the United States, identical in all its prominent fea- tures with that tyranny of t'le King of England which gave birth to the American Revolution. Kansas has instituted a revolution, simply be- cause ordinary remedies can never be applied in great political emergencies. There is a profound philosophy that belongs to revolutions. Accord- ing to that philosophy, the President is assumed by the people of Kansas to entertain a reSent- ment which can never be appeased , and his power, consequently, must be wholly taken away. Hap- f)ily, however, for Kansas, and for us, her revo- ution is one that was anticipated and sanctioned and provided for in the Constitution of the United States, and is therefore a peaceful and (paradox- ical as the expression may seem) a constitutional one. Never before have I seen occasion so great for admiring the wisdom and forecast of those who raised that noble edifice of civilgovernment. The people of Kansas, deprived of their sover- eignty by a domestic tyranny, have nevertheless lawfully rescued it provisionally, and, so exercis- ing it, have constituted themselves a State, and applied to Congress to admit them as such into the Federal Union. Congress has power to admit the nc;w Stflte thus organized. The favorable exercise of that power will terminate and crown the revolution. Once a State, the people of Kan- sas can preserve internal order, and defend them- selves against invasion. Thus, the constitutional remedy is as effectual as it is peaceful and simple. This is the remedy for the evils existing in the Territory of Kansas, which I propose. Happily, there is no need to prove it to be cither a lawful one or a proper one, or the only possible one. •The President of the United States and the Com- mittee on Territories unanimously concede all this broad ground, because he recommends it, and they adopt it. Wherein, then, do I differ from them ? Simply thus. I propose to apply the remedy now, by admitting the new State with its present popula- tion and present constitution. My opponents insist on postponing the measure until the Terri- tory shall be conct'ded by the usurping authori- ties to contain ninety-three thousand seven hun- dred inhabitants, and until those authorities shall direct and authorize the people to organize a new State, under a new constitution. In other words, I propose to allow the people of Kansas toa])[)ly the constitutional remedy at once. The Presi- I dent proposes to defer it indefinitely, and to com- j mit the entire application of it to the hands of the Missouri borderers. He confesses the inadequacy j of that course by asking appropriations of money to enable him to maintain and preserve order within I the Territory until the indefinite period when the j constitutional remedy shall be applied. There j is no sufficient reason for the delay which the President advises.' He admits the rightfulness and necessity of the remedy. It is as rightful and necessary now as it ever will be. It'is de- I manded by the condition and circumstances of the people of Kansas now. You cannot justly post- pone, any more than you can justly deny, that right. To postpone would be a denial. The President will need no grant of money, or of armed men, to enforce obedience to law, M'hen you shall have redressed the wrongs of which the people complain. Even under Governments less free than our own, thereis no need of power where justice holds the helm. When j_ustice is impar- tially administered, the obedience of the subject or citizen will be voluntary, cheerful, and practi- cally unlimited. Freedom justly due cannot be conceded too soon. True freedom exists — the utmost bounds of civil liberty are obtained, only where complaints are freely heard, deeply con- sidered, and speedily redressed. So only can you restore to Kansas the perfect freedom which you pledged, and she has lost. The Constitution does not prescribe ninety- three thousand seven hundred, or any other num- ber of people, as necessary to constitute'a State. Besides, under the present ratio of increase, Kan- sas, whose population now is forty thousand, will number one hundred thousand in a few months. The point made concerning numbers ia therefore practically unimportant and frivolous. The President objects that the past proceedings by which the new State of Kansas was organized, were irregular in three respects: First, that they were instituted, conducted, and completed, without a previous permission by Congress, or by the local authorities within the Territory. Secondly, that they were instituted, conducted, and completed by a party, and not by the whole people of Kansas; and thirdly, that the new State I holds an attitude of defiance and insubordination ! towards the territorial authorities and the Fed- eral Union. I reply, first, that if the proceedings I in question were irregular and partisanlike and [ factious, the exigencies of the case would at least i excuse the faults, and Congress ha^ unlimited I discretion to waive them. Secondly, the pro- ceedings were not thus irregular, partisanlike, I and factious, because no act of Congress forbade i them — no act of the Territorial Legislature for- I bade them, directly Or by implication — nor had j the Territorial Legislature power either to author- ! ize or to prohibit them. The proceedings were, I indeed, instituted by a party who favored them. I But they were prosecuted and consummated in I the customary forms of popular elections, which I were open to all the inhabitants of the Territory qualified to vote by the organic law, and to no others; and they have in no case come into con- flict, nor does the new State now act or assume' j to engage in conflict with either the territorial ' authorities or the government of the Union. I Thirdly, there can he no irregularity where 1 there is no law prescribing what shall be regular. 14 Congress has passed no law establishing regula- tions for the organization or admission of new States. Precedents in such cases, being without foundation in law, are without authority. This is a country whose Government is regulated, not by precedents, but by constitutions. But, if pre- cedents were necessary, they are found in the cases of Texas and California, each of which was organized and admitted, object to the same alleged irregularities. The majority of the Committee on Territories, in behalf of the President, interpose one further objection, by tracing this new State organization to the influence of a secret, armed, political soci-j ety. Secrecy and combination, with extra-judi- cial oaths and armed power, were the enginery ' of the Missouri borderers in effecting the subju- [ gation of the people of Kansas, as that machinery 1 IS always employed in the commission of politi-l cal crimes. How far it was lawful or morally right for the people of Kansas to employ the | same agencies for the defense of their lives and i liberties, may be a question for casuists, but cer-! tainly is not one for me. 1 can freely confess, I however, my deep regret that secret societies for j any purpose whatsoever have obtained a place. among political organizations within the Repub- lic; and it is my hope that the experience which we have now so distinctly had, that they can be but too easily adapted to unlawful, seditious, and dangerous enterprises, while they bring down suspicion and censure on high and noble causes j when identified with them, may be sufhcient to induce a general discontinuance of them. i Will the Senate hesitate for an hour between j the alternatives before them? The passions of | the American people find healthful exercise in { peaceful colonizations, and the construction of j railroads, and the building up and multiplying of I republican institutions. The Territory of Kansas I lies across the path through which railroads must j be built, and along which such institutions must| be founded, without delay, in order to preserve j the integrity of our empire. Shall we suppress j enterprises so benevolent and so healthful, and j inflame our country with that fever of intestine ! War which exhausts and consumes not more the 1 wealth and strength than the virtue and freedom i of a nation? Shall we confess that the procla- mation of popular sovereignty within the Terri- tory of Kansas was not merely a failure, but was a pretense and a fraud? Or will Senators now contend that the people of Kansas, destitute as they are of a Legislature of their own, of execu- tive authorities of their own, of judicial authori- ties of their own, of a militia of their own, of revenues of their own subject to disposal by | themselves; practically deprived, as they are, of the rights of voting, serving as jurors, and of writing, printing, and speaking their own opin- ions, are nevertheless in the enjoyment and exer- cise of popular sovereignly? Shall we confess before the world, after so brief a trial, that this great political system of ours is inadequate either to enable the majority to control through the operation of opinion, without force, or to give •security to the citizen against tyranny and do- mestic violence? Are we prepared so soon to relinquish our simple and beautiful systems of j republican government, and to substitute in their place the machinery of usurpation and depotism ? I The Congress of the United States can refuse admission to Kansas only on the ground th.at it will not relinquish the hope of carrying African slavery into that new Territory. If you are pre- pared to assume that ground, why not do it man- fully and consistently, and establish slavery there by a direct and explicit act of Congress ? But have we come to that stage of demoralization and degeneracy so soon? — we, who commenced our political existence and gained the sympathies of the world by proclaiming to other nations that we held " these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, and have certain inalien- able rights; and that among these rights are lite, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;" we who, in the spirit of that declaration, have as- sumed to teach and to illustrate, for the benefit of mankind, a higher and better civilization than they have hitherto known ! If the Congress of the United States shall persist in this attempt, then they shall at least allow me to predict its results: Either you will not establish African slavery in Kansas, or you will do it at the cost of the sacrifice of all the existing liberties of the American people. Even if slavery were, what it is not, a boon to the people of Kansas, they would reject it if enforced upon their accept- ance by Federal bayonets. The attempt is in conflict with all the tendencies of the age. Afri- can slavery has, for the last fifty years, been giving way, as well in this country as in the islands and on the main land throughout this hemisphere. The jjolitical power and prestige of slavery in the United States are passing away. The slave States practically governed the Union directly for fifty years. They govern it now, only indirectly, through the agency of northern hands, tempo- rarily enlisted in their support. So much, owing to the decline of their power, they have already conceded to the free States. The next step, if they persist in their present course, will be the resumption and exercise by the free States of the control of the Government, without such conces- sions as they have hitherto made to obtain it. Throughout a period of nearly twenty years, the defenders of slavery screened it from discussion in the national councils. Now, they practically confess to the necessity for defending it here, by initiating discussion themselves. 'I'hey have at once thrown away their most successful weapon, compromise, and worn out that one which was next in effectiveness, threats of secession from the Union. It is under such unpropitious cir- cumstances that they begin the new experiment of extending slavery into free territory by force, the armed power of the Federal Government. You will need many votes from free States in the House of Representatives, and even some votes from those States in this House, to send an army with a retinue of slaves in its train into Kansas Have you counted up your votes in the two Houses? Have you calculated how long those who shall cast such votes will retain their places in the National Legislature ? But I will grant, for the sake of the argument, that with Federal battalions you can carry sla- very into Kansas, and maintain it there. Arc you quite confident that this republican form of government can then be upheld and preserved ? You will then yourselves have introduced the Trojan horse. No republican government ever 15 has endured, with standing armies maintained in its bosom to enforce submission to its hiws. A people who have once learned to relinquish their rights under compulsion, will not be long in for- getting that they ever had any. In extending slavery into Kansas, therefore, by arms, you will subvert the liberties of the people. Senators of the free States,! appeal to you. Believe ye the prophets? I know you do. You know, then, that slavery neither works mines and quarries, nor founds cities, nor builds ships, nor levies armies, nor mans navies. Why, then, will you insist on closing up this new Territory of Kansas against all enriching streams of immigra- tion, while you pour into it the turbid and poison- ous waters of African slavery ^ Which one of you all, whether of Connecticut, or of Pennsyl- vania, or of Illinois, or of Michigan, would con- sent thus to extinguish the chief light of civiliza- tion within the State in which your own fortunes are cast, and in which your own posterity arc to live } Why will you pursue a policy so univind, so ungenerous, and so unjust towards tlie help- less, defenseless, struggling Territory of Kansas, inhabited as it is by your own brethren, depend- ing on you for protection and safety ? Will slavery in Kansas add to the wealth or power of your own States, or to the wealth, power, or glory of the Republic ? You know that it will di- minish all of these. You profess a desire to end this national debate about slavery, which has become for you intolerable. Is it not time to relinquish that hope ? You have exhausted the virtue, for that purpose, that resided in compacts and plat- forms, in the suppression of the right of petition and in arbitrary parliamentary laws, and in ab- negation of Federal authority over the subject of slavery within the national Territories. Will you even then end the debate, by binding Kan- sas with chains, for the safety of slavery in Missouri ? Even then you must give over Utah to slavery, to make it secure and permanent in Kansas; and you must give over Oregon and Washington to both polygamy and slavery, so as to guaranty equally the one and the other of those peculiar domestic institutions in Utah; and so you must go on, sacrificing, on the shrine of peace, Territory after Territory, until the prevail- ing nationality of freedom and of virtue shall be lost, and the vicious anomalies, which you have hitherto vainly hoped Almighty wisdom would re- move from among you without yoiu" own concur- rence, shall become the controlling elements in the Republic. He who found a river in his path, and j sat down to wait for the flood to pass away, was not more unwise than he who expects the agita- tion of slavery to cease, while the love of freedom animates the bosoms of mankind. The solemnity of the occasion draws over our heads that cloud of disunion which always arises whe