§5? Class Book -!l45g .^ Messrs, TALLANDIGHAM, RICHARDSON ANB CK>X. SPEECH OF HON. SAMUEL SBELLABARGER. OF OHIO, Delivered in the House of Representatives, January 27, 1863. The House being in Cvmmifctee of the Whole on the State of the Uuion, Mr. SHEL- LABAROER said : Mk. Chairmak: TM.e extinction of a nationality, in whose language are recorded the first events of human history, whose constitution antedates the pyramids fey three hundred years, and whose arts, literature and laws are the sources of all future civilization, is recorded by its last historian in that one startling sentence, **sedition destroyed the city, and Komans destroyed- the sedition." A polity older than Thebes, a Government whose life outmeasures Assyrian, Chaldean and Gre^^ian dominion combined, has the story of its decline and fall summed up, and its history told, in this sentence with which the Hebrew State is dismissed forever from the families of men. Sir, the sedition which let Titus into the Hebrew capital was but the mad- ness of those wnom the gods would destroy. If the attacks we witnessed the other day upon this Government when my colleague [Mr. VallandiqhamI sought to persuade its subjects no longer to give to it their support in its present struggle against armed treason were mere madness, they wore rela- tively innocent. But, sir, we are spectators to-day of events in our midst, seen in an arranged, simultaneous and systematized eflfort to paralyze the Government in this its life or death struggle with treason, and to persuade one hulf its subjects to "adhere to its enemies,'' which are not meye madness, I stop not to prove to-day. My countrymen, you no longer need proofs, I think. But whether you do or not, I cannot stop to prove, but only to warn you to-day that the "enormous conspiracy" of which you were told in the i;i>t public utterance of Mr. Douglas, on the 1st of May, 1801. has its con- spirators in the North — I do not say in this House — who there play their infernal part in this drama. The key-note was struck by Stephens at Sa- . vannah, on the 22d of March, 1861, when ha said: " The process of disintegration in the old Union will go on with nlmost ^bsohu-^ (•(■rtainty. We are tlie nucleus o( a growing power. Looking tt) the future, * « * (■ II is not beyond the range of pos.sibility, ancj even probability, that all the great State.i HK THE NoitTinvEsr shall gravitate thi^ way. Our doors are wide enoughopen to receive them, but not until they are ready to assimilate with us in principle.'^ And, sir, what we see in the North daily of these efforts to. paralyze this, and to inspire with confidence the rebel government, are assigned and set parts in the play of the conspirators in this "process of disintegration." My colleague [Mr. Vallandigham] said the other day that "this Gov- ernment, with an arbitrary power which neither the Czar of Kussia nor the Emperor of Austria dare exercise, has struck down at a bl,ow cveiy badge and muniment of freedom." The gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Habi>- iNO,] in substance, repeated this. But, sir, these two speeches, as to thi* point, are but imitations, and almost copies, of the speech of Mr. Breckin- ridge in the United States Senate, of 15th of July, 1861, made shortly before he entered the rebel service; and all are the echoes of a message of Jeflerson Jir,c v^v! ^^iV .i. ^ •'^^^ I ^ oC^ E>^ 3 DftTJs. Another gentleman [Mr. Cox] alleges, in substance, that the six hundred and forty-one days of Mr. Lincoln's administration have divided the Union into two belligerent parts; have debauched the religion and morals of the nation; have murdered, by its war, one hundred and fiftv thousand of its children, and by disease as many more. Another gentleman [Mr. Richardson} attributes this war and its fearful calamities to the "Pres- ident and his friends," because, he says, they could have avoided it by hon- orable compromise. I do not allude to these specimens of attack upon him who, as the national Executive, if we are to live, must be supported in the discharge of his con- stitutional duty to "protect and defend" the Government by all of the peo- ple, to say that these are parts of the play of the conspirators, for that would be unparliamentary. I do not refer to them for the purpose of influencing their authors by any reply, for that would be useless. 1 do not allude to them for the purpose of finding fault with any criticism of the acts of this. Administration. It is not the right merely, t5ut the duty, of every repre- sentative of the people, to watch, and by truthful, manly criticism, to guard the interests of the people and of their Government, by detecting and expo- sing the errors and wickedness of the highest and lowest officer of tne Gov- ernment- If a bad proclamation has been issued, it a vicious policy has been inaugurated, if a faithful and able commander has been superseded, or frauds have been committei, show these by patriotic and reasonable appeals to facts, and every patriot in the land will honor you, and will leap to your support in correcting the error. I bow in blind adoration to no President, no party, no administration. I know none of them as such in this frightful struggle for national life. I honor the man Avho makes this Government stronger by showing its faults. But, sir, the utterances I have cited belong not to this class of truthful or reasoning exposures or rebuke of error in this Government. "What, sir! tell Americans, who are not fools, and can read, that when the President arrests men such as Merryman and Kane, engaged in murdering our unarmed soldiers in Baltimore, coming to rescue this capital from the torch, or when he arrests those who were burnijig the bridges over which they came here, or who were acting in the plot to assassinate the President, he "struck down at a blow every badge of republican government," and is guilty of acts of despotism which the Czar dare not do! Why, sir, the au- dacity of this accusation, that military arrests for the public safety in time of great danger are unprecedented despotism, is absolutely sublime. In the war for our institutions, and most of them under the general command of Washington, these military arrests were almost daily. Some were charged with "being inimical to the liberties of America, ' as in the case of Connolly and others "in Maryland. Others with "damning General Washington and Congress," as in the case of Kirkpatiick, of the same State. Others for ex- pressing "sentiments inimical to America," and for "advising men to lay down their arms," as in the case of Belniir(!S, of the same State. Others for being "enemies to American liberty," as in the case of Joshua Tcstill, of the pamc State. Others for being "disaffected to the cause of American freedom," as in the case of twenty Friends taken from Philadelphia aad imprisonetl at Winchester, Virginia. Others for being suspected of being loyalists, as in tJie case of Colonel Henry Frey, of New York, imprisoned during the war, with others, at Hartford, Connecticut. AVhy, sir, under Washington, through- out the war, by military authority, and in disregard of habens carpus, for the public safety, these arrests of dangerous men were almost universal. Tell Americai's that these arrests are unheard-of acts of despotism, when they know that for such arrests at New Orleans by Jackson he received the plaudits of his Government; and for them by ileneral Wilkinson, at the time of Burr's conspiracy, he was applauded by Mr. Jefferson, who said: "(ln f;rc:»t occ'asions, everr Rood officer must lie rpndy to risk liiinsilf in fioing be- jond the strict line oi law, when tho public j)resorvntioii reiinires i(. His motives will be n jnstitioation, as far na there is any discretion in his ultralcg;\l proceedings, and no indulgence of j>rivate feelings." "Your sending hereSwartwout and liollman, iind adding to them Bnrr, Blennerhas- aet and Tyler, should they fall into your hands, will be supported by thepiiblic opinion." m FXCHANeE , "The Feds, and the little bnnd of Quids, in opposition, will try to make something of the infringement of liberty by the military arrests and deportation of citirenM • but if it .loes not go beyond such ottendcrs as Swartwout, Bollman, Burr, Blennerhasset Tyler, 4c., they will be supported by the public approbation." And these acts by Jackson and Wilkinson were done at a time when the public danger was to ours now as the summer breeze to the sweep of the hurricane. Tell us that these military arrests for "public safety" are unheard- of acts of despotism not dared to be made by autocrats, when wo know that, from the conspiracy of Cataline to the rebellion of Dorr, in every civilized Government under the heavens, they have been resorted to as a means of preserving the State! And, sir, they never should be resorted to, except when necessary to preserve the State, and then with extremest care. Tell men not idiots that Mr. Lincoln's six hundred and forty days' possession of this Government has divided this Union, inaugurated the war, and brou"ht all its consequences, when every man on the globe who reads any human language, from Esquimaux to English, knows that under Mr. Buchanans administration this Union was (as much as now) divided, seven States had seceded, the rebel government was formed, the President installed, the Con- gress in session, an act matured calling out one hundred thousand militia to seize on Washington and assassinate the President, our army and arms seized in Texas, public property taken by the rebellion, and the Government's au- thority overthrown throughout one-fourth its limits! Tell us Lincoln com- menced this war, when Walker, the rebel Secretary of War, on the 12th of April, 1861, boasts that they began it on that day by the attack upon Sum- ter, and notified through his organs his army of seven thousand men and one hundred and forty cannon to be ready at a moment's notice to march upon and take this capital ; and this and innumerable other acts of war, all done before one efibrt was made by this Government even in preparation for self-defense ! Why, Mr. Chairman, by what name will history call such truthless assaults upon our beloved institutions and the Government, now when it r.eeds so much the sympathy and support of all its children? Are these treason? Oh no, not treason, although they destroy the Government. They are not treason, only because treason is bold and leaps to its ends by the "overt act." It is only because treason is bold, and takes the hazards of crime, that some- body said of it that treason multiplied becomes heroic, successful becomes patriotism. Why, sir, Cataline, as conspirator, at the door of the Senate, has received the execrations of all history, and is pinioned over the door- way of every council chamber in Christendom. There, sir, over your door- way you see his bones yet, and scorn stands there pointing at them her slow unmoving finger. But Cataline as the captain, in flagrant war at Pistoia, has received from history the sacred rite of sepulture. When Absalom stole from his father the king the hearts of the king s subjects, us he kissed the men of Israel beside the king's gate, Absalom was but a demagogue and thief. But to the memory of Absalom, in the wood of Ephraim, as a leader of open rebellion, the tears of his father accord the meed of a hero illustri- ous at least in crime. No, Mr. Chairman, these covered and furtive attacks upoK this Govern- ment itself, which are made now by seeking to persuade the people that the crimes of their own Government are the causes of this rebellion against itself, are not technical treason, just because treason is no skulk or coward. And, sir, neither are they debate. AVhy, sir, debate is the contest of intel- lect with intellect, wielding in that contest truth— high, sublime, mighty truth — and if the combatants have no other li" lit, they have at least the sword-sparks struck by the conflict from these tlieir weapons. Michael or Ajax may be set down by poets as impersonations of high debate. But even Ajax, groping for an antagonist and for light, is not such impersona- tion ; much less is not debate the truthless dribblings of inanity as it stande there vacant anu emasculated, nuittering at each passer by its incoherent twaddle. Neither, sir, are these diatribes debate which, in this Hall or out, libel the loyal men of the North as the authors of our national cnlamiiic8. These utterances are not debate, sir. Then, what are they "^ Let them U- forever to histoiy what the ravings of the hags of th3 drama are to it, "a deed without a name." Let ns look a little at these accusations against the men of the North. — The gentleman from Illinois says in effect, we brought the war wrongly, un- justly, by rejecting an honorable compromise, which was rejected the 2d of March, 1861. This was after seven rebel States had seceded; organized a, rebel government; inaugurated its president; matured, in its congress, an act calling out one hundred thousand militia ; surrendered our army in Texas, and our forts, arsenals, navy yards and other public property to the rebel- lion; and after the conspirators had taken a final leave of this Government in contemptuous defiance of the Government and rejection of all compro- mise, and was in the act of organizing its armies to march them on this cap- ital to overthrow the Government and to assassinate the President of the United States, and to seize upon the seat of his and of this Government's power. That was the precise attitude of the rebels towards the "President and his friends" at the moment when that President and his friends, as the o-entleman alleges, at last refused to make with the rebels "an honorable compromise!" And that was the attitude of affixirs — mark it, Americans — when began the six hundred and forty-one days of this administration's ex- istence, which the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Cox] in this House dares to insinuate have borne, as their terrible fruits, the destruction of three hui,dred thousand citizens, the division of this Union into two belligerent parts, the bankruptcy and total debauchery of the entire nation. Let this House and nation note this attitude of affairs when this honorable compromise was de- clined, and when these six hundred and forty-one days began, and then let uj look a moment at these startling accusations that we have brought this war and its awful fruits by rejecting honorable compromise. Shall I argue with these honorable gentlemen the proposition that the President and his friends could only compromise with rebels, whose knife was at their throats, honorably upon the supposition that our principles, which we were required to abandon in the compromise, were so obviously wrong and unjust that we and the people who elected Mr- Lincoln could not hon- estly entertain them as true? If honestly entertained as wise principles of government, and just approved by the people, could the President and his friends abandon thm in obedience to the logic of the knife and the pistol, and abandon them at the very moment he was appointed by the people to to execute them? Would that, sir, be the gentleman's idea of an honorable compromise? Let us see. I now make an appeal which I know must reach the sense of manhood as well as the patriotism of the gentleman from Illinois, and of every member on the other side. Had Mr. Douglas been elected on the doctrine of "pop- ular sovereignty," and then had the New England States, or Ohio, pursued the course of their Soutiiern sisters and said, "we are unwilling to belong to a Government which protects slavery; we are tired of what these men call the copartnership; we will break it up, and will erect a Government of our own;" and if they had seized the forts, arsenals and public property of the whole country, and had arrayed themselves in hostility to the Govern- ment, and threatened to depose Mr. Douglas, and to take possession of the capital, and had put their knife at the heart of Mr. Douglas, and at the heart of the gentleman from Illinois, as the head of bis Cabinet; and then, in that posture of affairs, had said to Mr. Douglas and his Cabinet, and to the people who elected him, "we will submit to your (iovernmcnt and live under it if you will make with us an 'honorable compromise;' just abandon your principle of 'popular sovereignty;' put into the Constitution our Chicago platform; exclude popular sovereignty from the Territories forever; and do not stop there, but after you have got the Chicago platform into the Consti- tution, put in a clause touching it which shall say, as the Crittenden compro- mise did touching its 'slave code' which it injected into the Constitution, 'no future amendment to the Constitution shall aflect this article.'" And then had New England said, "do this, and we 'black republicans' will condescend to live under your government, and will not cut its throat, and yours too. — "We offer you this 'honorable comproinisc' You can accept it or the knife. If you reject this honorable compromise you will be the cause of the war we will make on the Government; and will be the authors of the slaughter and bankruptcy it will bring, and of our division uf the Union and of ovr rebellion." Had New England done this — and I beg pardon of noble New England forever quoting this supposition, which I do from Mr. Latham — would the gentleman from Illinois have accepted that most "honorable com- promise?" Would he, Mr. Chairman? Would he, my ju.st-minded men of America? Would he do the thing described b}' the noble Democrat, Kose- erans, just after the victory at Murfreesboro', which has made him immortal, whj thus speaks of the peace traitors of the North: " They will liok the boots of these Southern thieves and liars, who will turn around and kick them." Mr. Chairman, I take the question back. To ask it is not to assume merely that the gentleman from Illinois would have played the traitor by laying down, at the foot of monstrous, causeless rebellion, that Government which the people ha.d just given to him and made him swear "to protect and de- fend." It is not to assume merely that he was too poor-spirited and too cowardh' to defend a principle he believed right, and which the people had just approved and intrusted to him to defend as their chosen guardian ; but it is to suppose the gentleman from Illinois is a dog, and a very mean dog at that. Sir, if he would not, and could not, make such a compromise without dishonor and the abandonment ot all pretense of ours being a Government, then, in the name of all that is high and holy in common justice and fair play, I ask how could wc abandon our principles and the Government at the bidding of rebellion, with Yancey's dagger at our heart? But, Mr. Chairman, there is still another reason why I should not suppose the gentleman, as a member of Mr. Douglas' Cabinet, would, upon our threat of rebellion, have "honorably" compromised away "the Constitution as it is' than the one I have given, that it is to suppoiie him a traitor, u poltroon, and a very bad pup. That other reason, sir, is, that upon this very question the gentleman and all his party, but pre-eminently that gentleman, has been tested — ay, sir, most thoroughly tested. That gentleman, as the chosen and confidential representative of Mr. Douglas, was at the national Democratic convention at Charleston in April, 1860. What he said there and did was to be taken to be and was what Douglas said, and what Democracy North said. And, air, Yancey was there too. And that same knife which is now- red and dripping with blood of patriots slain on a hundred battle-fields for the Union was there loo. And that same torch was there, and in the hands of the same conspirators, which has fired this temple of our liberties. And there Yancey held that knife at the throat of the gentleman from Illinois, and applied that torch to the funeral pyre on which they had stretched, for immolation to the Moloch of slavery, the Democratic party. The gentleman then knew and said what Mr. Douglas, in etiect, repeated in the last public utterance of his life, that this attitude of Yanct-y and his co-conspirators toward him and Mr. Douglas, at Charleston, was one act in the plot for the destruction of this Union by destroying the Democratic party. Sir, did you not know it? Did you not, in ett'ect, say it ? Have you not said so ten thousand times out of this Hall and in it? Did you not say, what the whole Democratic party North have said, that then and there the conspirators meant to destroy the Democratic party first, and this Union next — to put out the light, and then put out the light?. And, sir, then, too, the gentleman, with th'is same knife of rebellion at hie throat, was tendered, by these same conspirators, a compromise — if he f)leases, an "honorable eom- piomise" — one which would save the Democratic J'arty, and, in his judg- ment, that would have saved this Union. What was that compromise? Let the country look at it now once mor<-. What was that tiling wiiich the gentleman from Illinois, rather than agree to do, would destroy the Demo- cr-tic party and thereby the Union? Why, sir, it is to the "honorable coni- promise ' said to be tendered to us in the Crittenden compromise as Hyperi- on to a satyr. Here is the proposition offered to the gentleman at Charlet- ton, before which he preferred to take the severance of the Democratic party and of this Union. It says: 6 "Itis the dut}' of the Federal Government in all its departments ^o protect, when ne- eeasary, the righ's of persons and property in the Territories, and wherever else it.'* oonstitutional authority extends." That was all he was required to accept as a compromise, and with it to take Mr. Douglas for President. That was the "slave code," the Breckin- ridge platform, the "honorable compromise" tendered to the gentleman, as he lay there, the great representative of Douglas s'^uatter sovereignty, upon the funeral pile of the nsitional Democracy, with Yancey's knife at his throat. Take this "honorable compromise," the "slave code," and the negatii'n of popular sovereignty, with Douglas and the preservation of the Union by the preservation of national Democracy, or take the knife to Union and Democ- racy. Mind you, Mr. Chairman, Yancey did not ask that this "honorable compromise," the Breckinridge platform, should bo put into the Constitution, and that it should then be made, like the laws of the Medes and Persians, unalterable by all the people throughout all the ages. Oh, no, sir. They did not ask so much as that at his hands, but only that it should be put into a political platform — a thing brewed, like the hell-broth of the witches, from " Eye of mewt and toe of frog, Wool of bat, and tongue of dog. Adder's fork, nnd blind-worm's sting, Lizard's leg, and owlet's wing. For a charm of powerful trouble;" and then dashed away more quickly than brewed when its purposes are end- ed. And, sir, what was the action of the gentleman then, when, by letting into that thing of wind called a platform this protection to slavery, he could have preserved the Democratic party, and thereby, as he avers, the Union also, and could have elected Douglas and avoided this war, as they tell us? Did he do it? For the sake of the national Democracy and of the Union did he doff his prmciples and make that "honorable compromise?" Did he get upon his belly and oat just a little more dirt? No, sir; oh, no. Just when the gentleman was in this attitude, with Y'ancey's knife at his party's n«ck, he received from Mr. Douglas this emphatic dispatch: •'Accept the Cincinnati platform and Dred Scott; but go not a step beyond." Mr. ALLEN, of Illinois. I desire to ask the gentleman one question. — What authority has the gentleman from Ohio for making that assertion ? Does he state it from his own knowledge, or from information? and if from information, what is the source of that information? Mr. SHELLABAliGER. I stated it as an extract, verbatim, ct literatim, 0t jnmctuatim, from the reports of the proceedings of the Charleston Con- vention, as they were given to us in the public papers at the time the con- vention was in pizblic session ; and it never has been, so far as I knyw, denied. Just then, too, it was that a distinguished delegate from Ohio, Mr. Payne, exclaimed in the convention, "we cannot recede I'rom this ground of non- interveniion without personal dishonor, and .so help us Cod we never will." It was about the same moment when another dchigate exclaimed, "I feel, praise the Lord, that I have got through eating dirt. I have eaten my peck, and I want no more." And it was then the gentleman rejected the "honor- able compromise," divided the Democrati'j party, defeated Judge Douglas, which he avers divided this Union, and brought on tliis war. lie did all tills rather than abandon a principle he believed right, and put its opposite into a mere platform. He and Mr. Payne could not put the opposite of their principle of non-intervention into a platform, even for the sake of the Democracy and the Union, without "personal dishonor," and they snore by the God of nations and of men they never would. And, sir, what man or mouse has dared to wag tongue or tail at these men for not eating that peck of dirt at Charleston? Sir, that was what ho was asked but declined to do at Charleston, to save this Union by "hf)norable compromise." What is it that was demanded of us? Here is the material pro-slavery term of that Crittenden compromise tendered, it is said, to us. It says: '• In all the 'rerritories south of .iO" 31/ slavery ol thi' .African race is recognized a>t existing, anrl shall not be inte;-(ered with by Congress ; but shall be protected by all the departments of the territorial government during Us eantinuance." This provision applied to all future acquired territories. This proposi- tion, let it be observed, is the very antipode of the leading principle on which Mr. Lincoln had just been elected, as that leading principle was incorpora- ted in the eighth resolution of the Chicago platform, which excluded slavery from the territories. It was "personal dishonor'' for Mr. Payne and Mr. Richardson to admit into their mere platform the opposite of their princi- ples, not principles just affirmed by the voice of the people; hut it is '-hon- orable compromise" for us to thrust'nto the Constitution of the United States, and to make it unalterable forever, the very opposite of our principles which had just been affirmed by the voice of the nation. Why, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has become patient beyond precedent, when it is not his, but our principles, our honor, our possession and administration of the Government, which are to be gfven up by this "honorable compromise.' Since this re- bellion has culminated in flagrant war, he has exhibited the graces of meek- ness far beyond the examples of the patriarchs and prophets. Even Moses and Job have ceased to be respectable. The primer must be changed now in order to vindicate "the truth of history;'" and to the questions our mother* used to ask us in the nursery, "who was the most patient man?" and "who the meekest man?" instead of the answers being Job, Moses, both must now be answered, William A. Richardson. It is true the gentleman's suffering is alleviated some in the fact that it is otif suffering he proposes to tolerate, oi/r honor he proposes to tarni.sh, our principles he proposes to sacrifice ; but still he is meek and patient, because in "this honorable compromise'' he is now ready to make with armed rebel- lion he parts with his own principles of non-intervention as well as ours. — And what makes his graces of patience arise to the absolutely illustrious and saintly, is the fact that this honorable compromise is to be made with the same men now in arms against him, who admonished the people of Charleston, when the gentleman and his fellow-delegates went there, to put an increased police force on their beat, and stronger locks on their doors to protect property and women from the danger which the presence of North- ern Democrats had brought to the city. Why, sir, I remember that a man, once a most distinguished member of this House and of the Senate, whose eloquence surpassed Patrick Henry's, drew from oriental biography an ex- ample of meekness in the life of a Hebrew herdsman, who afterwards be-'"' came a Hebrew king. He described the shepherd boy as being helped (ipl'J the acclivities of Judea's mountains by adhering to the tails of Jesse's cat* tie; and as receiving with marked patience in his golden hair what wa«' ■ coveted most for the enrichment of the impoverished soil in the valleys be- low. That looks like patience. But even that example pales its ineffectual'!^ fires before the lustre of this modern example of meekness which we hav* in the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. Chairman, even my colleague [Mr. Tallandioham] was compelled, . the other day, to admit that we could not in honor accept the Crittendeiiri compromise; and he makes us guilty of a "high crime" in holding our prin-'" ciples at all, and not in tbe refusal to part with theai. Ho says .• "But that party, most (ii.sAstronsly for the (-ountry, refijscd all i!Oinpromi.«e. How,, indeed, could theyacoept B,ny ?■ TJiat which the South clemanded, and the Democratic- and conservative parties of the North and West were willing to grant, and which alonef'' eoiild avail to keep the peftce and save the Union, implied a surrender of tlie solo vital i clement of the party." * '■' '•' '•' '•'' "■■■ '-'' ''" , '■ "Sir, the orime, the hi^ crime of the Republican party was not so much its refusal •t, .exr;iusively, to order and control thoir domosticin.ilitu- 8 tions according t& their own judgment; and the Terrltorks are, by th« Constitution and comnit>n iaw, free Territory; and when necessary to secure to persons in theTer- ritoriec their constitutional right to liberty, legislation to that end should be provided." This, sir, is the precise substance of the whole principle making our "high <;rime." The States exclusive masters of their own domestic aftkirs, the Territories free. The question I make with him who sajs this principle is ?i "high crime," and with him who sajs we caused the war by refusing to part with this principle is, was this principle so damnable in its character that we could have abandoned it without personal dishonor, while he could not abandon his principles at Charleston without such personal dishonor? That is the question, sir. Gentlemen cannot dodge it, or blink it, or cover it up from the view of an intelligent people. Three words cover the whole vast question: "Are Territories free?" Is this doctrine so monstrous that we could not believe it — so monstrous that, just when it was solemnly sanctioned by the people, and a Government selected to defend it, it could bo abandoned under the force of the logic of assassins and bullies, by an "honorable compromise ?" What ! Mr. Chairman, that the Territories ought to be free — a self-evident and monstrous wickedness^to be instantly aban- doned at the threat of treason the moment treason demands it. Why, sir, in the name of history, of truth, and God, let us look at this. Favor to freedom and to free labor — non-favor to extension of slavery and slave labor in the new States and empires of this continent ! Who, sir, were and are the friends and advocates of this doctrine, which freemen are now demand- ed to dash to the dogs of rebellion the moment they bark at us ? Why, sir, where did -vve learn that lesson? Who were our schoolmasters? Will the gentleman from Illinois walk with me a moment in fancy ? I take him to no porch of Zeno. I ask him not to the groves of Aristotle. — Let him go with his head uncovered with me now, for I invite him into an august presence- That is not an unnatural fancy which lets the dead re- visit "the glimpses of the moon," and which has assembled them again in Independence Hall as witnesses of the sad spectacle now before us, the death- struggle of the great Kepublic modeled after their teachings or formed by their hands. It is into that convocation that I invite gentlemen of this House and my countrymen. Let us light up again that old hall, where they reassenvble now, with the same lamps which shone down upon their benches when they were there before. Let the books be opened again from which these founders of our Government read the precepts which guided them in our natal epoch. Let that focus of lights which fell upon the cradle of the Republic be again thrown in full blaze upon us as we stand around what, alas may be its grave. Let us look upon the shades of our fathers in the same illuminations which surrounded them when they made the Republic. There these lights are now hanging in a vast galaxy around the chamber where, in fancy, our mighty dead have come back. He who turns with most confidence to the teachings of our holy religion, would first look to- wards the constellation in which are grouped the great teachers ot that di- vine faith. In that group he will see Baxter, Paley, Whitfield, Clark, Mc- Knight, Scott, Beattie, Butler, Goodwin, and the whole body of the repre- sentative minds of Christendom. Of the Protestant faith Wesley may be the central figure, and of the Catholic, Leo X : and all alike are saying in the language of Wesley — "Human slavery is the vilest thing that ever saw the sunlight," and in the language of Leo X., "not religion alone, but nature herself cries out against slavery." He who reveres the teachings of the great masters in public and international law, would first look at the light held by Blackstone and Montesquieu, and Sir AVilliam Jones and Grotius, where he would read their united testimony written over them nil in the immortal words of Grotius, that great father of the international law — "They who buy, sell, or abduct slaves or free men are men-stealers." He who bows reverently before the men wlio give laws to empires, policies to States, and character to civilization itself, would first see the light which came from the torch held in the hand of Fox and Burke and Clarkson and Wilberforce and Pitt; and would read in that light the utterance of thcra all in the memorable words of Pitt — "It is injustice to permit slavery to re- 9 or ■main a single hour in England." He who is most moved by th^ melodies of iniperisliable song, or is guided by the persuasive forees of high literary productions, would first see in this assemblage, Addison, Uunnah Mure anil Dr. Johnson, and their associates in the world of letters, and would read, over them all, the words of Dr. Johnson, written in ligiit which ages have not dimmed, "No man is the property of another." He who bows with most reverence in the august presence of the conuuon law, would first turn to that grand impersonation of that law which is over the very entrance to the Chamber where we now are, Lord Mansfield. What he holds in his hand is the judgment of the King's Bench in the cjise of Sommersett; that thing which, upon the ■22d day of June, 1772, belted with a zone of light the earth as far as goes that dominion "whose morning drum beat following th'^ sun and keeping pace with the hours circles the earth with one continu- ous and unbroken strain of martial airs of Englau sun in its coming, the earliest light of the morning gilding it, and parting day lingering and playing on its summit." The first Congress which ever met under the Constitution applied that ordi- nance, c.vcluding slavery from all our then Territories, to our new form of gov- ornnicnl. Its beneficent provisions began at the western base of the Alleghe- nies, and swept across the great States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, far oil to the Lake i»f the Woods. It was passed by the very men who had just made the Cdustitution — passed early in the morning of the first days of the Republic's, existence — passed when the young leaf upon our tree of liberty opened to the sun its lir.st verdure — passed when the first oath, ))y the men who had made the Constitution, had scarce escaped from their lips to support it; and had scarce yet been registered by (!od to whom it was addressed, and was approved by Washington on the same day the AVar Department of this Government was first created. And, sir, after it was passed, it received the illustrious signature of Washington. Why, sir, in the light of the events now surrounding us, and of the teachings of to day upon this floor, is it not a startling fact that one of the very lirst statutes ever passed by an American Congress, and one of the very first wlii<'h received the approving signature of the first President — of the man "first ill war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his fellow-citizens" — provi- ded that there should be no slayery forever in all the vast territories then owned by tills (ioverninciil — provided precisely what, in the election of the present Administration, lln' people declared to lie the best for the whole counjry — provi- ded j)r«'cisely w hut a gentleman on this floor now alleges our favoring makes u» tlie autliors of this relnllion, and llic murderers of the three hundretl thonsaud u who have fallen in Mr. Lincoln's six hundred and fortj-ono days; and prnvidcd what another calls a "high crime?" Ah, Mr. Cliairman, will these gentlemen be — not just, for that we do not e.\peet — liut will Ihey oniil to bo monsters? Wliy, sir, shall I ask the gentleman f'rum Illinois what he would take as a consideration for the benelicent results of that great act of the first Congress and of Washington ; that act under tlie po>v<>r of which a nation of men, a con stellation of States, an empire of weallli and civilization has leaped, like Miner va from the head of .love, full grown and Ijeautifiil? Let him contrast Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and the Slates protected by that signature of Washinglon, with their si.\ million of free, happy, and prosperous sons, with their nujre than em pires of wealth, and their si.v inland oceans of commerce, witii any other ec(ual extent of slave territory upcm which God's equally propitious sun and rains de- scend, and then answer me, not like the truckling demagogue and parti.^an of slavery, but like what he is, the independent, high-souled and sagacious stutes- man. Nay, sir, what would 3-ou take and have wrested from the brow of your your own great State of Illinois the crown ol" liljerty which Washington's signa- ture, dated on the memorable 7lli day of August, 1789, placed upon it? AVliy, Mr. Chairman, I will not ask him that question, for it ii asking him whether, for not one piece of silver, he would have douf against Illinois what Iscariot got .thirty pieces for doing against Christ. I will not even ask what he would take and have reversed in history the action of Randolph and his associates, by which, on the 2d of March, 1803, they refused to permit slavfMj to linger ("or one hour in all tlie beautiful bordejs of his great State. And yet, Mr. Chairman, it was just what AVashington and his first Cougjess did for us ; just wjuit Kan dolph did for Illinois ; just that we sought to do for that vast and beautiful earth which stretches freni the waters of the ilississippi to the Pacific ocean, and where our children now plant "The seeds of empire future, broad. And rear the first altars to the Pilgriin'.s God." There tee wanted to do for our children what AVashington did for us. And, Mr. Chairman, it was (inly the non-abandonment, at the bid of treason, by us of that desire that is demiunced in this House as the cause of this rebellion against Washington's Kepulilic. It is that which makes the six hundred and forty days of this Administration the murd<'rers of thi'ee hundred thousand of our ciiil- dren ! Sir, I might continue this exhibition of the precepts and deeds of our dead until it included them all. From sire to son these principles were trans mitted and repeated. I might re(Mte the teachings by Webster, repeated in his memorable declaratidn, tliat he would never do aught "to extend African slavery on this continent, or to add another slave State to this Union." I might point to that noble sentiment uttered by the great Clay, when, with a vehenn.'nco ' almost unlike himself, ho declared that "no earthly power could compel him to I vote to extend slavery into Territories now free." I But I must here pause, and let down the vail which hides from us the exam- ples of these great men. Sir, if the Republic must perish, let all these holy memories of its origin, to which I have alluded, and the names of its f()unders peHsh also; and let that vail never rise again to agonize the heart of a perished people by the memories of the frightful delusion under which our experiment in free government was begun — a delusion, a lie, enunciated in those words upon which that experiment was begun — that "all men by nature are cntith'd to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ;" and, sir, let their names perish from among men who de(ei\ed their diildren into the belief that "neither slavery nor involuntary servilud<' ought to be extended e\cej)t in punishment of crimes." I, sir, have not exhibited again fur the ten theusandlh time the words and deeds of these men of the past, in the vain hope of convincing the gentlenuin from Illi- nois, or anyone wlio says that the non alnindonment of our princMples at the l)id «f rebellion caused this war, that Washington and Franklin and Madison and Jefferson and Patrick Henry and Huriic and AVilberforce and lilackstone and Orotius and Mansfield and Wesley and Baxter and Addisi>n and Clay and Web ater Were right. Nay, sir, not in tin; hope to convince him that the universal conscience, example, and lieart of modern Christian civilization is right. In obedience to these, at the perion for ever having gone so far as to put any even into a platform ;" if he is right in saying that it would have been honorable compromise in us, just when the prin- ciples of Washington and his compeers were by the voice and approval ot the people intrusted to us for administration, to abandon them when mud- sill Ham- mond cracked his whip at us ; yet, sir, it is monstrously, absolutely, and incon teslably an error to assert that these conspirators would have given us even that "honorable compromise." Utterly polluted with dishonor as we would have been, as we lay there prostrate in filth before the relx'Uion, Ijeggiug to be per- mitted to exchange Washington's principles for Bully Brooks' by '•honorable compromise," they would have spit upon us and kicked us, instead of giving us the "honorable compromise" of the gentleman from Illinois. In proof of this let us submit facts to a candid world. Mr. Douglas, whatever he may hav(> previously said in hot debate, said in the lust public utterance of his life: "There never was a time since the inauguration of Wa«hiiigton when (he rights of the South were safer under the law than they are now." "The slavery question was a mere pretext" for this rebellion. The rebellion is the result of "an enormous conspiracy formed more than twelve months ago." If llr. Douglas told the truth when lie declared that the rebels had no more cause to rebel wiien they did than they would have had on the 30th of April, 1789, the day Washington was inaugurateil — and Mr. Douglas said that is su — will the gentleman say to me that our debasement of ourselves at the feel of the rebels by abandoning our principles and accepting theirs would have broken up that enormous conspiracy, made their rights more secure, w hieh were as secure as 13 when Washington was inaugurated; or would they have permitted llionisclves to be rol)bed by our prostration before them of tlieir coveted "pretext?" WouKl they, sir? If he will so say, then I will submit another pnM)f. "Douglas did not know," will the gentleman say, "whereof he alliriiied when he said that tlie slavery question was a mere 'excuse' for the rebellion ;" and that they were "as safe when they rebelled as they were under "Washington :" ])<)\iglas was not very familiar with public aflairs ; liad not seen mueh of this rebeldom ; did not know the plans and movements of the conspirators; and was not a close or shrewd observer of men ; and what is worse, was born in New England. Douglas lied when he declared the slavery question was a mere "excuse." Be it so; let the gentleman iiom Illinois pass Douglas too into the rear along with the Idockheads Washington and Madison and Franklin and Grotius. I next take as my witness Reverdy Johnson — a soutliern man, not guilty of being born in Xew England. Does he know something about the southern heart? He, upon the 7th of May, 1861, at Frederick, Maryland, useii these words: "The truth is, and I regret to believe it, that a fear of Ihe violation of southern rights was with the promoters of this rebellion a mere pretense." — They feared "the power was passing from them." Did tliis the Soulh's great champion in the great Dred Scott case, aud one of its greatest intellects, know this South? or did he falsify when he declared, that wlien they rebelled they did not even have -a fear of the violation of any southern right? Does the gen- tleman reply, that "Johnson was not of tlie rebels, and not very smart, and did not know as well as I why they rebelled," and that compromise and security of their rights was what the rebels wanted ? Very well ; let Johnson, the giant in- tellect of the South, pass into the congregation of the fools, along with Jellerson and his associates, who were ignorant as to the rights aiul interests or designs of these rebels. I will now call as my next witness, a man who will come up to the standard which entitles liim to speak as to what the reljels would have done in compromise. Yancey, the prince of the rebels, whose keen blade the gentle man from Illinois felt at Charleston, was, perhaps, as well posted as to the se- crets of the rebellion as even the gentleman from Illinois. lA't this House, this country, history, hear and write down, with pen of iron and point of diamond, every word of this utterance of the nuister of the rebellion ; and li't it never per- ish from the records of human wickedness. Let the gentleman from Illinois be careful to mark each word. Its date is material, and is December, ISGl. He says: "No profiered compromise; no amendments to the Constitution; no prottered addi- tional guaranties, can delay her (the Soiitli's) action for indei)endence one moment. — There is no defect in t)ie fundamental law; therefore it needs uo alteration." Did Yancey know as well as he of Illinois whereof lie spoke? Did tliat man know? He was selected by the rebel ^Soulh to be their mouth-piece at Charles- ton, and whose speech there was to annihilate "squatter sovereignty" and De- mocracy, and to complete the first act in this infernal drama of rebellion and murder. Sir, did he knoM' whether they wanted "honorable compromise?" No, say the gentlemen in Diis House, who alleged that we caused (his war liy rejec- tion of compromise. We know better than Yancey, the IJeelzelmb of this seces- sion, what its secrets were. This slatt-ment of Yancey was but the unofficial statement of ;ui individual, and he did not know what the rebtds want. Very well, sir. Lt'l Yancey, as an individual, also pass into tlie company of simple- tons, who HTO not wise in the designs of the rebellion, and who do nol compre hcnd the Southern heart; and I now call a group of witnesses. I now call no unofficial testiimmy or individual averment. I take the solemn official announce- ment made by the ihrec commissioners ol' the rebel government, speaking through Lord John iiussell to Parliament, to Europe, and the world. This is not tlie twaddle of pot-house politicians, nor the inflamed raphsodies of ranters; but it is the authorized, calm, cautiously worded, and ollicial enunciations "I the views, purposes and judgment of the rebellion, which it has chosen to record about itself in imperishable history. Sir, will the gentleman accept this ullerance of the commissioners Yancey, Rest and Maun as evidence of what concession.s or compromises thev wanted ? These are their worir, in one breath toll us that this Government "must aud will" have, "by right," 16 thf free navig-ation of the Mississippi, Davis' baUprios and tlio world to tlio con- trary notvvithstanding, and in the next tell us that the effort of this Government to-day to enforce that free navigation is unprefcdented and njonstrous wicked- ness! Why, sir, the gentleman, as I have said, is not mad, for there is some method, even in madness. What, then, is his speech? Sir, I admit I do not know, and think the country will label it as Barnum named the tiling in his gallery of queer things, which was neither man nor monkey, and which he called "What is it?" Sir, the gentleman outdoes the philosophers of Dean Swift, or somebody else, who organized a corporation to put out the sun and light their workl with sun- beams extracted from cucumbers. His sagacity would be just equal to theirs if he had stopped when his raphsodies against coercion were ended ; and when he had got up a Government with a Constitution, but with no power to "protect or defend it;" with laws, but with ho authority to compel subjects to obey them ; with a capital, but with no right, owing to habeas corpus, to arrest the Guy Fawkes who was about to blow it up; with a President, made commander-in-chief of its armies to quell insurrection, but with no armies to command, nor any right to command th(>m ; with exclusive control of its navigable rivers, but with no right to navigate them ; had he, I say, stopped then he would have been just as wise as the cucumber philosophers. But, going on, alter he has got up this admira- ble form of government, to tell us in his most coercive and unlove-making man- ner, with teeth gritting, arms defiant, nostrils distended, lips compressed, fists clenched, face upturned, with the whole man on tip-toe exalted, and eyes "in fine frenzy rolling," that this Gi>vernment "must and will" have, by right, and not by treaty or tribute, the free navigation of the Mississippi river, Jetf Davis nolens volens; then, sir, is when I get "bothered." And, Mr. Chairman, it is the duly of every mcm))er of Congress, in imitation of the gentleman, to quote some poetry in every speech upon this llo(jr. In obedience to that duty, and in dedi- cation to the lofty genius of the gentleman from Ohio for subduing rebellions without coercioji, and by the matchless seductions of the "compromise" which will "preserve the Constitution as it is" by changing it so as to (it each rebellion as it comes along,' and which will "enforce the laws" l)y altyring them so as to legalize each murder committed against them, I (juote from the Melodies of the Kingdom of Lilliput : " There was a man wl\o loved a maid, who loved the maiden much ; The Tn:\id dislikoil his 'orin and size, and would noi marry such. You like, said lie, the mouse, I'm told — the iiionse in form and .nnd fi'i'/.c ; I'll be a mouse to suit your views— a mouse by compromise." Sir, the life of the Republic will be decided speedily. That existence neK evidently depends on those who mad(? it — the people. Should the mass of the northern Democraf^y, in obedience' to the counsels of my colleague, [Mr. Val- LANDiGHAM,] withdraw their support from this (iovefnment in its struggle against rebellion, then, as he predicts, we are defeated and hjst. If they should follow those of such patriots and Democrats as he of rcnnsylvauia, [Mr. Wright,] for whose recent speech all patiiots thank him and liistory will honor him, and of such distinguished patriots and Democrats as AVrightof the Senate, Tiutler, Di\. llosecrans, aiul scores of other Democrats in the army, in this House, and in placivs of public trust and of private inlluence, then, sir, the rebeHi(»n will be overthrown, and lh« Republic will livp to protect and bless us and our children and our children's children (i)r ages; tvill live under "the Constitution as it is and the Union as it was," not when Senators wcic stri(dven down in tlunr own blooii in tile Sciuite Chamher foi- word.s spoken in debate, and when all over the South men were murdered for repeating the sentiments of the Declaration of Indepemlenee, but as it was when, in its golden age, M'ashington and Madison weri' fathers and I'residenta of the Republic. Spnngtield News, lu-iui. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 012 026 747 4