E 438 
 .S25 
 Copy 1 
 
lASi^ 
 
 Glass. 
 Book_xb_L5_ 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. ¥ILLA.RD SAULSBURY, 
 
 OF DELAWARE, 
 
 OK 
 
 THE STATE OF THE UNION. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, APRIL 2, 1863 
 
 The Senate having resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted by Mr. Davis 
 on the let of March, Mr. SAULSBURY said- 
 Mr. Peesident : It is not mj intention to speak to the merits of the 
 resohitions submitted by the Senator from Mississippi. They are the 
 occasion rather than the text of my discourse. I propose to speak 
 briefly to-day concerning the state of the Union ; to inquire whether 
 its harmony is endangered ; whether its integrity is threatened ; 
 whether its existence is imperiled ; and if so, by what means and 
 through whose agency such results have been produced ; upon whom 
 responsibility therefor rests, and whether there be any remedies for 
 8uch evils, and v.'liat those remedies are. Taught from earliest boy- 
 hood to respect the teachings of the Father of his Country as both 
 patriotic and wise ; to regard his admonitions with reverence, and to 
 believe that his precepts should be by all observed ; believing that the 
 liberties which our fathers achieved can only be permanently secured 
 by the preservation of the Union which they formed ; that liberty and 
 union are one and inseparable, I have accustomed myself to regard 
 our Federal Union as the palladium of our liberty, and for that, above 
 every other reason, earnestly to oppose every political party organiza- 
 tion whose principles were calculated, if practically applied in the 
 administration of the General Government, to alienate the affections 
 of the people of one portion of our common country from the people 
 of another. 
 
 That differences of opinion should exist, both in reference to the 
 domestic and foreign policy of a Government, in a country ^here 
 c =uch policy is dependent upon the popular will, is neither a matter of 
 ' wonder nor cause of regret ; but that a people possessing the inesti- 
 mable blessings of a free Government^ themselves the reaf sovereigns, 
 and those charged with the administration of public affairs their 
 agents, subject to their control, and removable at their pleasure, 
 
 Printed by Lemuel Towers, at $1 per hundred copies. 
 
\-c^lp 
 
 should allow those differences, in themselves capable of legal and sat- 
 isfactory adjustment in accordance with the fundamental law of their 
 political society, to endanger that possession, to wreck the fortunes of 
 the present, to blight the hopes of the future, shows them unmindful 
 of liberties which are theirs by inheritance, not by purchase, and 
 should subject their memories to the withering execration of the 
 teeming millions of the future time, who may learn from the truthful 
 narrative of some future Gibbon, sitting amid the crumbling ruins of 
 their once proud and mighty capital, the blessings which they madly 
 spurned and the destiny which they ingloriously surrendered. That 
 such may be our sad, our mournful fate as a people, the indications 
 of the present, no less than the examples of the past, admonish, unless 
 we timely pause, calmly think, and wisely act. It is not in the strug- 
 gles of national infancy, nor in the early battlings with adverse fortune 
 in individual life, that the existence of the one is generally destroyed, 
 or the hopes of the other forever blasted. Prosperity is more danger- 
 ous to either than adversity ; and each would be equally fortunate, 
 could the spirit by which prosperity was attained be remembered and 
 practiced, when dangers have been passed and difficulties subdued. 
 
 Scarce eighty years have passed away since our fathers, few in 
 numbers, but brave in spirit, fought the battles of the Eevolution. 
 They came from the North, they came from the South, they came 
 from the East, they came from their then West, and, by their united 
 efforts, achieved a common liberty for a common people, liberty for 
 themselves, and liberty for us, their posterity. To achieve that liberty, 
 many of them fell a sacrilice on freedom's altar. 
 
 "They fell, devoted but undying, 
 The very gales their names seem sighing; 
 The waters murmur of their name, 
 The woods are peopled with their fame; 
 The meanest rill, the mightiest river, 
 Rolls mingling with their fame forever." 
 
 To secure the liberty thus achieved to themselves and to their pos- 
 terity, the people of the several States agreed to meet together through 
 their representatives, and consult for the general good — the good jnot 
 of each separately, but of the whole unitedly. They did meet;_ they 
 did consult in the spirit of fraternal feeling. They were not without 
 their differences of opinion ; they were not without their apparent 
 conflicts of interest; but these differences were adjusted; these cor 
 iiicts were not "irrepressible ;'' they were harmonized, and they ente 
 ed into a compact ; they formed a Union which they intended to be 
 perpetual, and which will endure forever if we act for its preservation 
 in the same spirit of moderation and justice in which they acted in ita 
 formation. Our fathers were wise men — practical men. The}^ had 
 not studied in the schools in which were taught the sublimated theo- 
 ries of "irrepressible conflicts." They assumed not to be wiser than 
 their Maker, nor better than their Saviour. They essayed not f > 
 question the " ways of Providence to man," nor impiously assumeo; 
 the moral government of the world. They had not even learned tlie; 
 simple nomenclature of "capital States" and ^'labo.r States" now in- 
 corporated into the political vocabulary of ambitious aspirants for ofn - 
 cial positions which they have never merited, and of political honor! 5 
 
wliicli, if conferred, would be worn only to be disgraced. Thej found 
 society formed; they did not attempt to reform or disrupt it. They 
 were members of distinct and independent political communities, dif- 
 fering, to some extent, in their domestic institutions and economic 
 pursuits, but discovered in these no serious impediment to a common 
 union for a common good. 
 
 Under the mysterious disj^ensations of an allwise Providence, Afri- 
 can slavery had existed in the thirteen original colonies almost from 
 the time of their first settlement. It had become incorporated into 
 the very frame-work of society. Had it been desirable, it would have 
 been impossible for the superior or white race to rid themselves of the 
 inferior or servile race. The discovery of the equality of races eo 
 manifestly distinct that both the forming finger and providence of the 
 Almighty are traceable in that distinction, was reserved for the polit- 
 ical seers of a subsequent generation. The framers of the Constitution 
 were the representatives of independent political sovereignties. They 
 formed a Federal Union for the common benefit of all. They clothed 
 the Federal Government with such powers, and such powers only, as 
 they considered essential or necessary for the equal and common in- 
 terest and protection of each and all. They reserved to the States 
 respectively the regulation and government of their own domestic in- 
 stitutions and internal polity in their own way. They did not question 
 the right of property in slaves ; but as, from the nature of that prop- 
 erty, its owners might be subjected to its loss by reason of its escape, 
 either voluntarily or through the solicitations and persuasions of otli- 
 ers, and as the Constitution was formed, among Other things, to secure 
 domestic tranquillity to the people of the States, and between the 
 States themselves, the fathers provided in the Constitution, in the 
 common bond of their Union, that — 
 
 "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into 
 another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be di8charo;ed from such 
 service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to wliom such service or 
 labor may be due." 
 
 Here is a distinct and positive recognition in the Federal Constitu- 
 tion of the right of property in slaves. Here is a constitutional recoo-- 
 nition that one man may have a right of property in another, and a 
 constitutional guarantee that such right shall be respected and en- 
 forced, not only against the opposition of individuals, but against the 
 interference of States. "Historically," remarks Justice Story, in the 
 case of Prigg vs. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania — 
 
 '"It is well known that the object of this clause was to secure to the citizens of tie 
 slaveholding States the complete right and title of ownership in their slaves as property 
 in every State of the Union, into which they might escape from the State where tliey were 
 held in servitude. The full recognition of this I'ight and title was indispensable to the 
 securit}^ of this species of property in all the slaveholding States ; and, indeed, was so 
 vital to the preservation of their domestic interests and institutions, that it cannot be 
 doubted that it constituted a fundamental article, without the adoption of which the 
 Union could not have been formed. Its true design was to guard against the doctrines 
 a^c^J/jruicf/j/fis prevalent in the non-slaveholding States, by preventing them from inter- 
 meddling with, or obstructing, or abolishing the rights of the owners of slaves."' 
 
 Again, in his Commentaries on the Constitution, he remarks : 
 
 ''The want of such a provision under the Confederation was felt as a grievous iatcai- 
 venience by the slaveholdiij.^ States; since in many States no aid whatever woald be 
 allowed to the owners, and cpmetimes, indeed, they met with open resistance." 
 
And here, sir, it may be remarked tliat this provision waa incor- 
 porated in the Constitution by the unanimous vote of that body ; and 
 that it appears, from the opinion and commentaries of Mr. Justice 
 Story cited, that — 
 
 " Its true design was to guard against the doctrines and principles prevalent in the non- 
 slaveholdiug States, by preventing them from intermeddling with, or obstructing, or abol- 
 ishing the rights of the owners of slaves." 
 
 What were those principles and doctrines? The same which have 
 been recently revived, and which are now advocated by the leaders 
 and masses of the Eepublican party : that slavery is a moral, social, 
 and political evil ; that it is contrary to the law of God ; and that all 
 men — 'African slaves as well as American freemen — are born free and 
 equal ; and that political institutions which deny them equal political 
 rights and advantages are unjust; and that the denial to them of these 
 rights is in contravention of the Scripture injunction, Do unto others 
 as you would that they should do unto you. Let those who now pro- 
 fess such a reverence for the memory of the fathers, know that those 
 very fathers, by incorporating this provision in the Federal Constitu- 
 tion, meant to guard their countrymen against the doctrines and prin- 
 ciples which they now advocate ; and to prevent, in the future, the 
 repetition of the%vrongs resulting from these doctrines and principles 
 which had been suifered in the past. 
 
 Upon this provision and its historical illustrations, I remark that 
 the Constitution, in which it is contained, having been ratified by the 
 people of the several States, and thereby the general advantages 
 which it was designed to secure having been obtained by them, the 
 faith of such States, and of every State which has since been admitted 
 into the Union under it, was and is pledged to see to it that this clause, 
 as well as every other therein, is fairly observed and honestly en- 
 forced. It is the agreement, it is the covenant, it is the bond. Each 
 citizen is bound to see that the faith of his State is preserved ; and 
 any attempt, either by the individual citizen or by a State to evade 
 or violate, weaken or annul, the obligation thus assumed, is personal 
 dishonor and State perfidy. But, sir, our fathers were not perfidious. 
 They assumed obligations' as patriots, as patriots they discharged them. 
 In 1793, they passed tlie first fugitive slave act to carry out in good 
 faith this provision of the Fedei-al Constitution. It was approved by 
 George Washington, president of the convention which framed the 
 Consritution, and then President of the United States.^ Under his 
 administration, and those of the elder Adams, of Jefterson, and ot 
 Madison, the domestic and foreign policy of the Government was 
 shaped and advanced, if not perfected. The public mind of the 
 country was at times deeply agitated in reference to that policy, and 
 deeply stirred by the discussions of questions connected therewith. 
 But from the violation of phghted faith there was no cause for gen- 
 eral or sectional complaint. The fathers of the Kepublic had heeded 
 ih% patriotic counsels of Washington against the formation of politi- 
 cal parties founded upon geographical distinctions and sectional issues- 
 No State had been denied admission into the Union on accout of the 
 character of its domestic institutions. 
 But many of the fathers had fallen asleep„ Most of those remam- 
 
mg had gone into tlie retirement of private life, and there awaited, 
 m the tranqnihty of age, the expected snmmons to their kindred dead. 
 But, sir, that repose was destined to a most terrible shock. A people 
 who had successfully achieved their independence of a powerful for- 
 eign and oppressive foe, who had established a free and independent 
 Republic, far, far away from the seats of former civilized political em- 
 pires ; a Eepublic the anomaly of the present, and fit to be the model 
 of the future ; who had witnessed the principles of the Government 
 they had established practically and felicitously applied in the de- 
 velopment of their national resources and in the expansion of their 
 growing power ; who in a second struggle with their former oppressor 
 had vmdicated their national honor and successfully maintained their 
 national rights, now, that peace with her olive branch had again re- 
 turned to bless the husbandman in his toil, the merchant in his' traffic, 
 the artisan in his trade, and all in their honorable pursuits, were sud- 
 denly startled by the fearful apprehension that the Government they 
 cherished was about ingloriously to end, not from the assaults of a 
 foreign foe, but from the folly and madness of those upon whom its 
 blessings were lost. 
 
 At the time of the adoption of the Constitution nearly all the States 
 were slaveholding states. In 1819 and 1820, many of them Ivdvino- 
 found that slave labor was to them unprofitable, unsuited to their soif^ 
 their climate, and industrial pursuits, and having to a great extent 
 parted with their slaves for a valuable consideration, by sending them 
 among their more southern brethren, where the condition of the slave 
 would be improved, and where his labor would be more remunerative, 
 had become non-slaveholding States, l^o one of these States, how- 
 ever, had freed their slaves solely from motives of humanity. Econo- 
 mic considerations mainly influenced their action. While interest was 
 demandant, philanthropy was dormant. When personal interest 
 ceased, humanit}^— falsely socalled— became active. The Constitu- 
 tion of the United States had provided that "new States may be ad- 
 mitted into this Union." There was no qualification annexed, and no 
 condition imposed, in respect to the domestic institutions or internal 
 polity of such States. No such qualification or condition could, there- 
 lore, constitutionally be imposed by Congress upon the admission of 
 a State. All the States of the Union are, under the Constitution, 
 equal. Those originally ratifying the Constitution did so as equals, 
 being the sole judges of what their domestic institutions should be. 
 Unless those to be admitted by Congress upon their aj^plicatiou were 
 equally their own judges in this respect, then they would not be equals 
 with the other States. 
 
 Under these circumstances, and at the time I have mentioned, Mis- 
 souri^ applied for admission into the Union. Her government was re- 
 publican in form. She labored under no constitutional disqualification 
 tor admission. Does any one believe that if Missouri had been an 
 independent community, as was IS^ew York, as was Delaware, at the 
 ,time of the formation of the Constitution, that, under the same cir- 
 cumstances, her admission into the Union would have been oi;)posed? 
 Does any one believe that had the framers of that instrument been 
 <jlothed with the power of determining whether Missouri should be 
 
6 
 
 admitted, they would have refused her admission ? Not unless party 
 preiudice has so blinded his judgment as to render it an unsafe coun- 
 selor even in the ordinary duties of life. Yet, sir,' the admission pt 
 Missouri was opposed, and the Senator from New York has said his- 
 toiy tells us that the Union reeled under the vehemence of that great 
 
 If such be the fact, it only proves that there were men then, for the 
 first time in the Federal Congress, as there are men now throughout 
 this country, who, for the purpose of gaining a sectional and party 
 triumph or'securing for themselves and their followers the high places 
 of power and the emoluments of office, in the prosecution of unconsti- 
 tutional measures, would cause the Union of their country to reel. 
 Sir in that strucrgle patriotism did not take counsel Irom prudence, 
 as 8U<^gested bylhe Senator from New York; but patriotism unwise- 
 ly listened to the demands of ambition. If ever there was a blot and 
 a blur upon the statute-book of this country, it was the miscalled com- 
 promise of 1820. It was a statute, since judicially decided to be un- 
 constitutional, which was exorted from patriotism by the spirit ot rev- 
 olution and the suggestions of selfishness. Sir, ever since I read the 
 able and conclusive argument of the eloquent and gifted rmckney 
 upon the Missouri restriction, I have regarded the motives that de- 
 manded it, and the restriction itself, and the provision ot the act ot 
 1820 which attempted to prescribe the conditions ot the admission ot 
 States into this Union, with a loathing and a detestation which is only 
 lialf removed by the tardy but patriotic repeal of such conditions m 
 
 Mr President, our opponents are given to much talking about the 
 aggressions of the slave power. They would have the country be- 
 l^ve— they even have the eftrontery to assert on this fioor— tliat the 
 peace of that country, in reference to the institution of domestic slave- 
 ry would have been uniform and unbroken, had it not been tor the 
 ikreasonable and unconstitutional demands of that^power. lo his^ 
 torv I appeal. Let her decide the controversy. Who was it that 
 created the excitement in 1819 and 1820'^ Was it the friends and 
 supporters of the equal rights of the States, those who then favored 
 the principle that each State and the people of each Territory when 
 they came to form a constitution, preparatory to their admission as a 
 State into the Union, should form and regulate their own domestic 
 institutions in their own way ; or was it those who thought as tlie l.e- 
 publican party now profess to think, that Congress should form and 
 recnilate tLse institutions for the people of the Territories ? Had the 
 slave propagandists of the South forced slavery upon the people of 
 Missouri « Had "border ruflians" from other States expelled the 
 Sends of freedom from her fertile plains ? Had not her own people, 
 freely of their own choice, established among themselves the rehition 
 of m'a ter and slave ? Did she not, with that relation thus established, 
 ap^y for admission as a State into the Union ? Had not Congi-ess the 
 power to admit her? Would there have then been any excitement 
 in the country in reference fo slavery if objection had no been made 
 to her admission? Who n^ade that objection?^ Was it the Demo^ 
 oratic party of that day; wa^ it the Representatives from the slave- 
 
holding States, or was it tlie Eepresentatires from the non-slavehold- 
 ing States ; those who, for the accomi^lishment of partisan purposes, 
 had become the advocates of the free-soil ^^rinciple which has since 
 become intensified into modern Republicanism ? By the record the 
 assertions of the Republican party are refuted. By the record, the 
 enemies, not the friends, of domestic slavery are proved to be respon- 
 sible for the first excitement since the formation of the Constitution 
 upon this subject. 
 
 But, sir, we are told by the Senator from Xew York, that the 
 " question of 1820 was identically the question of 1860, so far as prin- 
 ciple, and even the field of its application, was concerned. Every 
 element. of the controversy now present entered it then^ the rightful- 
 ness or the wrongfulness of slavery ; its effects, present, and future ; 
 the constitutional authority of Congress ; the claims of the States, and 
 of their citizens ; the nature of the Federal Union, whether it is a 
 compact between the States, or an independent Government ; the 
 springs of its power, and the ligatures upon their exercise." Sir, I 
 accept the issue, and will hereafter consider it more particularly in 
 reference to its principle. But the Senator, like most of the members 
 of his party, Avho are also members of this body, professes great rev- 
 erence for the memory and labors of the fathers. I wish to cite the 
 opinions of one of those fathers in reference to this issue of 1820, 
 which is said to be the issue of 18«0 ; and of one for whose opinions 
 upon the subject of slavery some of our opponents have expressed un- 
 bounded admiration. In the retirement of private life, and in the 
 venerableness of declining years, lived Thomas Jefferson at Monti- 
 cello, in his own native and loved Yirginia, when the controversy of 
 1819 and 1820 startled the country from its comparative repose. His 
 hand had drafted the Declaration of Independence. He had been a 
 chief in establishing the principles and policy of the infant Republic. 
 He was now awaiting his summons to the spirit land. He was " origi- 
 nally opposed," remarks his biographer, " to the slavery restriction 
 clause of the bill, and equally so to the establishment of the ' Missouri 
 compromise bill,' as it was called." Instead of regarding the efforts 
 of those who opposed the admission into the Union with favor, and 
 approving their motives, he readily apprehended, and promptly ex- 
 posed, their true designs. In a letter to C. C. Cabell, dated January 
 23, 1820, he thus declares : 
 
 "The Missouri question is for power." 
 
 Again, in a letter to H. oSTelson, dated March 12, he says : 
 
 " I thank you, dear sir, for the information, in your favor of the 4th instant, of the set- 
 tlement for the present of the Missouri question. 1 am so completely withdrawn from all 
 attention to public matters, that nothing less could arouse me than the definition of a 
 geographical line which, on an abstract principle, is to become the line of separation of 
 these States, and to render desperate the hope that man can ever enjoy the two blessings 
 of peace and self-government. The question sleeps for the present, but is not dead." 
 
 Again, in his letter to Mark Langdon Hill, April 5, of the same 
 year, he says : 
 
 " I congratulate you on the sleep of the Missouri question. I wish I could say on its 
 death; but of this 1 despair. The idea of a geographical line once suggested, will brood 
 in the minds of all those who prefer the gratification of their ungovernable passions to the 
 peace and union of their country." 
 
8 
 
 In a letter to "William Short, of the 13th of April, he observes : 
 
 " Although I had laid down as a law to my?elf never to write, talk, or even think of 
 politics ; to know nothing of public affairs, and therefore had ceased to read newspapers, 
 yet the Missouri question aroused and filled me with alarm. The old schism of Federal 
 and Republican threatened nothing, becmise it existed in evert/ State, and united them to- 
 gether by the fraternism of partj^ But the coincidence of a marked princij)le, moral and 
 political, with a geograpliical line once conceived, I fear would nevermore be obliterated 
 from the mind ; that it would be recurring on every occasion, and renewing irritations 
 until it would kindle such mutual and mortal hatred as to render separation preferable 
 to eternal discord. I have been among the most sanguine in believing that our Ur'on 
 would be of long duration. I now doubt it much, and see the event at no great distance, 
 and the direct consequence of this question, not by the line which has been so confident- 
 ly counted on — the laws of nature control this — but by the Potomac, Ohio, Missouri, or 
 more probably the Mississippi, upwards to our northern boundary. iNI}' only comfort and 
 confidence is, tha^ I shall not live to see this ; and I envy not the present generation the 
 glory of throwing away the fruits of their fathers' sacrifices of life and fortune, and of 
 rendering desperate the experiment which was to decide ultimately whether man is capa- 
 ble of self-government. This treason against human hope will signalize their epoch in 
 future history as the counterpart of the medal of their predecessors." 
 
 And in his celebrated letter to John Holmes, which has heretofore 
 been cited in this Chamber, by opposition Senators, he says : 
 
 "I thank you, dear sir, for the copy you have been so kind as to send me of the letter 
 to your constituents on the Missouri question. It is a perfect justification to them. I had 
 for a long time ceased to read newspapers, or pay any attention to public affairs, confi- 
 dent they were in good hands, and content to be a passenger in our bark to the shore 
 from which I am not distant. But this momentous question, like a fire-bell in the night, 
 awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. 
 It is hushed, indeed, for the moment; but this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence, 
 A geographical line coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived 
 and held up to the angry passions of man, will never be obliterated ; and every new 
 irritation will mark it deeper and deeper." 
 
 And again : 
 
 "Of one thing I am certain: that as the passage of slaves from one State to another 
 would not make a slave of a single human being who would not be so without it, so their 
 diffusion over a greater surface would make them individually happier, and proportionally 
 facilitate the accompUshment of their emancipation by dividing the burden on a greater 
 number of coadjutors. An abstinence, too, from this act of power would remove the 
 jealousy excited by the undertaking of Congress to regulate the condition of the different 
 descriptions of men composing a State. This certainly is the exclusive right of every 
 State, which nothing in the Constitution has taken from them and given to the General 
 Government." ^* * * * * * * * * 
 
 "I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by 
 the generation of 1776, to acquire self-government and happiness to their country, is to 
 be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons ; and that ray only 
 consolation is to be, that I live not to weep over it. If they would but dispassionately 
 weigh the blessings they will throw away agaiust an abstract principle, more likely to 
 be effected by union than by scission, they would pause before they would perpetrate 
 this act of suicide on themselves, and of treason against the hopes of the world." 
 
 But I will not multiply quotations. These sufficiently show the 
 motives of those who caused the "Union to reel" in 1820. It was 
 the thirst for power ; not the promptings of philanthropy or the love 
 of freedom. " The question sleeps," says Jefterson, " it is not dead." 
 " This is only a reprieve, not a final sentence." Subsequent events 
 proved his opinions to be prophecies. Miscalled a compromise, it 
 was never observed nor intended to be observed by those who ex- 
 torted it. The possession of present power never gratifies ; it must 
 continue, expand, and be perpetual. Hence, aggression is its hand- 
 maid; injustice and oppression its agencies. ^ .. 
 
 This much-talked of compromise prdved to be no compromise at all. 
 
9 
 
 Why not ; and who are responsible therefor ? Even the Senator from 
 'Ne^y York, in his arraignment of the Democratic party at Rochester, 
 nnintentionallj, it is true, but in fact, absolves it, and admits its ene- 
 mies to be responsible for whatever of excitement and of agitation 
 has existed upon this subject. Hear him. Hesajs: 
 
 "From 1838 to 1844, the subject of abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia and 
 in the national dock-j'ards and arsenals, was brought before Congress by repeated appeals. 
 The Democratic party thereupon promptly denied the right of petition." 
 
 Who was it, then, that renewed the slavery agitation ; who were 
 unwilling to let things remain as the fathers left them ; who, from 
 183S to 184-±, were making their appeals to the national Congress to 
 legislate further, notwithstanding the Missouri compromise, upon the 
 subject of slavery ? "Was it the Democratic party ? Assuredly not, 
 if the Senator from Xew York is a credible witness. They only re- 
 fused to legislate upon this exciting subject when called upon to do 
 80, against the faith of compromises, the guarantees of the Constitu- 
 tion, and the peace of the country, by anti-slavery agitators, who had 
 no possible practical interest in the legislation they demanded. Again, 
 says the Senator : 
 
 "From 1840 to 1S43, good and wise men counseled that Texas should remain outride 
 of the Union until she should consent to relinquish her self-instituted slavery;" 
 
 and charges that the Democratic party precipitated her admission into 
 the Union. This is only additional evidence that, upon eveiy occa- 
 sion when the subject of domestic slavery has awakened excitement 
 either in or out of Congress, such excitement has been produced, not 
 by the Democratic party, but its enemies. They have invoked the 
 action of Congress for its suppression in the original Territories 5 they 
 have op]>osed the acquisition of other territory, unless the people 
 thereof would abandon their own domestic institutions, and allcv'w the 
 anti-slavery sentiment of the country to say what those institutions 
 should be. 
 
 Again, when we acquired our Mexican possessions, what occasioned 
 the excitement then existent in the country ? The attempt not to leg- 
 islate slavery into, but to exclude slavery therefrom ; to pre'vent its 
 going there ; to determine in advance what the domestic institutions 
 of a distant people should be ; to determine these matters for them, 
 and not allow them to determine them for themselves. When, for 
 the purpose of preventing excitement and sectional feeling upon this 
 subject, propositions have been made in Congress by Democratic 
 members to extend the Missouri compromise line to the Pacific ocean, 
 the propositions have invariably been opposed by these pretended 
 friends of that compromise, but real disturbers of the public peace. 
 
 I will not dwell upon the history of the compromise measures of 
 1850. How intense was the excitement, how bitter tlie controversy, 
 is already but too familiarly known. If by their adoption, the storm 
 was apparently for a time allayed, it was soon to be revived, with far 
 greater intensity; to grow and swell until the "Union was indeed to 
 reel under the vehemence of the great debate." The passage by 
 Congress of the fugitive slave law, as one of those measures to carry 
 more fully into efi"ect the great constitutional compact entered into by 
 
10 
 
 onr fathers, was seized upon by designing men as a pretext for popu- 
 lar appeal to a blind and fanatical spirit, pervading too raucb the 
 great northern portion of our country. Men of extreme views and 
 unbounded personal ambition, unwilling to bide their time, perceived 
 in this spirit an engine of political power, and a means, if it could be 
 made available, of displacing the more conservative men in the free 
 States; and when Congress, finally, in establishing the Territories of 
 Kansas and ISTebraska, repealed a former unconstitutional act, the oc- 
 casion was too opportune for the purposes of sectional agitation to be 
 left unimproved by personal ambition. State after State attempted, 
 by its legislation, to nullify the fugitive slave law ; and a great sec- 
 tional party arose, relying solely for success upon the superior strength 
 of section over section, waging a political warfare, which, for viru- 
 lence of feeling and bitterness of speech, is scarcely equaled in the 
 history of partisan struggles in this or any other civilized country, 
 either in ancient or modern times. Having selected an adventurer 
 as their standard-bearer, they enter the contest of 1856, the assumed 
 representatives of the philanthropy, the morality, civilization, and 
 Christianity of the age ; and without scarcely a friend or follower in 
 fifteen States of tlie Union, they emerge from the conflict self-sur- 
 prised at their almost triumphant success. Upon the distant plains of 
 Kansas they placed in the hands of their maddened followers the 
 deadly rifle for the destruction of its peaceful inhabitants, and echoed 
 far, far away towards the setting sun the impious sentiment, fallen 
 fron2 the lips of a degraded priesthood that in life's civilization, the 
 rifle it^ more efficient and more pleasing in the sight of the Almighty 
 than His own most Holy Word. Struggling for jdace and power, 
 they h'lve told their deluded followers that, in God's law, and in the 
 Declare. tion of American Independence, it is written that all men are 
 created free and equal, and that neither the arbitrary regulations of 
 political communities nor the constitutions of civilized States can in- 
 terpose ri-u-htful barriers to the inalienable rights of man. 
 
 There '- one listens to their teachings, believes in their principles, 
 and resi . , es to carry them out to their logical conclusions. John 
 Brown, in the privacy suited to the accomplishment of a desperate 
 purpose, collects his meager but determined forces, and goes forth 
 upon h'c mission to free the slave, even by the murder of his master. 
 The stillness of a Sabbath's night is chosen for the accomplishment 
 of the hellish deed, and ere the morning sun relumes the heavens, 
 quiet and peaceful citizens sleep the last cold sleep of death. And 
 whore did all this occur? Almost in sight of the spot where repose 
 the '.shes of him whose hand drafted the declaration of a nation's in- 
 dies. endence ; of him who made that declaration good by leading the 
 intant armies of his country forth in glorious and successful war ; 
 and of him who, of all men, did most to frame that bund of Union — 
 the Constitution of his country — which made the people of this land 
 one in interest, one in right, and one in destiny. As the dread news 
 is borne along, the mother clasps her unconscious infant more closely 
 to her bosom, and the manly father girds himself for the defence of 
 his country and his home. The invader, the murderer, and the traitor 
 is seized, and awaits in a felon's cell the execution of the law's decree. 
 
11 
 
 sympathizing messages are borne to liim from sympathizing spirits 
 fjir away, reminding him of his glorious fate, and still more glorious 
 future historic name. Even Senators, while disapproving of the act, 
 avow the sympathy of their people for the qualities of the felon hero ; 
 and a powerful press, the general representative of Eepublican princi- 
 ples, declares that John Brown will hereafter be regarded as the most 
 glorious martyr in the history of martyrology. The whole land has 
 been convulsed. The Senate of the United'States is divided, as if by 
 a hostile line, and those on either side regard each other as common 
 foes. Can these things be, and this Union stand? If the American 
 people are wise, they will deeply ponder this question. 
 
 In tracing the history and causes of political events, I have indica- 
 ted my views in reference to the questions whether this Union is im- 
 periled, and what political party is responsible therefor? But in 
 criminality there may be degrees. The man who has done more than 
 any other to bring tliis Union to the verge of dissolution, who has 
 inogt persistently uttered teachings and advised a policy which inevit- 
 ably tend to that result, is now an aspirant for its highest honors. 
 He recently delivered a speech in this body, in which he professed 
 great respect for the principles and action of the fathers of the Re- 
 public. In reference to the ditficulties they encountered in the for- 
 mation of tlie Constitution, he remarked : 
 
 "The fatliers disagreed, debated long, and compromised at last. Each State they de- 
 termined shall have two Senators iu Congress; three-fifths of the slaves shall be else- 
 where represented, and be taxed as persons. What should be done if the slave should 
 escape into a labor State? Should that State confess him to be a chattel, and restore him 
 as such ? or might it regard him as a person, and harbor and protect him as a man ? They 
 compromised again, and decided that no person held to labor or service in one State, by 
 the laws thereof, escaping into another, shali, by any law or regulation of that State, be 
 discharged fiom sucli labor or service ; but shall be delivered up, on claim, to the person 
 to whom such labor or service shall be due." 
 
 Well, sir, the Senator has furnished some memorable illustrations 
 of his very high regard for this compromise and decision of the fath- 
 ers. History tells us that the Senator was once Governor of the State 
 of New York, and that whilst he held that position, three persons res- 
 ident in that State were charged on oath in the State of Virginia with 
 having feloniously stolen, taken, and carried away a negro slave be- 
 longing to a citizen of Virginia from his possession ; and upon this 
 charge, a demand was made by the Governor of Virginia upon the 
 Governor of ISTew York for their surrender as fugitives from justice. 
 The Governor at first attem])ts to find fault with the form of the afii- 
 davit ; but finally meets the question boldly, and refuses compliance 
 with a constitutional requirement. In his letter to the Governor of 
 Virginia, he says : 
 
 "But it is by no means my wish to protract unnecessarily the correspondence on thi.^ 
 subject, or to avoid a decision upon the important principle it involves. I beg leave, 
 therefore, to state most respectfully that even were I to admit that the afhdayit was suffi- 
 cient in form and substance to charge the defendants with the crime of stealing a negro 
 slave from his master in the State of Virginia, as defined by the laws of that State, yet, 
 in my opinion, the offence is not within the meaning of the Constitution of tlie United 
 States." 
 
 The reason for his opinion was, in substance, that, inasmuch as the 
 State of New York was a free State, slave stealing was no ofiFence 
 
12 
 
 against her, and, there beinoj no law in that State recognizing slavery, 
 her citizens could go into Virginia and steal as many slaves as they 
 •pleased, and with perfect impunity, if they were not overtaken by the 
 authorities of Yirginia before they returned to the sheltering bosom 
 of New York and the protecting arm of her Constitution-loving Gov- 
 ernor. The provision of the Constitution is as follows : 
 
 "A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee 
 from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand of the executive authority of 
 the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having jurisdic- 
 tion of the crime." 
 
 The absurdity of the proposition contended for by the Governor of 
 New York is this : that according to it there can be no crime against 
 the sovereign ty of Yirginia within the meaning of the Constitution 
 which New York declines by her legislation to make a crime against 
 her own soveignty; and therefore, if New York declines to make trea- 
 son, felony, or other crime, punishable Mdthin her jurisdiction, there 
 is no constitutional obligation upon her to surrender fugitives from 
 justice from other States. But I will not argue the proposition. This 
 was only slave stealing; and that, according to the political and 
 moral ethics of the Senator, may be a virtue, not a crime. 
 
 John Brown avowed, I believe, that his object in his invasion of 
 Yirginia was to carry off slaves — peaceably if not resisted, forcibly 
 only if opposed. Had he succeeded in his purpose without bloodshed, 
 and escaped to his home in New York with all the slaves of Yirginia, 
 what a fortunate Governor' for him would he have found in the Sena- 
 tor from New York! But the Senator has on another occasion ex- 
 pressed his devotion to the compromises of the fathers. He made a 
 speech^ in the State of Ohio, which has already been cited against 
 him this session. I quote from it only to preserve the symmetry of his 
 record for public admiration. Hear him : 
 
 "The party of freedom seeks complete and universal emancipation." * * * 
 "Slavery is the sin of not some of the States only, but of them all ; of not one nation 
 only, but of all nations. It perverted and corrupted the moral sense of mankind deeply 
 and universal!}', and this corruption became a universal habit. Habits of thought beconie 
 fixed_ principles. No American State has yet delivered itself entirely from these habits. 
 We, in New York, are guilty of slavery still by withjioldiiig the right of suffrage from 
 the race we have emancipated. You, in Ohio, are guilty in the same way by a system o^ 
 black laws still more aristocratic and odious. It is written in the Constitution of the 
 United States that live slaves shall count equal to three freemen as a basis of representa,- 
 tion; and it is written also, in violation of Divine law, that we shall surrender the fugi- 
 tive slave who takes refuge at our fireside from his relentless pursuer. Yow blush not atl 
 these things, because they have become as familiar as household words ; and your pre- 
 tended Free-Soil allies claim peculiar merit for maintaining these miscalled guarantees of 
 slavery which they find in the national compact. Does not all this prove that the Whig 
 party liave kept up with the spirit of the age? that it is as true and faithful to human 
 freedom as the inert conscience of the American people will permit it tobe? What, then, 
 (you say,) can nothing be done for freedom because the public conscience remains inertf 
 Yes, much can be done ; everything can be done. Slavery can be limited to its present 
 bounds. ^ It can be ameliorated. It can be and must be abolished, and you and I can and 
 must do it. The task is simple and easy, as its consummation will be beneficent and its 
 rewards glorious. It requires only to follow this simple rule of action : to do everywhere 
 and on every occasion what we can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can at 
 any time, because at that precise time and on that particular occasion we cannot do more. 
 "Circumstances determine possibilities." ******* 
 "But we must begin deeper and lower than the composition and combination of factions 
 or parties, wherein the strength and security of slavery lie. You answer that it lies in 
 the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions and laws of slaveholding States. 
 
13 
 
 Kot at all. It is in the erroneous sentiment of tlie American people._ Constitutions and 
 laws can no more rise above the virtue of the people than the limpid stream can climb 
 above its native spring. Inculcate 1>lie love of freedom and the equal rights of man under 
 tho paternal roof; see to it that they are taught in the schools aud in the churches ; re- 
 form your own code ; extend a cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs 
 at your door, and defend him as you would your paternal gods ; correct your own error, 
 tliat slavery has any constitutional guarantee which may not be released, and ought not 
 to be relinquished." ******** 
 
 " Whenever the public mind shall will the abolition of slavery, the way will be open 
 for it. 
 
 "I know that you will tell me this is all too slow. "\\ ell, then, go faster if you can, 
 and I will go with you." 
 
 Sir, John Brown did go faster. He went to Virginia ; and the 
 Senator went to view the Pyramids. Surely those who, in life, had 
 been so intimately associated in purpose, object, aim, hope, in death 
 should not have been divided. 
 
 The Senator, when addressing the American Senate on the eve of 
 a presidential election, when he is aspiring to the highest office 
 within the gift of the people, when the public sense and feeling of the 
 country — North, South, East, and West — have been shocked by the 
 practical results of his former teachings, and when rival aspirants of 
 supposed greater moderation of views in his own party are threaten- 
 ing him with defeat, can talk of the compromises of the fathers in 
 reference to domestic slavery ; but in addressing the masses of Ohio 
 those very comproniises are the subject of his ridicule. He exhorts 
 them to '"^ correct their error that slavery has any constitutional guar- 
 antee which may not be released, aud which ought not to be relin- 
 quished." He tells them that "it is written in the Constitution of the 
 -United States that five slaves shall count equal to three freemen as a 
 basis of representation ; and it is written also, in violation of Divine 
 law, that we shall surrender the fugitive slave who takes refuge at our 
 fireside from his relentless pursuers.'' He tells iis that the fathers 
 agreed, by compromise, to these things, and would have us believe 
 that he consents to them ; but he tells the men of Ohio to " extend a 
 cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your 
 door, and defend him as you -vrould your paternal gods." 
 
 It is not slavery in the Territories that engages his great thoughts. 
 It is slavery as it'is recognized in the Constitution, and as it exists in 
 the States. This, he tells them, " can and must be abolished, and 
 that he and they can and must do it." Eut, sir, had the recent speech 
 of the Senator lu this body been one of definite positions in reference 
 to this subject, instead of being composed of glittering generalities, 
 what reliance could be placed upon his fidelity to them, or of fidelity 
 on the part of those whom he represents, when he himself has told 
 us of the value of pledges, programmes, aud platforms. Hear him 
 in his celebrated irrepressible speech at Rochester. He says : 
 
 "One class say that they cannot trust the republican party ; that it has not avowed its 
 hostility to slavery boldly enough, or its affection for freedom earnestly enough. I ask, 
 in replj', is there any other party which can be more safely trusted? Every one knows 
 that it is the Republican party or none that shall displace the Democratic party. But I 
 answer further, that the character and fidelity of any party are determined necessarily 
 not by its pledges, programmes, and platforms', but by the public exigencies, and the tem- 
 per of the people when they call it into activity." 
 
 Away, then, with pledges and platforms by such a leader, and such 
 a party ! But, sir, the Senator not only respects the compromises of 
 
14 
 
 denm ,on of equdity than that whieh i c'ont^iined in /h 'n' ^''" •^^-*'' *° ^°^ ^ better 
 or of justice, than the form which our rehVion adon , Tf ^'''"'T'^ «f Independence, 
 are born free and equal, institutions wl 'ch d nv t?P m ' T 'r -^^T ''' ^'^'"■'^' ^^^ °^en 
 tages are unjust; and if I would do Tt otS t ft '^n \P°'^^'?^ "^'^^'^^ ^"-^^ ^dvan- 
 should not deny them any ri^ht on account of thth, '^1"^ '^''''' ^'^'"^ *" ^^° ""^e me, I 
 they or their ancestors wire born On?v t m an d^ '^' ''T'' ^'^ '^ '^'' '^"^^ >" ^^^^^ ^ 
 xipheld and those who have opposed Z-mrsui^Tto^l^^^^^^^ ^^'T'" ''^°^« ^^^^ ^'-^^'^ 
 feel encouraged to wait that decision- !ince in a n,nl .•^"''^ ^/^^ adverted. But I 
 
 injustice should come, the exile doeTnotJepChZn '''■'°' '^ T'^'"' '*^l"-'^^ches for 
 departure, and the disfranchised and the slJve ^ t ' ^'^'T'- ''^^^ '^'°* ^^'^f* in my 
 
 in-partid a portion „ His X nUtJiZL"' ^"^'"^'{'•'P-S ^"e to whom He h,. 
 reward you've,,, vour k-indn""to'^M m™ ,3l r„T- "' '''.'•" '"I'resMd His own image, 
 generous and n„-„ee.ort. to r^^^i:tl^:7:S^:::^t:X^^^^^' 
 
 don it. No son of 1,»..^ 1,1, 1 ^ 'l°',.r' <='":ii'nstanecs, to .iban- 
 
 States or ta-eaAe t gh but'hopT^ ,' I! Yf' '" '"^ ^"'™ "^ ">^'^'' 
 
 stt'tv'„ri'"i"'^-^^'*'^ 
 
 thai' :2 r p fr ; t\'s:s'°o;';?i"^'""=';™ '^r Tr^ ^^<^ 
 
 solely fot success n,,™, Sfogmp\nc^\ r,^,.ty :,^, been formed, relying 
 
 ^viH^'^'aS? trr±?isf in''::t'Xtr 1 ""' p°T^-' ^'j-^ 
 
 word If pflrrJpc; o Kl .7..1 7 • / ^^^ ^^®^^ ^^^^ proclaimed n 
 10 new and tenible, but fitly expressive of its true designs. That 
 
15 
 
 motto is, " Lavjlessness.''^ Throiigli its cliief, it openly declares that 
 " uo pledges, progi'amraes, or platforms can bind it ; but that its action 
 will be determined by the public exigencies and the temper of the 
 gathering hordes who swell its ranks ;"' that constitutions and laws can 
 no more rise above the virtue of the people than the limpid stream 
 can climb above its native spring. 
 
 The only tribunal known to your Constitution for the determination 
 of such questions has decided that Congress has not the constitutional 
 authority to prohibit the existence of African slavery in any of the 
 Territitries of the United States. In utter contempt of this decision, 
 the miscalled Republican party avow tliat, if successful in their efforts 
 to gain the political control of this Government, they will, by congres- 
 sional legislation, make that prohibition, and that they will so con- 
 struct the Federal judiciary that they shall register, as constitutional, 
 their decrees. A lawless legislature, a pliant, subservient, party- 
 foaring, and corrupt judiciary ! When these things are consummated 
 liberty will have fled our land and ascended to her native heaven. 
 
 Mr. President, against such calamities I know of but one protec- 
 tion. It is in the union and harmony of the Democratic party, and 
 the co-operation tliercAvith of all truly conservative and Union-loving 
 citizens throughout this whole country — jS'orth, South, East, and West. 
 The .Senator trom New York was right when he declared that the 
 issue was between the Democratic and Republican parties. There 
 never has existed in this coraitry at the same time more than two 
 great political parties. There can exist but two now. This is no time 
 for the formation of a Union or .other party. There has existed in 
 this country a great Union party fi'om the beginning, and it exists to- 
 day, powerful and great. It stands to-day the bulwark of the Consti- 
 tution ; the conservator of the Union of these States. Under its gijiid- 
 ing counsels we have increased froin less thaiftive, until we now num- 
 ber thirty millions of people. Its policy has swelled the number of 
 your States from nearly the original number — thirteen — to thirty-tm-ee. 
 It has acquired for you every foot of tei-ritory which has been adiled 
 to your national domain. It took the banner of your Union abd 
 planted it upon your southern Gulf, and Florida became one of tl 
 galaxy of States. It took that banner and planted it upon the va^ 
 Territory of Louisiana — an empire in itself; and thus extended your^ 
 possessions towards the setting sun. It took that banner and planted 
 it upon the virgin soil of Texas ; and she now is one of the sisterhood 
 of States. Westward still "the star of empire takes its way;" and, 
 faithful to its true mission of expansion and development, it takes that 
 same banner of your Union and, marching right onward, plants it in 
 glorious triumph upon the shores of the mighty Pacific ; and Utah, 
 New Mexico, and California are yours forever. This true Union 
 partj^ has made ours an ocean-bound Republic ; great, mighty, pros- 
 perous, and free. In peace it has developed our resources and ex- 
 panded our power ; and in war, it has successfully maintained our 
 rights, and nobly vindicated our national honor. Under its policy, 
 and by its counsels, in peace and in war, the feeble Republic of yester- 
 day has become one of the greatest and mightiest among the nations 
 of the earth. 
 
16 
 
 Mr. President, this true Union party will also soon meet, tlirongli 
 its representatives, in national council. When its roll is called, there 
 shall be a response from every State in this vast Confederacy — from 
 Maine to Oregon; from Georgia to California; from northern lakes 
 to southern Gulf From the banner which shall float over the hall 
 of its assemblage no star shall be effaced ; but its banner shall be the 
 banner of our common Union. If counsel of one of its feeblest yet 
 most devoted of friends could be heard by that convention, it would 
 be : Be true to your principles ; be just to all the members of the 
 noble party you represent ; accept the issue presented by the Senator 
 from ISTew York and those whose chief he is ; apply no new tests of 
 party faith ; forget your past differences upon abstract and compara- 
 tively unimportant issues ; be tolerant of present differences of opin- 
 ion on questions of minor importance; lay upon the altar of your 
 country's good your personal, political Isaacs; have no political Pauls 
 or Apolloses ; plant yourselves firmly upon the great principle of non-'' 
 intervention by Congress with slavery in State, Territory, or the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia ; and, remembering that a nation's destiny may 
 depend upon your deliberations, go forth to the achievement of a 
 noble and a glorious triumph. 
 
 IN EXCHANGE 
 ^N 5 i8l7 
 
 1^ 
 
/ 
 
i