Glass 
 
 £411 
 
 Book-...3.!2ij 
 

 THE DEMANDS OF FREEDOM. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. CHARLES SUMNER, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
 
 ON HIS MOTION 
 
 TO HEPEAL THE FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL. 
 
 FEBRUARY 23, 1855. 
 
 Mr. SUMN'ER. Mr. President, on a former occasion, as Slavery was about 
 to clutch one of its triumphs, I rose to make my final opposition to it at mid- 
 night. It is now the same hour. Slavery is again pressing for its accustomed 
 victory, which I again undertake for the moment to arrest. It is hardly an 
 accidental conjunction which thus constantly brings Slavery and midnight 
 together. 
 
 Since eleven o'clock this forenoon, we have been in our seat detained by 
 the dominant majority, which, in subservience to Slavery, has refused to 
 postpone this question or to adjourn. All other things are neglected. The 
 various public interests which, at this late stage of the session, all press for 
 attention, are put aside. According to the usages of the Senate, Friday is 
 dedicated to the consideration of private claims. I have been accustomed to 
 call it our day of justice, and I have been glad that, since these matters are 
 referred to us, at least one day in the week has been thus set apart. But 
 Slavery grasps this whole day, and changes it to a day of injustice. By the 
 Calendar, which I now hold in my hand, it appears that, at this moment, 
 upwards of seventy-five private bills, with which are associated the hopes and 
 fears of widows and orphans, aud of all who come to Congress for relief, 
 are on your table neglected, ay, sir, sacrificed to the bill which is now urged 
 with so much pertinacity. Like Juggernaut, the bill is driven over prostrate 
 victims. And here is another sacrifice to Slavery. 
 
 But I do not adequately expose the character of this bill when I say it is a 
 sacrifice to Slavery. It is a sacrifice to Slavery in its most odious form. 
 Bad as Slavery may be, it is not so bad as hunting slaves. There is a seeming 
 apology for Slavery at home, in the States where it prevails, founded on the 
 difficulties in the position of the master and the relations of personal attach- 
 ment which it sometimes excites ; but every apology fails when you seek again 
 to enslave the fugitive whom the master could not detain by duress or by 
 kindness ; and who, by courage and intelligence, under the guidance of the 
 north star, has achieved a happy Freedom. Sir, there is a wide difference 
 between a Slaveholder and a Slave-Hunter. 
 
 But the bill before you is to aid in the chase of slaves. This is its object. 
 This is its " being's end and aim." And this bill, with this object, is pressed 
 upon the Senate by the honorable Senator from Connecticut, [Mr. Toucey.] 
 Not from slave soil, but from free soil, comes this effort. A Senator from the 
 
 mm: 
 
*£# 
 
 North — a Senator from New England — lends himself to the work, and with 
 unnatural zeal helps to bind still stronger the fetters of the slave. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. "Will the honorable Senator allow me to interrupt him? 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. RUS?*. I ask him to point out the words in this bill where Slavery is 
 mentioned. 
 
 Mr. SI'MXER. I am glad the Senator from Texas has asked the question, 
 for it brings attention at once to the true character of th ; - I ill. 1 know its 
 language well, and also its plausible title. On it ace pojta to be "a 
 
 bill to protect officers and other persons acting under the authority of the 
 United States;" and it proceeds to provide tor the transfer of certain proceed- 
 ings from the State courts to the Circuit Courts of the United States. And 
 yet, sir, by the admission of this whole debate, stretching from noon to mid- 
 night, it is a bill to bolster up the Fugitive Slave Act. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. I have not listened to the debate, but I ask the Senator to point 
 out in the bill the place where Slavery is mentioned. If the Constitution and 
 laws appoint officers, and require them to discharge d > : l .- , - - ill he abandon 
 them to the mob ? 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. The Senator asks me to point otofc an- p!ace in this bill 
 where "Slavery" is mentioned. Why, s' ', 'his is c f e • sary. I might 
 
 ask the Senator to point out any place in the Consti. ,.iio f'nited States 
 
 where " Slavery " is mentioned, or where the word' an be found, 
 
 and he could not do it. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. That is evading the question. I asked the Senator to point 
 out in the bill the clause where Slavery is mentioned. The bill proposes to 
 protect officers of the United States, whom you appoint, in discharging their 
 duties. If they are to be left unprotected, repeal your law. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. I respond to the Senator, with all my heart, "repeal your 
 law." Yes, sir, repeal the Fugitive Act, which now requires the support of 
 supplementary legislation. Remove this ground of offen. •> . And before I sit 
 down, I hope to make that very motion. Meanwhile, I evade no question 
 propounded by the honorable Senator; but 1 do not consider it necessary to 
 show that "Slavery " is mentioned in the bill. It may not be found there in 
 name; but Slavery is the very soul of the bill. 
 
 Mr. RUSK rose. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. The Senator has interrupted me several times; he may do 
 it more; but, perhaps, he had batter lei me go on. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. I understand the Senator; but I make no boast of that sort. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. Very well. At last I may be allowed to proceed. Of the 
 bill in question, I have little to say. Its technical character has been <•• 
 hj various Senators, and especially by my valued friend, the Senator from 
 Ohio, [Mr. ('hash.] who opened this debate. Suffice it to >ay, that tt is an 
 intrusive ana offensive encroachment on State Rights, cah ilated to'snbvert 
 the jiower of the States in the protection of the liberties of thcii citizens. This 
 consideration alone would he ample to secure its rejection, if he attachment 
 to State Rights, so often avowed by Senators, were not utterly lost in a Stronger 
 attachment to Slavery. Rut on these things, although well worthy of att. n- 
 tion. I do not dwell. Objectionable as the bill may be ou this wound, it 
 becomes much more so when I regard it as an effort to I the Fugitive 
 
 Slave Art. 
 
 Of this act it is difficult to speak with inoderatii ( ,1 in defiance 
 
 of the Constitution, and in utter disregard ol of justice and 
 
 humanity, it should be regarded as an outlaw. m the form of 
 
 legislation, but it lacks every essential element ol hn . ,iave so often 
 
 exposed its character on this floor, that 1 shall be brief 
 
 There is an argument against it which has especial importance at this mo- 
 ment, when the Fugitive Act is made the occasion ol a i saull on State 
 Bights. Thia vera net u <m assumption hy ' ud to it 
 Under i/,-- Constitution, and on infraction of righit ttciired to //<< States, i'ou will 
 mark, if jpu please, the double aspect of this proposition, in asserting not only 
 an assumption of power by Congress, but an infraction of State Rights. And 
 
 ■ 1 
 
this proposition, I venture to say, defies answer or cavil. Show me, sir, if you 
 can, the clause, sentence, or word, in the Constitution, which gives to Congress 
 any power to legislate on this subject. I challenge, honorable Senators to 
 produce it. I fearlessly assert that it cannot be done. The obligations im- 
 posed by the " fugitive " clause, whatever the;/ may be, rest upon the States, and 
 not upon Congress. I do not now undertake to say what these obligations 
 are; but simply that, whether much or little, they rest upon the States. And 
 this interpretation is sustained by the practice of Congress on another kindred 
 question. The associate clause touching the " privileges of citizens " has 
 never been mad-? a source of power. It will be in the recollection of the Sen- 
 ate, that, during the last session, the Senator from Louisiana, [Mr. Benjamin,] 
 in answer to a question from me, openly admitted that there were laws of the 
 Southern States, bearing hard upon colored citizens of the North, which were 
 unconstitutional ; but when I pressed the honorable Senator with the question 
 whether he would introduce or sustain a bill to carry out the clause of the 
 Constitution securing to these citizens their rights, he declined to answer. 
 
 Mr. BENJAMIN. I think, Mr. President, I have a right to set the record 
 straight upon t: .: point, 1 rose in the Senate on the occasion referred to, as 
 will be perfect rec : *!ected by every Senator present, and put a respectful 
 
 question to the : or . . m Masqat .*usetts. Instead of a reply to my ques- 
 tion, he put a question to me, which I answered, and then I put my question. 
 Instead of replying to that, he again put a question to me. Considering that 
 as an absolute evasion of the question which I put to him, I declined having 
 anything further to say in the discussion. I was not here submitting to an 
 interrogatory from the gentleman. I put to him a respectful question. He 
 preferred to put one to me instead of answering mine. I yielded and answer- 
 ed ; and when I again repeated mine, he continued interrogating me. It was 
 obvious to every Senator present that he evaded an answer to my question, 
 and I therefore let the matter drop. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. The Senator from Louisiana will pardon me if I suggest 
 that there is an incontrovertible fact which shows that the evasion was on his 
 part. The record testifies not only that he did not reply, but that I was cut 
 off from replying by the efforts and votes of himself and friends. Let him 
 consult the Congressional Globe, and he will find it all there. I can conceive 
 that it might have been embarrassing to him to reply, for had he declined to 
 sustain a bill to carry out the clause in question, it would have been awkward, 
 at least, to vindicate the Fugitive Slave Act, which is derived from an iden- 
 ' tical source in the Constitution. And yet there are Senators on this floor 
 who, careless of the flagrant inconsistency, vindicate the exercise of power by 
 Congress under the "fugitive" clause, while their own States at home deny 
 to Congress any power under the associate clause, on the " privileges of citi- 
 zens," assume to themselves a complete right to determine the extent of its 
 obligations, and ruthlessly sell into Slavery colored citizens of the North. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. Does the Senator allude to my State? 
 
 Mr. RUSK. No ; to mine. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. If he means South Carolina, I will reply to him. This is 
 about the fourth time, I think, that the Senator, and his predecessor [Mr. 
 Winthrop] before him, have alluded to the laws of South Carolina. If that 
 be his allusion. I intend to give some facts in relation to the subject, of which 
 I have put m, jf.in possession since Mr. Winthrop formerly brought it here 
 for discussion. e Senator intends to allude to South Carolina, let him 
 
 say so. 
 
 Mr. SUMXET. T <lo allude to South Carolina, and also to other Southern 
 States ; but especially to South Carolina. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. Does the Senator allude to Texas ? 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. The Senator had better allow me to go on. When I have 
 finished, he can make any explanation he thinks necessary. 
 
 Mr. RUSK. 1 will not take the trouble ; I do not think the game is worth 
 the candle. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. Very well. The Senator can do as he pleases. But let me 
 say, that if I allude to these States, it is not to bring up and array the hardships 
 
of individual instances, but simply to show the position occupied by them rra 
 a constitutional question identical with that involved in the Fugitive Act. 
 And now, at the risk of repetition, if I can have your attention for a brief 
 moment, without interruption, I will endeavor to state anew this argument. 
 
 The rules of interpretation, applicable to the clause of the Constitution 
 securing to "the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens 
 in the several States," are equally applicable to its associate clause, forming 
 a part of the same section, in the same article, and providing that "persons 
 held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into 
 another, shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service 
 or labor may be due." Of this there can be no doubt. 
 
 If one of these clauses is regarded as a compact between the States, to be 
 carried out by them respectively, according to their interpretation of its obliga- 
 tions, without any intervention of Congress, then the other must be so regard- 
 ed ; nor can any legislative power be asserted by Congress under one clause, 
 which is denied under the other. This proposition cannot be questioned. Now 
 mark the consequences. 
 
 Congress, in abstaining from all exercise of power under the first clause, 
 when required thereto, in order to protect the liberty of colored citizens, 
 while it has assumed power under the second clause, in order to obtain the 
 Burrender of fugitive slave.-, has shown an inconsistency, which becomes more 
 monstrous when it is considered that, in the one case, the general and com- 
 manding interests of Liberty have been neglected, while in the other, tho 
 peculiar and subordinate interests of Slavery have been carefully secured ; and 
 such an exercise of power is an alarming evidence of that influence of Slavery 
 in the National Government which has increased, is increasing, and ought to 
 be overthrown. 
 
 Looking more precisely at these two clauses, we shall arrive at the true 
 conclusion. According to the express words of the Constitution, in the tenth 
 amendment, " the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitu- 
 tion, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, 
 o/ to the people;" and since no powers are delegated to the United States, 
 in the clause relating to "the privileges and immunities of citizens," or in the 
 associate clause of the same section, relating to the surrender of "persons 
 held to service or labor," therefore all legislation by Congress, under either 
 clause, must be an assumption of undelegated powers, and an infraction of 
 rights secured to the States respectively, or to the people ; and such, I have 
 already said, is the Fugitive Slave Art. 
 
 I might go further, and, by the example of South Carolina, vindicate to 
 husetts, and every other State, the right to put such interpretation upon 
 the "fugitive" clause as it shall think proper. The Legislature of South Car- 
 olina, in a series of resolutions, adopted in 1844, asserts the following prop- 
 osition : 
 
 "Resolved, That free negroes and persons of color are not citizens of tho 
 United States uithin the meaning of the Constitution, which confers upon the cit- 
 izens of one State the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the several 
 States." 
 
 Here is a distinct assumption of a right to determine the persona to whom 
 certain words of the Constitution are applicable. Now, nothing can be clearer 
 than this: If South Carolina may determine for itself whether the clause 
 relating to "the privileges and Immunities of citizens" be applicable to the 
 colored citizens of the several States and may solemnly deny its applicability, 
 ii,,,, mtt y \; tts, and every other State, determine for itself whether 
 
 tber clause, relating to the surrender of "persons held to service or labor," 
 be really applicable to fugitive slaver, and may solemnly deny its applicability. 
 Mr. President, 1 have Bald enough to show the usurpation Uy Congress under 
 the •• fugitive Clause of the Constitution, and to warn you against renewing 
 this usurpation. But I have left untouched those other outrages, plentiful as 
 . which enter into the existing Fugitive Slave A.Ct among which are the 
 denial of trial bv jury ; the denial of the writ of kobeoe corpus ; the authoriza- 
 tion of judgment on ex parte evidence, without the sanction of cross-examina- 
 
tion ; and the surrender of the great question of human freedom to be deter- 
 mined by a mere Commissioner, who, according to the requirements of the 
 Constitution, is grossly incompetent to any such service. I have also left 
 untouched the hateful character of this enactment, as a barefaced subversion 
 of every principle of humanity and justice. And now, sir, we are asked to 
 lend ourselves anew to this enormity, worthy only of indignant condemnation ; 
 we are asked to impart new life to this pretended law, this false act of Con- 
 gress, this counterfeit enactment, this monstrosity of legislation, which draws 
 no life from the Constitution, as it clearly draws no life from that Supreme 
 Law which is the essential fountain of life to every human law. 
 
 Sir, the bill before you may have the sanction of Congress ; and in yet 
 other ways you may seek to sustain the Fugitive Slave Act. But it will be 
 in vain. You undertake what no legislation can accomplish. Courts, too, 
 may come forward, and lend it their sanction. All this, too, will be in vain. 
 I respect the learning of judges; I reverence the virtue, more than learning, by 
 which their lives are often adorned. But nor learning, nor virtue, when, with 
 mistaken force, bent to this purpose, can avail. I assert confidently, sir, and 
 ask the Senate to note my assertion, that there is no court, howsoever en- 
 dowed with judicial qualities, or surrounded by public confidence, which is 
 strong enough to lift this act into any permauent consideration or respect. It 
 may seem, for a moment, to accomplish the feat. Its decision may be en- 
 forced — amidst tears and agonies. A fellow man may be reduced anew to 
 Slavery. But all will be in vain. The act cannot be upheld. Anything so 
 entirely vile, so absolutely atrocious, would drag an angel down. Sir, it must 
 drag down every court, which in an evil hour ventures to sustain it. 
 
 And yet, sir, in zeal to support this enormity, Senators have not hesitated 
 to avow a purpose to break down the recent legislation of States, calculated 
 to shield the liberty of their citizens. " It is difficult," says Burke, " to 
 frame an indictment against a whole people." But here in the Senate, where 
 are convened the jealous representatives of the States, we have heard whole 
 States arraigned, as if already guilty of crime. The Senator from Louisiana, 
 [Mr. Benjamix,] in plaintive tones has set forth the ground of proceeding, 
 aud more than one sovereign State has been summoned to judgment. It 
 would be easy to show, by a critical inquiry, that this whole charge is without 
 just foundation, and that all the legislation, so much condemned, is as clearly 
 defensible under the Constitution, as it is meritorious in purpose. 
 
 Sir, the only crime of these States is, that Liberty has been placed before 
 Slavery. Follow the charge, point by point, and this will be apparent. In 
 securing to every person claimed as a slave the protection of trial by jury 
 and the habeas corpus, they simply provide safeguards, strictly within the prov- 
 ince of every State, and rendered necessary by the usurpation of the Fugitive 
 Act. In securing the aid of counsel to every person claimed as a slave, they 
 but perform a kindly duty, which no phrase or word in the Constitution can 
 be tortured to condemn. In visiting with severe penalties every malicious 
 effort to reduce a fellow-man to Slavery, they respond to the best feelings of 
 the human heart. In prohibiting the use of the county jails and buildings as 
 barracoons and slave-pens ; in prohibiting all public officers, holding the com- 
 mission of the State, in any capacity — whether as chief justice or justice of the 
 peace, whether as Governor or constable — from any service as a slave-hunter ; 
 in prohibiting the volunteer militia of the State, in its organized form, from any 
 snch service, the States simply exercise a power under the Constitution, recog- 
 nised by the Supreme Court of the United States, even while upholding Sla- 
 very, in the fatal Prigg case, by positive prohibition, to withdraw its own 
 officers from this offensive business. 
 
 For myself, let me say that I look with no pleasure on any possibility of con- 
 flict between the State and National jurisdictions ; but I trust that, if the 
 interests of Freedom so require, the States will not hesitate. From the be- 
 ginning of this controversy, I have sought, as I still seek, to awaken another 
 influence, which, without the possibility of conflict, will be mightier than any 
 act of Congress and the sword of the National Government. I mean an en- 
 lightened, generous, humane, Christian public opinion, which shall blast with 
 
contempt. indignation, and abhorrence, all who, in whatever form, or under 
 whatever name, undertake to be agents in enslaving a fellow-man. Sir, such 
 an opinion you cannot hind or subdue. Against its subtle, pervasive influence, 
 your legislation and the decrees of courts will be powerless. Already in Mas- 
 sachusetts, 1 am proud to believe, it begins to prevail; and the Fugitive Act 
 will soon be there a dead letter. 
 
 Mr. President, since things are so, it were well to remove this act from our 
 statute book, that it may no longer exist as an occasion of ill-will and a point 
 of conflict. Let the North be relieved from this usurpation, and the first step 
 will be taken towards permanent harmony. The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. 
 Uenjamix] has proclaimed anew to-night what he has before declared on this 
 lloor — •• that Slavery is a subject with which the Federal Government has 
 nothing to do." I thank him for teaching the Senate that word. True, most 
 true, BUT, out -s is a I Io\ eminent of Freedom, which has nothing to do with Sla- 
 very. This is t lie doctrine which I have ever maintained, and which I am 
 happy to find recognised in form, if not in reality, by the Senator from Lou- 
 isiana. The Senator then proceeded to declare that " all that the South asks 
 is bo be let alone." This request is moderate. Anil I say, for the North, that 
 all that we ask is to be let alone. Yes, sir, let us alone. Do not involve us 
 in the support of Slavery. Hug the viper to your bosoms, if you perversely 
 will, within your own States, until it stings you to a generous remorse, but 
 do not compel us to hug it too ; for this I assure you we will not do. 
 
 Hut the Senator from Louisiana, with these professions on his lips, proceeds 
 to ask, doubtless, with complete sincerity, but in strange forgetfulness of the 
 history of our country: "Did we ever bring this subject into Congress?" Yes, 
 sir, that was his inquiry, as if there had been any moment, from the earliest 
 ii the Republic, when the supporters of Slavery had ceased to bring this 
 subject into Congress. Almost from the beginning it has been there, through 
 the exercise of usurped power, nowhere given under the Constitution, for I am 
 glad to believe that the Constitution of my country contains no words out of 
 which Slavery, or the power to support Slavery, can be derived; and this con- 
 clusion, I doubt not, will yet be affirmed by the courts. And yet. the honora- 
 nator asks: "Did we ever bring this subject into Congress?" The 
 answer shall be plain and explicit. Sir, you brought Slavery into Congress, 
 when, shortly after the adoption of the Constitution, you sanctioned it in the 
 District of Columbia, within the National jurisdiction, and adopted that bar- 
 barous slave code, still extant on your statute-book, which the Senator from 
 Connecticut [Mr. Gillkttk] has so elonucntly exposed to-night. You brought 
 Slavery into Congress, when at the same period you accepted the cession of 
 territories from North Carolina and Georgia, now constituting States of the 
 Union, with conditions in favor of Slavery, and thus began to sanction Slavery 
 iu Territories within the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress. You brought Sla- 
 very into Congress, when, at different times, you usurped a power not given 
 by the Constitution, over fugitive slaves, and by most offensive legislation 
 thrust your arms into distant Northern homes. You brought Slavery into 
 ban, by express legislation, you regulated the coastwise slave trade, 
 and thus threw the national shield over a traffic on the coast of the United 
 State*, whi'h on the coast of Congo you justly brand as "piracy." You 
 brought Slavery into Congress, when, from time to time, you sought to intro- 
 duce new States with slaveholding Constitutions into the National Union. 
 And, permit me to say, sir, you brought Slavery into Congress when you called 
 upon it, M you have done even at this very session, to pay for slaves — and 
 thus, in defiance of* cardinal principle of the Constitution, made the National 
 Government recognise property in men. And yet the Senator from Louisiana, 
 with Strange Simplicity, says that the South only asks to be let alone. Sir, 
 the honorable Senator only borrows the language of the North, which, at each 
 of these usurpations, < xchiinis, " Let us alone.'' And let me say, frankly, that 
 pi-ace can never prevail until you do let us alone — until this subject of Slave- 
 ry is banished from Congress by the triumph of Freedom — until Slavery is 
 driven ten its usurped foothold, and Freedom is made national instead of 
 ial — and nntil the National Government is brought back to the precise 
 
position it occupied on the day that Washington took his first oath as Presi- 
 dent of the United States, when there was no Fugitive Act, and the national 
 flag, as it floated over the national territory, within the jurisdiction of Con- 
 gress, nowhere covered a single slave. 
 
 And now, sir, as an effort in the true direction of the Constitution ; in the 
 hope of beginning the divorce of the National Government from Slavery, and 
 to remove all occasion for the proposed measure under consideration, I shall 
 close what I have to say with a motion to repeal the Fugitive' Act. Twice 
 already, since I have had the honor of a seat on this floor, I have pressed 
 that question to a vote, and I mean to press it again to-night. After the 
 protracted discussion, involving the character of this enactment, such a motion 
 seems logically to belong to this occasion, and may fitly close its proceedings. 
 
 At a former session, on introducing this proposition, I discussed it at length, 
 in an argument, which I fearlessly assert has never been answered, and now, 
 in this debate, I have already touched upon various objections. There are yet 
 other things which might be urged. I might exhibit the abuses which have 
 occurred under the Fugitive Act; the number of free persons it has doomed to 
 Slavery; the riots it has provoked; the brutal conduct of its officers; the 
 distress it has scattered ; the derangement of business it has caused, interfering- 
 even with the administration of justice, changing court-houses into barracks 
 and barracoons, and filling streets with armed men, amidst which law is silent. 
 All these things I might expose. But in these hurried moments, I forbear. 
 Suffice it to say, that the proposition to repeal the existing Fugitive Act stands 
 on adamantine grounds, which no debate or opposition can shake. 
 
 There are considerations belonging to the present period which give new 
 strength to this proposition. Public Opinion, which, under a popular Govern- 
 ment, makes and unmakes laws, and which, for a time, was passive and 
 acquiescent, now lifts itself everywhere in the States where the act is sought 
 to be enforced, and demands a change. Already three States, Rhode Island, 
 Connecticut, and Michigan, by formal resolutions presented to the Senate, 
 have concurred in this demand. The tribunals of law are joining at last with 
 the people. The superior court of Cincinnati has denied the power of Con- 
 gress over this subject. And now, almost while I speak, comes the solemn 
 judgment of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin — a sovereign State of this Union — 
 made after elaborate argument, on successive occasions, before a single judge, 
 and then before the whole bench, declaring this act to be a violation of the 
 Constitution. In response to Public Opinion, broad and general, if not uni- 
 versal at the North, swelling alike from village and city, from the seaboard and 
 lakes — judicially attested, legislatively declared, and represented, also, by 
 numerous petitions from good men without distinction of party — in response 
 to this Public Opinion, as well as in obedience to my own fixed convictions, I 
 deem it my duty not to lose this opportunity of pressing the repeal of the 
 Fugitive Slave Act once more upon the Senate. I move, sir, to strike out all 
 after the enacting clause in the pending bill, and insert instead thereof these 
 words : 
 
 " That the act of Congress, approved September 18, 1850, usually known as 
 the < Fugitive Slave Act,' be, and the same hereby is, repealed." 
 And on this motion I ask the yeas and nays. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, I have no idea of irritating sectional differ- 
 ences. If gentlemen have the opinions which it seems the gentleman from 
 Massachusetts entertains, be it so. I assure him I do not intend to bandy 
 words with him. He talks as if he was disposed to maintain the Constitution 
 of the United States ; but if I were to put to him a question now, I would 
 ask him one which he, perhaps, would not answer me honestly. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. I will answer any question. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. Then I ask you honestly now, whether, all laws of Congress 
 being put out of the question, you would recommend to Massachusetts to pass 
 a law to deliver up fugitives from Slavery ? 
 
8 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. The Senator nsks me a question, and I answer, frankly, that 
 no temptation, no~inducement, would draw me in any way to sanction the 
 return of any man to Slavery. But, then, I leave to others to speak for them- 
 selves. In this respect, I speak for myself. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. 1 do not rise now at all to question the right of the gentle- 
 man from Massachusetts to hold his seat, under the obligation of the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, with the opinions which he has expressed; but, if 
 I understand him, he means that, whether this law, or that law, or any other 
 law prevails, he disregards the obligations of the Constitution of the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. SUMNER Not at all. That I never said. I recognise the obligations 
 of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. But, sir, I will ask that gentleman one question: if it de- 
 volved upon him as a representative of Massachusetts, all Federal laws being 
 put out of the way, would he recommend any law for the delivery of a fugitive 
 slave under the Constitution of the United States? 
 
 Mr. SUMNER. Never. 
 
 Mr. BUTLER. I knew that. Now, sir, I have got exactly what is the truth, 
 and what I intend shall go forth to the Southern States. 
 
 BOEU. A BI.ANCUAUD, PRINTERS, WA8IT1NGTOM, D. C.