,C5-7/ 
 
 /?'6? 
 
012 028 976 7 
 
 pH8J 
 
r^i W- 
 
 S P E K C H 
 
 CASSIUS M. CLAY, 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 LAW DEPARTMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF ALBANY, N. Y. 
 
 FEBRUARY 3, 1863. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 PRESS OF WYNKOOP, HALLENBECK & THOMAl 
 
 \o. 113 KULTO.V Strkkt 
 
 1863. 
 

 ^/^ 
 
 

 SPEECH OE C. M. CJ.-VY. 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Law Depautment, Ladies, and 
 Fellow-Citizexs : 
 
 All history unites in one conclusion ; tliar kiiowlfdirc 
 and virtue constitute the basis of the permanent grandeur 
 and safety of nations. Human hiip]>iness is not the result 
 of chance; this aspiration of all Iiumaiiiry, Deity yields us 
 but on conditions ; we must know and do. jMontesipiieu 
 tells us tliat honor is the principle of Monarchies; and 
 virtue of Republics. I am of the opinion tiiat honor, in 
 the sense of a haughty, self-seeking elevation, never was 
 the basis of any permanent greatness : and that virtue is 
 the only safe foundation of all Governments. The Em- 
 pires of Alexander and Napoleon passed away ; the one 
 with, and the other before, its creative intelligence ! On 
 the true and the right only have been built the lasting 
 nationalities. 
 
 The founders of our llepublic were not ignnraiit of this 
 fact : and, in the enacting clause of the Constituti(»ii, they 
 declared one of its great objects to be, to ^^ cstuhlish jnsticr.'''' 
 Tautological was it then in them to include " liberty," 
 among their purposes. For, without justice, there is no 
 liberty; and what is liberty but justice — which, perceiv- 
 ino- the true relation of all thinus, ob»'vs (hem '. Tlii'se 
 
eternal relations of things are " laws." Well may it then 
 be said, that " without law, there is no liberty." I stand 
 before you the defender of " law." A citizen of the United 
 States, and a " Republican," I would vindicate my party, 
 and my country ; for I believe they are one. I stand by 
 " tlie Union, the Constitution, and the laws." The Consti- 
 fvttoi/ as it is. The Union as our fathers desi<j^ncd it : as it 
 ought to be : based not upon injustice, usurping the name 
 of law ; but truly upon the law of nature, and of nature's 
 God. 
 
 First, then, we claim the name of " iZq»/6//a/;i," because 
 it best represents what we are ; it is a good name : let 
 us never abandon it ! It is not our fault, in this crisis of 
 life and death to the nation, that party names and part}' 
 organizations are revived. I ardently hoped that, in 
 this struggle for our national being, all citizens of " the 
 United States of America" would have stood for them, 
 in sup[)ort of their chosen " powers that be." But the 
 " Democratic" party has decreed otherwise : and we have 
 nothing left but to accept the issue. I accept it with 
 reluctance, but not with fear. I have no personal enmi- 
 ties to avenge : the friends of my country ai"e m}^ friends : 
 the enemies of my country are my enemies. If we are 
 right, we will stand : if we are wrong, we will fall. It is 
 a signilicant lact, tliat, the foes of our Republic abroad, in 
 the rebel States, and in our Northern homes, all take com- 
 mon ground against us. 
 
 Who is Responsible for the War ? 
 
 It is said that iIh; Kt'piil)lican party is responsible ibr 
 
 thr war. That (un- violation of the Constitutional rights of 
 
 the Sla\(' Slates gave tiii'm cause for "secession" — that 
 
 the refusal of the Reptiblicans to return fiigiti\(» slaves, 
 
through mobs and "porsoiiul liberty bills," cniichMl into 
 law in some Repnblican States, was in violalion of the 
 Constitution, and just cause of a dissolution of tlic rnioii. 
 Grant its truth, for ariiunuuit's sake ; beciusr ;i man is 
 injured in violation of the civil law, must he rebel against 
 the Cxovernment? ( 'ertaiidy not : els<^ all law must per- 
 ish, and universal anarchy desolate mankind. The true 
 remedy under our form of government is reform, not revo- 
 lution : the ballot of the majority, not the bayonet of the 
 minority, liut all jurists agree that those who <lemand, 
 shall do justice. The llepublican party did, following the 
 irrepressible instincts of nature, sometimes forget the law. 
 But what the Free States did exceptionally, the Slave 
 States did systematically. They never held the Constitu- 
 tion higher than slavery; they made mob-violence the 
 rule; regard to the Constitution, the exception. From the 
 foundation of the Government in 1789, to the year ISGl, 
 in which that tyranny broke out into armed rebellion, tliere 
 never was a day in which the Constitution of the United 
 States M^as enforced ; or could without war have been 
 enforced in the Slave States. Article 3, section 2, of the 
 Constitution of the United States, declares, that : " The 
 judicial power shall extend to controversies between two 
 or more States — between a State and citizens of another 
 gtate — and between citizens of different States ;" yet 
 South Carolina, the chief mover in this rebellion, in the 
 most formal, insulting, and violent manner, in violation of 
 the above clause in the Constitution, expelled :\Iassachu- 
 setts from her borders, seeking, by an appeal to the courts, 
 redress for repeated injuries ; and then by State authority 
 made this violence into law. ( )f course, all redress for simi- 
 lar denials of justice to private citizens of the United States 
 has been systematically denied, in all the Slave States. 
 
6 
 
 Again : article 4, section 2, United States Constitution, 
 declares that, " The citizens of each State shall be entitled 
 to all tlie })rivileges and innnunities of citizens in the 
 si'veral States." The Constitution of the United States 
 and the Constitutions of all the States have declared in 
 favor of freedom of assemblage of the people — freedom of 
 ntterance by sj)eech and writing — and freedom of religion ; 
 and vet in no Slave State have these rights of American 
 citizenship been allowed. They have been in some Slave 
 States forbidden by law, and in all suppressed by sys- 
 tematic mob-violence, which, in the most liberal of them, 
 was declared, by the most " respectable" Slave-holding 
 citizens, to be " the common law" of the South. I stop, 
 not to give isolated cases, as the annexation of Texas, and 
 the armed violence in Kansas, but confine myself to these 
 systematic violations of the Constitution. How dare, 
 then, the enemies of the Republican party to plead onr 
 disregard of the Constitution in vindication of the Southern 
 Rebellion ? The world knows that this charge of the 
 slave-holders and their allies is not only a calunmy 
 against us, but not at all the cause of the rebellion. 
 For the lact is notorious, that the slave interest held 
 power over us, not only in the veto of a Democratic 
 President, but in a jtro-slavery court of the United States, 
 and a senat(jrial and legislative majority in the (Jongress, 
 at the day and hour when they entered into this crinu; 
 against huiuaii nature. 
 
 Is there Legal Right in the Slave-Holders' Rebellion ? 
 Thes«,' alh'gations of otlense falling to the ground, have 
 the States in rebellion any power under the Constitution 
 to " wcaA ?'" If this Union is a "confederation," the vio- 
 lation of its terms miiriit be a cause of disunion. IJut 
 
certaiiily it is not. We had a " coiiAidrration ;" it wmk 
 full of will, bat had no power to enforce it. History is 
 before us. We overthrew the old confederation ol tlitsc 
 States, simply because it was a " confederation," and n«»t 
 a Government. Ignoring the States, w«' met as a great 
 nation of a continent, to form, according to tlu; enacting 
 clause of the Constitution of 178!), "a more perfect 
 Union." It declares itself what it is — it sjx-aks not of 
 States, but men. "We, the itcoplc of the United States, 
 do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United 
 States of America." The States arc not " sovereign." 
 There cannot be two sovereigns in one; territory. The 
 Constitution declares that the National Constitution is the 
 sovereign. The regulation of commerce " with foreign 
 nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian 
 tribes" (art. 1, sec. 8, clause 3), is a " sovereign" power ; 
 it is given only to the National Legislature. " To establish 
 a uniform rule of naturalization" — " to levy and collect 
 taxes, duties, and imports, and excises" — to make " uniform 
 aws on the subject of bankf u])tcies" — " to coin money, 
 regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the 
 standard of weights and measures" — " to establish post-offi- 
 ces and post-roads" — " to promote the progress of science 
 and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors 
 and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writ- 
 ings and discoveries." " To define and punish piracies and 
 felonies committed on the high seas, and otfenscs against 
 the laws of nations." "To declare war, grant letters of 
 marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures 
 on land and water." " To raise and support armies — to 
 provide and support a navy." " To provide for the 
 organizing armies and disciplining the militia." These are 
 
Jill sovorciirn powers claimed for the XatioiuiHiloveriiment. 
 lint this is not all. The States VlYQ forbiddoi after 1808 to 
 import shivcs without the consent of Congress. " No State 
 shall enter into an}^ treaty, alliance, or confederation — 
 ijjrant letters of marque or reprisal ; coin money ; emit 
 bills of credit ; make anything but gold and silver coin a 
 tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, 
 ex iKJst facto law, or law impairing the obligation of 
 contracts, or grant any title of nobility" — " no State shall, 
 without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or 
 duties on imports or exports, except what may be abso- 
 lutely necessary for executing its inspection laws, &c. — 
 and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and con- 
 trol of the Congress. No State shall, without the consent 
 of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or 
 ships of war, in time of peace, enter into any agreement 
 or compact with another State, or with a foreign power, 
 or engage in war, unless actually iuvaded, or in sucii im- 
 minent danger as will not admit of delay." But to crov^^n 
 all and forever to silence all* dispute, article G, section 2, 
 United States Constitution, declares : " This Constitution 
 and tlie laws of tlu^ United States, which shall be made, in 
 pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be 
 made, under theauthority of the United States, shall be the 
 supreme law of the land, anything in the laws or Constitu- 
 tion of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." Here, 
 then, is an end of all argument. So thought Judge Story 
 (Martin v. Hunter: Wheaton, '324-27). " The Constitution 
 of the Unitecl States was established, not by the States in 
 their sovereign capacity, but emphatically, as the preamble 
 of the Constitution declares, by " the jieople of the United 
 States." So thought John ^[arshall (Cohens /-. Virginia : 
 (J Wheaton, 113-14). " The Constitution and the laws of 
 
a State, so far as they are repugnant to the ('(disiitiition 
 and hiws of the United States, are ahsohitely voifl. 'J'hey 
 are members of the one (j real Empire,'" So (h«tii<rht Daniel 
 Webster, in his immortal reply to llayne, in the Sriuite, 
 Jannar}^ 1830 : "It is, sir, the people's Constinitioii ^ the 
 people's Grovernment : made for The people — made by tlu! 
 people — and answerable to the people. Tin; people of the 
 United States have declared that this Constitution shall be 
 the supreme law." Such is history, the Constitution, 
 judicial decisions ; and the authority of our most illustrious 
 men. " Secession" has no warrant in the Constitution, 
 but is in violation of its spirit and its kinguage ; is treason ; 
 and its authors, aiders, and abettors, deserve death. 
 
 The Right of Revolution: and of Unity. 
 
 But we are told that the Slave States have the right of 
 revolution — and they are the judges of tiie necessity. 1 
 grant that there is, according to our declaration of inde- 
 pendence, an inherent right of revolution among all 
 peoples. But this is the right of the oppressed majority 
 against an oppressive minority. What is the absurdity, 
 then, of this slave-power, at the time itself a controlling 
 majority, revolting against an impotent minority ? Besides, 
 if there is a right of revolution, there is a right of self- 
 preservation. 
 
 Locke (Work upon Government : B : i) declares that 
 government is founded npou the " consent" of the people, 
 "wherein a majority have a right to act." 
 
 Vattel (Laws of Nations : B : 1 : ch. 2) says : " Every 
 nation is obliged to perform the duty of self-preservation." 
 — " The body of a nation cannot then abandon a })rovin('e, 
 a town, or even a particular person, who has done his 
 
10 
 
 [>;irt, unless obliged to \t from nccessiti/.'^ " Since, tlien, a 
 nation is obliged to preserve itself, it lias a right to every 
 thing necessary to its preservation, provided these means- 
 are not unjust in themselves, or absolutely forbidden by 
 the laws of nations." 
 
 Edmund Burke (Ketiections on the Kevohition in 
 France) eloquently pleads for the unity of nations: 
 " Society is indeed a contract : * * * but the State ought 
 not to be considered as nothing better than a partnership 
 in trade, of pepper and coffee, calico and tobacco, to be 
 broken up for a little temporary interest, and to be dis- 
 solved by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on 
 with other reference — ^because it is not a partnership in 
 tilings subservient only to the gross animal existence, of a 
 temporary and perishable nature. It is a partnership in 
 science — a partnei-ship in all art — a partnership in every 
 virtue, and in all perfection. As the ends of the partner- 
 ship cannot be obtained in one, in many generations, it 
 becomes a partnership not only between those who are 
 living, but between those who are living, those who are 
 dead, and those who are to be born." We accept the 
 blood-bought compact of the Constitution, which is o)ir 
 inheritance, its enjoyment, and its defense. 
 
 The world knows who struck the first parricidal blow 
 at its life; and, as we did not first draw the sword, so we 
 will be the last to sheathe it, till the Union be restored, and 
 the Constitution be vindicated, we " never will lay down 
 our arms — never !" 
 
 " Habeas Corpus. " 
 
 Those who find fault with our cause, of course find fault 
 with our method of defense. It is urged that President 
 Lincoln has violated the Constitution, in the suspension ot 
 
11 . 
 
 the privilege oi habeas corpus ; in that clause (art. 1, sec. 0, 
 cl. 2. C. U.S.) which dechires that " The writ oi' /uihcas cor- 
 ims shall not be suspended, uiik'ss wlicn, in cases of rebel- 
 lion or invasion, the public safety may require it." I too 
 complain of President Lincoln in the exercise of this 
 power; not because he has exercised it ;il all ; but because 
 he has not done it efficiently. I would have spared the 
 insignificant traitors ; but I would have brought those emi- 
 nent in evil to summary military execution ! But how is 
 it attempted to be proved that the President has acted in 
 violation of law ? I find that the "Federalist" only 
 alludes to this clanse, as one of those which stand in place 
 of a bill of rights. Judge Story, in his " Commentaries on 
 the Constitution of the United States," avoids the question 
 by simply saying, " it would seem, as power is given to Con- 
 gress to suspend the writ in cases of invasion and rebellion, 
 that the right to judge whether exigency had arisen must 
 exclusively belong to that body." Judge Kent says noth- 
 ing in his Conmientaries upon it. So, having no authority 
 upon the subject, we are left to precedent and to our own 
 reasoning. In the Burr conspiracy. Congress having refused 
 to give him the power, Thomas Jefterson arrested Burr on 
 his own authority. So Gen. Jackson's suspension of the 
 writ of habeas corjms at New Orleans was sustained by the 
 American People, by a restoration of the fine imposed 
 by the civil authorities. It is contended, because the 
 clause is found in the group of powers belonging to Con- 
 gress, that, therefore, it is forbidden to the President. It 
 is the 2d clause of article 1, section 9. But clause 7 of the 
 same section is, that : "No money shall be drawn from the 
 treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made bv 
 law." Will any man dare say that this clause applies to 
 Congress, and not to the President "? On the contrary, does 
 
12 
 
 nor t'vt'ry one see that it applies more espocially to the 
 President, who, from his power of appoiutmciit, is just the 
 person most dangerous in this respect ? The argument, 
 then, proves too much, or nothing. If, because! this second 
 chiuse is found in section 9, the President is forbidden its 
 use; then, by the same reasoning, the prohibition of section 
 7 ap])lies also to Congress, and not to the President. But, 
 as no one will venture to contend for the last, they must 
 abandon the first also. 
 
 The Congress makes the laws, but does not execute 
 them. Reason would say that he who executes is the one, 
 if the emergency should arise, to suspend tlicm. The 
 Congress is only bound by oath to "5?/^?por^" the Consti- 
 tution ; but the President is specially bound to " solemnly 
 swear to preserve, protect, and defend, the Constitution of 
 the United States." If there is a fitness in any oue sus- 
 pending that writ, it belongs most certainly to him. He 
 is commander of the army and navy : he is bound to " take 
 care that the laws be faithfully executed." These are 
 duties that are imposed, not upon Congress, but upon him 
 only. All fair reasoning, then, gives him the right to say 
 when the public safety, in rebellion or invasion, may 
 require its suspension. " The Madison Papers " would 
 se«Mn to justify this conclusion (vol. 2, p. 741). " The 
 Legislature of the United States shall pass no law upon 
 the subject of religion — nor touching the liberty of the 
 press" — but the phraseology is at once changed, and it 
 irocs on to say — " nor shall the privilege of the writ of 
 hahdis rorpu.s i'ver be suspended," &c. The next time tlie 
 clause is again named, in Pinckuey's report, the Congress 
 (»r Liirisjaiiire is again numtioned ; aud on the final pas- 
 sage, it is (Jioiqx'd. In most cases, where the phraseology 
 wuH changed, it was done w^ith a purpose. No doubt, on 
 
a subject of so iiiucli iiii[)ortancc, this was not licic doiio 
 without design. It was matured in couniiittcc : and the 
 inference is, that this power was desiujned to W h-ft, wiih 
 the President, or wherever (;x[)t!rienc(! shouhl best fix it. 
 
 lam of the opinion, therefore, tliat its exercise lias faHen 
 into tlie right hands; and it has been constitutionally ex- 
 ercised. This writ we inherit with the connnon law from 
 our British ancestry. But there is nothing dangcnms in 
 its exercise. It was wrested from Charles II., by the jx'ople, 
 against kings, who, like Louis XIV., claimed to be the 
 State. It was taken from a tyrant to protect the people. 
 But here it is given by the people to their own Executive 
 servant, for their own safety. 
 
 The history of this country proves that all tin; fears 
 affected by the Democratic party, in this regard, are imag- 
 inar}', or traitorous. The whole force of the Government 
 is centrifugal, not central. The most popular Presidents, 
 with all their patronage, have rarely been able to keep 
 the Congress permanently on the side of the administra- 
 tion. The Government has never been strong enough to 
 vindicate the Constitution in the Slave States. Its ruin is 
 now threatened, not by the Federal despotism, but by the 
 false doctrine of State rights ; and, if the Union fails, it 
 fails by its too great weakness, and not by its too great 
 strength ; and upon this issue we go before the. people and 
 the world. 
 
 The Proclamation of the 22cl September, 1862. 
 The immortal prochunation of the L^-Jd of Scptrndjer is 
 equally unpalatable to the Democracy. They know very 
 well that to destroy the pro-slaver}^ power of the South is 
 to destroy the right wing of their political army, and to 
 overthrow forever the foundation of their power in this 
 
14 
 
 lu'lHihlic-. Ilriict' this clamor of "great is Diana of the 
 Ki)liesiaiis," and "of the overthrow of tiie Constitution !" 
 
 Tliese traitors to the Constitution, who habitually, in 
 the name of slaver}'', overrode all its guarantees of citizen- 
 ship and liberty — who used the army of the United States 
 in Kansas in unison with mob violence to the overthrow 
 of ihe elective franchise — who, for the first time in history, 
 conspired the destruction of the Government which a de- 
 luded jjeople had confided to their sworn protection — who 
 avowedly usurped all those powers w'hich belonged ex- 
 clusively to the National Empire and not to the States ; 
 who dispersed and demoralized our armies ; scattered over 
 distant seas our small, but faithful and gallant navy ; who 
 robbed our treasur}^ secretly took the public arms, and at 
 last broke out into rebellion by seizing the public moneys? 
 forts, and arsenals — setting up a separate confederacy, 
 and firing upon the ships, men, and forts of the United 
 States — I sa}', those traitors to the Constitution and hu- 
 manity received no word of censure for these violations of 
 national law and eternal justice. No; it is for us, who 
 are faithful to all, and would defend all, to the sacrifice of 
 whatever is sacred among men, that these sympathizers 
 with treason, its aiders and abettors, reserve all their ire 
 and denunciation. 
 
 Its Legality. 
 
 Let us see, then, if the proclamation violates the Consti- 
 tution, or not. Vattel (Laws of Nations, B. 3, ch. 18) says, 
 after di'fining "sedition," and "insurrection," " AVhen in 
 a Ke[)id)h'(' a nation is divided into two opposite factions, 
 and both sides lake uj> arms, this is called a civil war." 
 "These two parties are two distinct people." "Thus 
 they an- iu tlu; case of two nations who have a dispute 
 
15 
 
 wliicli they cannot adjust, and are compelled to decide it 
 by force of arms." " The ohligation of observing the com- 
 mon laws of war are therefore absolute — and tlie same 
 which the law of nature obhges all nations to observe 
 between State and State." Foreign nations have acknowl- 
 edged the dc Jkcto goyevmnent of the " (Confederate States" 
 and allowed them all the rights of belligerents. In that 
 action we have acquiesced, and confirmed it by exchange 
 •of prisoners of war, and similar admissions. We have, then, 
 the same rights of war against the " Confederate States" 
 as we have against other nations, which rights arc deter- 
 inined by the laws of nations solely, and not at all by the 
 Constitution of the United States. Now, there is no dis- 
 pute as to the rights or laws of war. Chancellor Kent (Com., 
 sec. -5, p. 89) says : " The end of war is to procure by 
 force the justice which cannot be otherwise obtained, and 
 the laws of nations allow the means necessary to the end. 
 The persons and property of the enemy may be attacked, 
 and captured or destroyed, when neeessar}'^ to procure 
 reparation or security." Says Vattel (Laws of Nations, B. 
 3, ch. S) : " On a declaration of war, therefore, the 
 nation has a right of doing against the enenw whatever is 
 necessary to this justifiable end of bringing hin^i to reason, 
 and obtaining justice and security from him." •• It gives a 
 right of doing against the enemy whatever is necessary for 
 weakening him ; of disabling him from making any further 
 resistance in support of his injustice ; and the most proper, 
 the most effectual methods may be chosen, providtMl they 
 have nothing odious, be not unlawful in themselves, or 
 exploded by the law of nature." 
 
 Such is the doctrine laid down by Wheatonand all pub- 
 licists. If, then, the slaves of the Confederate States are inc/i, 
 we have the right to caj)ture or destroy them ; if they are 
 
IG 
 
 jH'operty, we have tl)e right to deprive their claimants of its 
 use, and thus compel them to submission. The Emperor of 
 Russia, in the arbitration between England and the United 
 States, decided that shives were legal caj^ture by the 
 rights of war, J. Q. Adams held that even in a slave in- 
 surrection, the slaves might be made free. Judge Clover, 
 in case of Com. vs. Ben. Williams, in St. Louis,, has pro- 
 nounced tlie proclamation constitutional. 
 
 Its Justice. 
 
 Tliis property of slaves the President jjroposes to restore 
 to liberty; not to destroy it, by death. If there is a lasv 
 of nature, this is one; if there is a humanity in war, this 
 is the noblest ! That man has a natural right to his liberty 
 has been held by the wise and good of all ages, and of all 
 religions. Justinian (Just. Insts., lib. 1, tit. 2, § 2) says : 
 " Jure enim uaturali omnes liomines ab initio liberi nasce- 
 bantur." De Wolpius"(Legs. Natm.) declares: "Nations 
 are so many particular persons living together in a state of 
 nature," and " they are born naturally free." Montesquieu 
 (L'Esprit des Lois, B. 17, ch. 5), relates : " In the North 
 were found those valiant people, who sallied forth to 
 destroy tyrants and slaves, and to teach men that, nature 
 having made them equal, reason could not render them de- 
 pendent." And again (B. 1-5, ch. 5) : " But, as all men 
 are born equal, slavery must be accounted unnatural." 
 
 The French National Assembly (August 20, 1789) pro- 
 claimed tliat : " All men are born and continue free and 
 rqiufl, as to their rights." The Declaration of the Fourth 
 of July, 177G, declared : that " all men are created ec^ual 
 — endowed with certain inalienable rights — among which 
 are — //7«:/7^." For my part, I always scorn to debate so 
 self-evident a truth ; for, to me, the plainest of rights is 
 th(! riirlit (if a man to himself. 
 
17 
 
 Its Safety and Expediency. 
 Whilst tluTc is IK) siiuc )ii;iii outside the Slave States \vli(» 
 doubts the legality and justice of tlii! abolition of slavery, 
 let lis, then, exainiiu! the expediency of iinnieiliate libera- 
 tion. Whilst we, have ever held that what is ri<;ht is 
 always expedient, for those of less faith in the riirht, we 
 give the experience of emancipation in the West Indies- 
 M. Cochin, a learned French philanthropist, has just pub- 
 lished a work, termed "The Results of Einaiicipation " 
 (translated by Mary S. Booth, Boston: 1SG;3), in which h.' 
 examines, from the statistical reports of all the govern- 
 ments, the effects of emancipation in the West Indies. He 
 concludes that the experiment is a success in all respects. 
 That there are more property-holders — more families — 
 more priests — more churches — higher price of lands — in- 
 creased gross consumption — equal exportation of tropical 
 products — smaller armies — fewer persons in prison under 
 freedom, than, before, under slavery. In a word, that " lib- 
 erty, property, and family," the loss of which sunk the 
 man into a slave, have been restored, by raising the slave 
 into a man. The expediency of immediate over gradual 
 liberation, was fully proved by experience. England passed 
 her act of emancipation August 2S, 1833, giving £40,000,000 
 for 800,000 slaves, and extending the system of gradualism 
 or apjDrenticeship for seven years, till 1840. But, on the 
 1st of August, 1838, she was forced to immediate libera- 
 tion. In France, the Convention of 1789 proclaimed im- 
 mediate emancipation. In consequence of the opposition 
 of the slaveholders, this act was resisted till 179-4, when 
 repeated insurrections compelled immediate emancipation, 
 which brought with it peace. Slavery was attempted and 
 partially restored, under Napoleon, in 1802, with all the 
 horrors of bloodshed on both sides ; in which barbarities 
 
IS 
 
 I lie whites excelled the blacks — importing ship-loads of 
 l)l()odhouiids from Cuba! Liberty \Yas restored in 1830; 
 abolished nnder the monarchy, and again finally established 
 in 1848. The Danes tried gradualism, and abandoned it, 
 as a failure, July 3, 1848. Sweden abolished slavery at 
 once, in 1846. The Dutch abolished slavery in her East 
 India possessions, May 7, 1859, and in the West Indies, 
 July 1, 1862. England gave a compensation to the slave- 
 holders of S125 per head : the Dutch the same : the French 
 8106. Gradual emancipation always proved a failure ; and 
 abolition a success. The danger of massacre comes from 
 slavery and oppression : not from liberty and humanity. 
 The Duke de Broglie, speaking of English abolition, says: 
 " The summons to freedom of 800,000 slaves at the same 
 moment has not caused, in all the English colonies, the 
 tenth part of the disturbance ordinarily caused by the 
 smallest political question that agitates minds ever so little, 
 amongst the most civilized nations of Europe." 
 
 M. Cochin thus sums up his conclusions : ' ' Nearly a million 
 of men, women, and children have passed from the condition 
 of cattle to the rank of rational beings. Numerous mar- 
 riages have elevated the family above the mire of a name- 
 less promiscuousness. Paternity has replaced illegitimacy. 
 Churches and schools are opened. Keligion, before mute, 
 factious, and dishonored, has resumed its dignity and liber- 
 ty. Men, who had nothing, have acquired property. Lands 
 which were waste have been occupied : inadequate popu- 
 lations have increased : detestable processes of agriculture 
 and manufacture have been replaced by better: a race, 
 reputed inferior, vicious, and lascivious, idle, refractory 
 to civilization, religion, and instruction, has shown itself 
 honest, gentle, disposed to family life, accessible to Chris- 
 
10 
 
 tianity, eager for instruction. Those of its incnilierM who 
 have returned to vagrancy, sh)th, and corruption, an; not a 
 reproach to race as much as to the servitude whicli has left 
 them wallowing in their native ignorance and depravity ; 
 but these are a minority. The majority labor, and show 
 themselves far superior to the auxiliaries which China and 
 India send to the colonists. In two words, wealth has 
 suftered little ; civilization has gained much. Such is tlu^ 
 balance-sheet of the English experiment." If calamity, 
 then, shall follow the proclamation, it will be the fault 
 of the masters, not of the President, nor of the freed 
 blacks. 
 
 What shall be done with the Freed Blacks? 
 
 When the rebel States shall be subdued : when the 
 State Constitutions shall be made free : when the lands of 
 the rebels shall be confiscated, and sold, or divided between 
 loyal and armed occupants, the blacks can be employed as 
 hired laborers upon the same lands they now occupy. If 
 wages are sufficient to induce work, very well : if not, then 
 let them be compelled to work, and be paid. Let schools 
 and churches be established : and let civil and political 
 rights be extended to the blacks, as they shall in time prove 
 worthy of them. 
 
 I proclaim a free political salvation. I have nothing to 
 do with the equality or inequality of races. I have to do 
 with the equality of civil and political rights ; and I am 
 for extending them to all nations, without regard to color, 
 religion, or language, only, as they shall prove worthy of 
 the boon. It is not for me, whose British ancestors, so 
 late as the overthrow of the Roman Republic, were savages, 
 and pagans, and cannibals, to sit in judgment upon the 
 rank of nations and races. I have no respect for that De- 
 
20 
 
 mocracy, ui' tli;it Jit'pnblicunisiii, North or South, wliich 
 denies, without regard to merit, civil rights to the blacks- 
 They are far more worthy of civil and political liberty than 
 many of those who are fiercest in the denunciation of them. 
 The allegation, that Deity has decreed the eternal slavery 
 of any race, is a calumny against man, and a blasphemy 
 against God. Equally do I despise the hypocrisy of those 
 defenders of slavery and the slave trade, who vaunt them 
 before the world as, at one time, civilizing and Christianiz- 
 ing the African ; and yet, when we propose liberation, con- 
 tend that three hundred years of such schooling only fit 
 them to cut the throats of their benefactors ! The difficulty 
 of this whole question is solved by laying down our preju- 
 dices, and nsing a little common sense. Recognize the 
 slaves as men, and treat them according to their merit or 
 demerit, and all difficulties disappear. Labor everywhere 
 will be freed from the competition of unpaid wages. The 
 blacks will, by the law of nature and the proof of history, 
 gravitate towards the tropics. The tropical productions 
 will not be decreased ; whilst consumption will increase. 
 The commerce and manufactures of the North will be en- 
 larged, instead of being destroyed. In a word, industry 
 will everywhere be encouraged ; because labor, being free, 
 will bo everywhere made honorable. 
 
 Our Foreign Relations, and Slavery. 
 
 AVhatever may be the feelings of foreign aristocracies 
 against Republicanism, the liberals of all Europe are for 
 the principles of freedom and emancipation. Whilst the 
 people of England are secured to us by the proclamation, 
 the Government dare not intervene on the side of slave- 
 holders, liussia is with us uj)on the basis of common in- 
 
21 
 
 terests ; and wliilst the other liioiiarchics may threaten us 
 on one side, we are, on tlie other, safe in the defeiisi- ol'tlie 
 greatest liberal ol' all Kiirope, Alexander II., who is morr 
 worthy of the name of "the Great," for ilie millions he 
 has made free, than Alexander Macedon was for the 
 millions he made slaves ! Ikit, after all, we must rely m[>oii 
 ourselves, our glorious cause, and the heroism of our 
 troops. United at home, w^e may safely defy a woild in 
 arms. Whilst I am grateful to friends, I have no words 
 of self-abaseijient for our haughty foes at home or al)ioad. 
 Notwithstanding the cry of "radicalism," I have still taitli 
 in humanity. I neither despair of my principles, nor of 
 the Republic. They will both, I trust, live long after the 
 desponding prophecies of disappointed demagogues and 
 the blows of ambitious traitors shall have been alik(! for- 
 gotten. 
 
 Slavery in the Loyal States. 
 
 The President and the Republican party leave slavery in 
 the loyal states where they found it. We have never 
 claimed any political power to abolish it there. We have 
 claimed and exercised the power to abolish it in the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia, in the Territories, and in all places of 
 exclusive national jurisdiction. This is glory enough for 
 any administration. The proposition to compensate the 
 slave-owners in the loyal States, who shall liberate their 
 bondsmen, is, on our part, magnanimous and patriotic. I 
 approve the j^olicy, and I urged the justice and expedi- 
 ency of its adoption upon the representatives of Kentucky, 
 in the hall of the House of Representatives in August last. 
 It is for them to adopt or reject the proposition. 
 
 But whether for or against the proclamation, and the 
 scheme of emancipation, the loyalty of my native State I 
 
have never doubted. A hereditary Slave State herself, she 
 has ever made slavery subordinate to the higher interests 
 secured by the Constitution and the Union. Whatever 
 opinion she may have of Republican policy — there she 
 stands, and there she will ever stand. Besides, were she 
 les:- loyal, she is not less wise, for she knows that the way 
 to save the slavery of the South is not to join the rebellion, 
 but to subdue it. That, w^itli peace, the military j)ower of 
 the President ceases, and the w^hole right over slavery sur- 
 vives in the States themselves. 
 
 Independent reasons why Slavery should be destroyed. 
 In reply to all these arguments, we are met with the 
 Democratic cant of " the Union as it was." There never 
 was, and never can be, any cordial union between liberty 
 and slavery. Liberty dej)ends upon equality of civil and 
 political rights : slavery is subversive of both. Liberty 
 fosters education, and religion, and virtue : slavery opposes 
 all. Liberty desires a fair distribution of lands, and other 
 property, among the whole population : slavery tends to a 
 monopoly of both. Liberty respects labor : slavery de- 
 spises it. Liberty encourages the arts, manufactures, and 
 commerce : slavery is incapable of them. Liberty makes 
 and obeys law : slavery defies it. Liberty advances civil- 
 ization : slavery returns to barbarism. Liberty appeals to 
 justice, and the nobler sentiments, for its safety : slavery 
 to force, and the animal instincts, and fears. Liberty is 
 our ideal of the Divine Beneficence : slavery the fullest 
 manifestation of the evil, which follows the ignoring of the 
 laws of God. *'The Union as it was" was not even a 
 truce between these conflicting powers: from the begin- 
 ning, l)(!fore the Constitution, and after it, there was a 
 secret war, in the home and foreign policy of the country; 
 ill the acquisition and contiol of territory : and in the lurni- 
 
'2^i 
 
 atioii of Stiitcs. It aicw into ;iii avowed st iii<_r<r|,. i;,|- 
 political ascciitlaiicy in tlic wliolr Tnion, Free and Slave 
 States. It culniinjited in war in Kansas; and liiially in 
 rebellion and disunion. " 'I'lie I'nion as ir, was" means 
 the subjection of millions of nominal freemen to a few 
 hundred thousand slave-holders. " The Union as it was" 
 means domination in the South ; subjection in the North. 
 " The Union as it was" means the overthrow of all Consti- 
 tutions, all law, and all liberty. " The Union as it was" 
 means corruption, robbery, incapacity of government, and 
 a dissolution of the bonds of society. " The Union as it 
 was" means treason and rebellion, as they were. If we 
 are true to ourselves, we will have no more of " the Union 
 as it was ;" but the Constitution as it is, and the union of 
 freedom and free men, as our fatlu'rs desiirned it. 
 
 Historic reasons against the Union as it was. 
 In having tried the experiment of the Union of Slave and 
 Free States, and having proved it a lailure, we are but 
 repeating well-known history. In the union, or rather 
 Confederation of the German States, some free and others 
 aristocratic, monarchical, and despotic, Germany has never 
 been able to secure consolidation or safety. Slie still strug- 
 gles in vain for " a more perfect union." Holland and Swit- 
 zerland, being homogeneous, have better succeeded. The 
 Vientes, choosing a king, broke up the Tuscan Federation. 
 The Canaanites, being petty monarciiies, were naturally 
 incapable of forming an useful union. It was the admission 
 of the Kings of ]\[acedon into the Amphyctionic Coimcil 
 which overthrew the Confederation, and extinguished the 
 liberties of Greece forever. 
 
 Peroration. 
 When, long years ago, knowing the nature of slavery, we 
 
(li'sirctl by pi'iiccaWIt' mcjiiisto check its power and to sub- 
 ject it to the civiliziiiu inlbiences of tlie age: Nortli and 
 South, we were told to lie (|uiot — time would cure all 
 rhinos — Providence would luovide a remedy. In peace^ 
 llie tinu> had not come : and now in war the time has not 
 come ! In vain we gave utterance to the "voiceless woe" 
 (»t' till' lour millions of men, women, and children in slavery; 
 and nnplored the eight millions of whites to let the 
 oppressed go I'ree, The prejudice of color bound the non- 
 slave-holding whites, alike with the black, to the masters' 
 chariot wheels. See them now, like dundj cattle, driven to 
 tiie slaughter; they are thrown in heaps into their last resting 
 places ; no stone marks their dishonored graves. See now 
 " the desolator desolate ! " Within the shattered hovel, 
 l)y the broken hearth-stone, the wan, expectant wife 
 gathers her ragged, starving children : alas ! the husband, 
 the lather, and the brother will return no more ! Yes, 
 Providence at last speaks ! By the wasted fields — the 
 blighted industries — the exhausted treasures — the desolated 
 hearth-stones — the tears of the widow and the orphan — 
 and the shedding of blood — Deity calls upon us to execute 
 justice. The madness of the pamcides has broken the 
 shield of the Constitution. Men of the North, having now 
 tlie legal equitable jtower over slavery, I warn you, too, 
 that God decrees liberty to all or to none! The hopes and 
 fears of a lile struggle are with me crowded into a day. I 
 would that you could feel as I do the urgency of the crisis, 
 which determines the destiny of so many millions now 
 living, and the vastly more millions yet to be l)orn. Then 
 would you be jiersiiaded, thai as much as the liberation of 
 the slaves is a " //v//- vikisiitc,'''' yet liir more is it a '■'■ 2)C(ice 
 inrii«urf\" If you would have pea(te, be just; for justice 
 IX the onlij ])( an . 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 lilllliiill 
 
 liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMi 
 
 012 028 976 7 
 
 L 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 012 028 976 7