t\\^ 
 
 ^Vl 
 
 ©xrlwraMa Wnivtvsitn 
 in titoe ©its of Hatr %ovU 
 
 GIVEN BY 
 
 5uj1 *L Rlulk-R 
 
T 
 
Great 
 American Legislators 
 
 SOURCE EXTRACTS 
 
 BY 
 
 HOWARD W. CALDWELL, A.M. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA 
 
 New York : 
 
 WILLIAM BEVERLEY HARISON 
 
 No. 5 West 18th Street. 
 
Great 
 American Legislators 
 
 SOURCE EXTRACTS 
 
 BY 
 
 HOWARD W. CALDWELL, A.M. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA. 
 
 Chicago, Illinois 
 
 j. n. MILLER, Publisher 
 
 1900 
 
COPYRIGHTED, 1900, 
 
 BY 
 
 J. H. MILLER. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. TAGB 
 
 Introduction v, 
 
 I. t Albert Gallatin 1 
 
 II. John Quincy Adams 27 
 
 III. Henry Clay 57 
 
 IV. Daniel Webster 75 
 
 V. John C. Calhoun 99 
 
 VI. Charles Sumner 123 
 
 VII. Stephen A. Douglas , 147 
 
 VIII. William H. Seward 171 
 
 IX. Salmon P, Chase 93 
 
 X. James G. Blaine 215 
 
 29860S 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 METHODS of teaching history are in proc- 
 ess of transformation. With the 
 change in method comes the demand 
 for new books; so if anyone asks the reason 
 for this little collection of sources on Ameri- 
 can history, the answer is believed to be found 
 in this change. The compiler is pleased to 
 know that these studies have been received 
 with favor by many progressive teachers. He 
 feels that the lack of proper and available ma- 
 terial is one reason that the " laboratory 
 method" has not found more ready acceptance 
 in the past by a larger number of teachers. 
 In the belief that this collection will in part 
 supply the demand, it is now sent forth to the 
 school-world in this more permanent form. 
 
 In many Normal schools and in some high 
 schools brief reviews are demanded and given. 
 In such cases it seems to the writer to be a 
 waste of time to hurry through some text 
 book, repeating the work that has been done 
 in the grades, in perchance even a less efficient 
 way. It is hoped and believed that the fol- 
 lowing ten ; ' studies ' ' help to solve the problem 
 of such reviews. A few suggestions are made 
 in regard to the method of handling this ma- 
 terial. A note-book should be in the hand of 
 every pupil. It is desirable to have this made 
 up of loose sheets of paper, perforated, so that 
 they may be bound together, or removed and 
 changed in place at the will of the pupil. A 
 cover should be made or purchased in which 
 to keep and preserve these sheets. 
 
Vi. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The next and most important matter is to 
 bring the students into contact with the origi- 
 nal material as often and as completely as possi- 
 ble. For this purpose, of course the f< sources" 
 must be accessible, and as far as possible in 
 the hands of every pupil. It should be noted 
 here again that it is not expected that the 
 larger part even of the facts of history can be 
 obtained from these sources, so a good narra- 
 tive text must be at hand, and in constant use. 
 The "sources" are to be used for the purpose 
 of illustrating how the narrative history was 
 formed; but more especially for the mental 
 training which may be obtained from their use. 
 The same document or illustrative extract 
 should be in the hands of every member of the 
 class that each may have the benefit of the 
 criticism of all. 
 
 With the material then in the hands of the 
 class, the first question will be to determine as 
 far as possible its value. To do this necessitates 
 that we find out whether the document is what it 
 purports to be; then to determine whether we 
 have a correct copy of it. Next we must find 
 out who wrote it, and under what circum- 
 stances. Finally, the character of the author 
 will come under discussion. Did he have the 
 opportunity to know ? Was he able, honest, ed- 
 ucated? Was he writing for partisan ends, or 
 did he attempt to tell the exact truth? These 
 are a few of the tests we must apply to our 
 material, if we are to know its real value. 
 Perhaps the most important question of all will 
 be, did the writer know of his own personal 
 knowledge, or did he gain his information 
 from hearsay? After we have determined the 
 
INTROD TJCTION Vll . 
 
 value of our "source," we next proceed to 
 analyze it, and to find out just what the writer 
 meant. Here we must notice the use and 
 meaning of words at the time the document 
 was written, and note any changes at the pres- 
 ent time, so that we may get just the idea in- 
 tended to be conveyed. A series of questions 
 will often greatly help in this analysis. The 
 ones given in the text are only intended to be 
 suggestive, and so may be supplemented by 
 others, or limited by omissions. 
 
 The next step will be to classify and arrange 
 our knowledge. In the writer's opinion this 
 is the hardest, as well as the most important, 
 part of the work. A logical arrangement 
 must be insisted on. A careful outline must 
 be prepared, containing a page reference to 
 every point in the notes. It is only by this 
 careful preparation that accuracy in thinking 
 or in writing can ever be secured. When this 
 work is completed, then the last step in the 
 plan can be taken with great ease and facility, 
 for then the whole mind and strength can be 
 concentrated on the composition. The mem- 
 ory under such circumstances is not burdened 
 with carrying all the details. They are indi- 
 cated in the outline and in the notes to which 
 it refers. It goes without saying that every 
 piece of student work when completed should 
 be tested by comparing it with the best narra- 
 tive texts, or Avith the teacher's knowledge. _ 
 
 One final idea should be suggested. Each 
 of these studies covers many years of time. 
 The evolution of the topic has been kept 
 in mind in making the extracts. In work- 
 ing up the material then into papers and 
 
Vlll. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 reports, the teacher should see that the pupil 
 has noted and understood the changes and the 
 reasons therefor. For example, if the topic 
 be the "Economic History" of the United 
 States, great pains should be taken to call the 
 attention to the changes in belief in regard to 
 the tariff, or internal improvements. Let 
 every effort be bent to discovering the causes 
 of these changes. If Webster cease to be a 
 free trader, the reason for the change should 
 be found if possible. If the South oppose in- 
 ternal improvements, let the cause be un- 
 earthed. 
 
 These studies, then, are committed to my 
 fellow teachers. in the hope that they may aid 
 them a little in solving the difficult problem 
 of how to get our children to understand their 
 own history, and to get such an understand- 
 ing in such a way as to make them men- 
 tally and morally stronger, that they may be 
 better prepared to meet the exceedingly diffi- 
 cult questions which will confront the coming 
 generation. The writer has no extravagant 
 ideas or expectations in regard to the trans- 
 forming power of these studies. He simply 
 hopes and believes that they will be found to 
 be an aid. 
 
 H. W. C. 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN 
 
 Born in Switzerland, 1761. Came to America, 
 1781. Member of Pennsylvania legislature. 
 Senator of United States, 1794— rejected. 
 Member of House of Representatives, 1794-1801. 
 Secretary of treasury, 1801-1813. Peace com- 
 missioner, 1813-1814. Ambassador to France, 
 1815-1823. Ambassador to court of St. James, 
 1826-1829. Nominated for Vice-President, 1824— 
 withdrew. Banker last years of life in New 
 York. Died, 1849. 
 
CHAPTER I 
 ALBERT GALLATIN 
 
 THIS year we are to have a series of char- 
 acter studies for our source work. 
 The aim will be to let, as far as pos- 
 sible, each man "give an account of him- 
 self." Since the aim is to study men, rather 
 than the history of their times, the extracts 
 chosen will be primarily for that purpose, but 
 incidentally it is hoped and expected that much 
 light will be thrown on the times. In a suc- 
 ceeding number something will be said in re- 
 gard to method again, but no great amount of 
 space will be taken up with that work. Trust- 
 ing that some of America's great statesmen 
 will mean more from these studies to the youth 
 of many a school, the series is launched with 
 Albert Gallatin, scholar, statesman, orator, 
 diplomat, and scientist. 
 
 Gallatin's connection with American history 
 may be said to begin with this letter: 
 
 Passy, May 24, 1780. 
 Dear Son— Messrs. Gallatin and Serres, two young 
 gentlemen of Geneva, of good families and very good 
 characters, having an inclination to see America, if 
 they should arrive in your city I recommend them to 
 your civilities, counsel, and countenance. 
 I am ever your affectionate father, 
 
 B. Franklin. 
 To Richard Bache, Postmaster General, Philadelphia. 
 — Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 2f 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. O 
 
 An extract from the action of the President 
 and Fellows of Harvard College, July 2, 1782, 
 will indicate how Gallatin made his living for a 
 time: 
 
 Vote 5. That Mr. Gallatin * * * be per- 
 mitted to instruct in the French language such of the 
 students as desire it, and who shall obtain permission 
 from their parents or guardians in writing, signified 
 under their hands to the President; which students 
 shall be assessed in their quarter-bills the sums agreed 
 for with Mr. Gallatin for their instruction; and that 
 Mr. Gallatin be allowed the use of the library, a cham- 
 ber in the college, and commons at the rate paid by the 
 tutors, if he desire. Joseph Willard, President. 
 —Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 1*2. 
 
 In 1783 when he left Harvard he carried with 
 him the good-will of all, as the following testi- 
 monials will show. The President *• * * 
 said: 
 
 [Mr. Gallatin had] acquitted himself in this de- 
 partment with great reputation. He appears to be 
 well acquainted with letters, and has maintained an 
 unblemished character in the university and in this 
 part of the country. — Ibid, 43. 
 
 Three years later we find Gallatin in close 
 touch with P. Henry, and Virginia, In a 
 letter of recommendation and introduction 
 Henry says: 
 
 * * * I feel it my duty in a peculiar manner 
 to give every possible facility to this gentleman, be- 
 cause his personal character, as well as his present 
 designs, entitle him to the most cordial regards. 
 
 P. Henry, 1785, 
 
 -Ibid., 60. 
 
 Albert Gallatin was married to Sophia 
 Allegre in a runaway match, May 14, 1789. 
 In his account book appears the following entries: 
 
4 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Ruban de queue, 1-6, Veste blanche, 9, Tailleur, £2, 
 16s. Souliers de satin, gants, bague £1, 11.6, License 
 minister, .£4,4. * * * 
 
 The following letter throws some light on 
 one episode in Gallatin's history: 
 
 New Kent, May 16, 1789. 
 
 My Dear Mama— Shall I venture to write you a few 
 lines in apology for my late conduct? And dare I 
 natter myself that you will attend to them? If so, and 
 you can feel a motherly tenderness for your child who 
 never before wilfully offended you, forgive, dear 
 mother, and generously accept again your poor Sophia, 
 who feels for the uneasiness she is sure she has oc- 
 casioned you. She deceived you, but it was for her 
 own happiness. Could you then form a wish to destroy 
 the future peace of your child and prevent her being 
 united to the man of her choice? He is perhaps not a 
 very handsome man, but be is possessed of more essen- 
 tial qualities, which I shall not pretend to enumerate, 
 as, coming from me, they might be supposed partial. 
 If, mama, your heart is inclined to forgive, or, if it is 
 not, let me beg you to write to me, as my only anxiety 
 is to know whether I have lost your affection or not. 
 Forgive me, dear mama, as it is all that is wanted to 
 complete the happiness of her who wishes for your 
 happiness and desires to be considered again your 
 dutiful daughter. SOPHIA, 
 
 —Ibid., 72. 
 
 She died the following October. 
 
 The position of Gallatin during the first days 
 after the constitution was submitted to the peo- 
 ple may be gathered from the following resolu- 
 tions, adopted at a second convention, held at 
 Harrisburg, 1788. 
 
 1st. Resolved that in order to prevent a dissolution 
 of the Union, and to secure our liberties and those of 
 our posterity, it is necessary that a revision of the 
 Federal Constitution be obtained in the most speedy 
 manner. 
 
 2d. That the safest manner to obtain such a revi- 
 sion will be. * * * , to have a convention 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 5 
 
 [ a second national convention ] called as soon as pos- 
 sible; * *. 
 
 3d. That in order that the friends to amendments 
 of the Federal Constitution * * may act in 
 concert, * * it is hereby recommended to the 
 several counties in the state to appoint committees, 
 who may correspond one with another and with such 
 similar committees as may be formed in other states. 
 
 4th. [ A call for a general convention. ] 
 
 A less radical set of resolutions were adopted; and, 
 as both are in Gallatin's handwriting, we cannot de- 
 termine whether he changed his views, or was over- 
 ruled at the conference. The final result was to recom- 
 mend twelve amendments, similar to those already 
 suggested by Massachusetts and New York, to the 
 constitution. — I bid. , 78. 
 
 Gallatin has left us an account of his influ- 
 ence in the Pennsylvania legislature and the 
 reasons therefor: 
 
 I acquired an extraordinary influence in that body, 
 the more remarkable as I was always in a party minor- 
 ity. I was indebted for it to my great industry and to 
 the facility with which I could understand and carry 
 on the current business. The laboring oar was left al- 
 most exclusively to me. In the session of 1791-92, I 
 was put on thirty-five committees, prepared all their 
 reports, and drew all their bills. * * * 
 
 I failed, though the bill I had introduced passed the 
 House, in my efforts to lay the foundation for a better 
 system of education. Primary education was almost 
 universal in Pennsylvania, but very bad, and the bulk 
 of the schoolmasters incompetent, miserably paid, and 
 held in no consideration. It appeared to me that 
 * * N intermediate academic education was an 
 indispensable preliminary step; and the object of the 
 bill was to establish in each county an academy, allow- 
 ing to each out of the treasury a sum equal to that 
 raised by taxation in the county for its support. But 
 there was at that time in Pennsylvania a Quaker an'? a 
 German opposition to every plan of general education. 
 The spirit of internal improvements had not yet been 
 awakened. Still, the first turnpike road in the United 
 
6 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 States was that from Philadelphia to Lancaster. * 
 This, as well as every temporary improve- 
 ment in our communications (roads and rivers and 
 preliminary surveys, met, of course, with my warm 
 support But it was in the fiscal department that I 
 was particularly employed. * * * 
 
 The report of the Committee of Ways and Means * 
 * * was entirely prepared by me. * * * 
 I was quite astonished at the general encomiums be- 
 stowed upon it, and was not at all aware that I had 
 done so well. It was perspicuous and comprehensive; 
 but I am confident that its true merit, and that which 
 gained me the general confidence, was its being founded 
 in strict justice, without the slightest regard to party 
 feelings or popular prejudices. * * * 
 
 It was my constant assiduity to business and the as- 
 sistance derived from it by many members which en- 
 abled the Republican party in the legislature, then a 
 minority on joint ballot, to elect me, and no other but 
 me of that party, senator of the United States. — Ibid., 
 p. 85-86. 
 
 In 1793 Gallatin prepared the following 
 report: 
 
 That they [the committee] are of opinion that slav- 
 ery is inconsistent with every principle of humanity, 
 justice, and right, and repugnant to the spirit and ex- 
 press letter of the constitution of this commonwealth. 
 * * * [A bill to abolish introduced.]— Ibid., 86 
 
 In 1792 Gallatin formulated the reasons for 
 the opposition of the western counties of Penn- 
 sylvania to the excise tax in these words : 
 
 Our peculiar situation renders this duty still more 
 unequal and oppressive to us. Distant from a perma- 
 nent market and separated from the eastern coast by 
 mountains * * * , we have no means of 
 bringing the produce of our lands to sale, either in grain 
 or in meal. We are therefore distillers through neces- 
 sity, not choice, that we may comprehend the greatest 
 value in the smallest size and weight. The inhabitants 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 7 
 
 of the eastern side of the mountains can dispose of their 
 grain without the additional labor of distillation at a 
 higher price than we can after we have bestowed that 
 labor upon it. Yet, with this additional labor, we must 
 also pay a high duty, from which they are exempted, 
 because we have no means of selling our surplus prod- 
 uce but in a distilled state. 
 
 Another circumstance which renders this duty ruin- 
 ous to us is our scarcity of cash. Our commerce is 
 not, as on the eastern coast, carried on so much by ab- 
 solute sale as by barter, and we believe it to be a fact 
 that there is not among us a quantity of circulating 
 cash sufficient for the payment of this duty alone. We 
 are not accustomed to complain without reason, * 
 * * .—Ibid., p. SS. 
 
 In a letter to a friend written in 1792, he 
 
 says : 
 
 * * * . We have a plan before us, which I 
 brought forward, to establish a school and library in 
 each county, each county to receive £1,000 for buildings 
 and beginning a library, and from £75 to £150 a year, 
 according to its size, to pay at least in part a teacher 
 of the English language and one- of the elements of 
 of mathematics, geography, and history, * * 
 
 * , it is meant as a preparatory step to township 
 schools, * * * .—Ibid., p. 90. 
 
 In a petition drafted by Gallatin to the leg- 
 islature of Pennsylvania, from the western 
 counties of Pennsylvania, we find the following 
 language : 
 
 That your petitioners have been greatly alarmed by 
 a law of Congress which imposes a duty on spirituous 
 liquors distilled from produce of the United States. 
 To us that act appears unequal in its operation and 
 immoral in its effects. Unequal in its operation, as a 
 duty laid on the common drink of a nation, instead of 
 taxing the citizens in proportion to their property, 
 falls as heavy on the poorest class as on the rich; im- 
 moral in its effect, because the amount of the duty, 
 chiefly resting on the oath of the payer, offers, at the 
 expense of the honest part of the community, a pres- 
 
8 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 sure to perjury and fraud. Your petitioners also con- 
 sider this law as dangerous to liberty; * * * 
 — Writings Gallatin, Vol. L, pp. S-k. 
 
 Extracts from a letter to Miss Nicholson a few 
 months before their marriage, August 25, 1793: 
 
 * * * Well, my charming patriot, why do you 
 write to me about politics? * * * I believe that, 
 Except a very few intemperate, unthinking, or wicked 
 onen, no American wishes to see his country involved 
 In war. As to myself, I think every war except a de- 
 fensive one to be unjustifiable. As to the present cause 
 of France, although I think they have been guilty of 
 many excesses, * * * and that in their present 
 temper they are not likely to have a very good govern- 
 ment wifehin any short time, yet I firmly believe their 
 cause to be that of mankind against tyrants, and, at 
 all events, that no foreign nation has a right to dictate 
 a government to them. So far, I think, we are inter- 
 ested in their success, and as to our political situation 
 they are certainly the only real allies we have yet had. 
 * * * Upon the whole, I think that unless France 
 or England attach us we shall have no war. * * * 
 Please to remember that my politics are only for you. 
 Except in my public character I do not like to speak on 
 the subject, although I believe you will agree with me 
 that I have no reason to be ashamed of my sentiments; 
 but moderation is not fashionable just now. 
 
 Again, December 15, 1793, just after their 
 marriage, he writes : 
 
 I am happy to see that you are a tolerable democrat, 
 and, at the same time, a moderate one. I trust that 
 our parties at this critical juncture will, as far as pos- 
 sible, forget old animosities, and show, at least to the 
 foreign powers who hate us, that we will be unanimous 
 whenever the protection and defense of our country 
 require it. —Adams' Life of Gallatin, pp. 103-104, 112. 
 
 The following anecdote illustrates very well 
 the way much history is written, as well as 
 gives us a good insight into the character of 
 Gallatin for straightforward honesty. Brack- 
 enridge, in his "Incidents of the Whiskey .Re- 
 bellion," relates the incident as follows: 
 
Albert gallatiN. 9 
 
 Mr. Gallatin supported the necessity of the resolu- 
 tion with a view to the establishment of the laws, and 
 the conservation of the peace, though he d d not ven- 
 ture to touch on the resistance to the marshal, or the 
 expulsion of the proscribed, yet he strongly arraigned 
 the destruction of property; the burning of the barn of 
 Kirkpatrick, for instance. " What? ", said a fiery rellow 
 in the committee, "do you blame that?" The secretary, 
 [Gallatin] found himself embarrased ; he paused for a 
 moment. "If you had burned him in it" said he "it 
 night have been something; but the barn had done no 
 harm." "Ay, Ay," said the man, "that is right 
 enough." I admired the presence of mind of Gallatin, 
 and give the incident as a proof of the delicacy neces- 
 sary to manage the people on that occasion. 
 
 Mr. Gallatin has written on the margin of 
 the volume containing this account these words: 
 
 Totally false. It is what B. would have said in my 
 place. The fellow said: " It was well done." I replied 
 instantly: "No; it was not well done, "and I continued 
 to deprecate in the most forcible terms every act of 
 violence. For I had quoted the burning of this house 
 as one of the worst.— Adams Life of Gallatin, p. 133. 
 
 April 22, 1795, Gallatin writes to his wife 
 rom New York, in part, as follows: 
 The more I see of this state the better I like Pennsyl- 
 vania. It may be prejudice, or habit, or whatever you 
 please, but there are soma things in the Western coun- 
 try which contribute to my happiness, and which I do 
 not find here. Among other things which displease me 
 here I may mention, in the first place, family influence. 
 In Pennsylvania * * * from the suburbs 
 of Philadelphia to the banks of the Ohio, I do not know 
 a single family that has any extensive influence. An 
 equal distribution of property has rendered every in- 
 dividual independent, and there is amongst us true and 
 real equality. * * * I n a word * * * 
 as I am poor, I like a countrv where no person is very 
 rich. * * *.-Ibid. }I ). 146-47. 
 
 The following may not throw much light on 
 Gallatin, but it gives us his opinion of the con- 
 
10 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ditions of 1795. He is commenting on tho 
 Whiskey Rebellion trials: 
 
 * * * Brackinridge says he would always 
 choose a jury of Quakers, or at least Episcopalians, in 
 all common cases, such as murder, etc., but in every 
 possible case of insurrection, rebellion, and treason, 
 give him Presbyterians on the jury by all means. I 
 believe there is at least as much truth as wit in the 
 saying. * * *.-Ibid, p. 150. 
 
 Mr. Gallatin has made an estimate of his own 
 services in Congress from which a few extracts 
 may be made that will throw much light on the 
 man and his works. He says: 
 
 The first great debate in which we were engaged was 
 that on the British treaty; and my speech, or rather 
 two speeches, on the constitutional powers of the 
 House, * * * were, whether I was right or 
 wrong, universally considered as the best on either 
 side. I think that of Mr. Madison superior and more 
 comprehensive, but for this very reason ( comprehen- 
 siveness ) less impressive than mine. Griswold's reply 
 was thought the best; in my opinion it was that of 
 Goodrich, * * * , both, however, were second- 
 rate. The most brilliant and eloquent speech was un- 
 doubtedly that of Mr. Ames ; * * *. 
 
 It is certainly a subject of self-gratulation that I 
 should have been allowed to take the lead [ in Congress ] 
 with such co-adjutors as Madison, Giles, Livingston, 
 and Nicholas, * * * and that I was able to 
 contend on equal terms with the host of talents col- 
 lected in the Federal party— Griswold, Bayard, 
 Harper, Goodrich, Otis, Smith, Sitgreans, Dana, and 
 even J. Marshall. Yet I was destitute of eloquence, 
 and had to surmount the great obstacle of speaking in 
 a foreign language, with a very bad pronunciation. 
 My advantages consisted in laborious investigation, 
 habits of analysis, thorough knowledge of the subject 
 under discussion, and more extensive general informa- 
 tion, due to an excellent early education, to which I 
 think I may add quickness of apprehension and a sound 
 judgment. 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 11 
 
 The principal questions in which I was engaged re 
 lated to constitutional construction or to the finances. 
 * * * The Financial department in the House 
 was quite vacant, so far, at least, as the opposition [ the 
 Republicans] was concerned; and having made my- 
 self complete master of the subject, and occupied that 
 field almost exclusively, it is not astonishing that my 
 views should have been adopted by the Republican 
 party and been acted upon when they came into 
 power.— Adams' Life of Gallatin, pp. 155-157. 
 
 January 24, 1797, Gallatin writes to his wife 
 concerning a dinner with President Washington 
 in the following words: 
 
 He [Washington] looked, I thought, more than usu- 
 ally grave, cool, and reserved. Mrs. W. inquired about 
 you, so that you may suppose yourself still in the good 
 graces of our most gracious queen, who, by the by, con- 
 tinues to be a very good-natured and amiable woman. 
 Not so her husband, in your husband's humble opinion; 
 but that between you and me, for I hate treason, and 
 you know that it would be less sacrilegious to carry 
 arms against our nation than to refuse singing to the 
 
 tune of the best and greatest of men * * * 
 
 Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 182. 
 
 A few days later he writes again concerning 
 the political conditions of the times in this rather 
 gloomy way: 
 
 * * * Your husband was not formed for the 
 bustles of a political life in a stormy season. Conscious 
 of the purity of my motives, and (shall I add when I 
 write to my bosom friend) conscious of my own strength, 
 I may resist the tempest with becoming firmness, but 
 happiness dwells not there. * * * I feel 
 disgusted at the mean artifices which have so long been 
 successfully employed in order to pervert public opin- 
 ion, and I anticipate with gloomy apprehension the 
 fatal consequences to our independence as a nation and 
 to our internal union which must follow the folly or 
 wickedness of those who have directed our public 
 measures. —Ibid., p. 182 3. 
 
 Again he writes: 
 
12 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Yonr papa has not yet answered my last political 
 letter. I am afraid he thinks me too moderate and be- 
 lieves I am going to trim. But moderation and firm- 
 ness have ever been and ever will be my motto. — Ibid., 
 
 p. m. 
 
 February 23, 1798, Gallatin writes to his wife 
 concerning the Washington birthday ball in 
 
 this way: 
 
 -' Do you want to know the fashion able 
 news of the day? The President of the United States 
 has written in answer to the managers of the ball in 
 honor of G. Washington's birthday, that he took the 
 earliest opportunity of informing them that he declined 
 going. The court is in a prodigious uproar about that 
 important event. The ministers and their wives do not 
 know how to act upon the occasion; the friends of the 
 old court say it is dreadful, a monstrous insult to the 
 late president; * * * A most powerful bat- 
 tery was opened against me to induce me to go to the 
 said ball; it would be remarked; it would look well; 
 it would show that we democrats, and I specially, felt 
 no reluctance in showing my respect to the person of 
 Mr. Washington, but that our objections to levees and 
 to birthday balls applied only to its being a Presiden- 
 tial, anti-republican establishment, and that we were 
 only afraid of its being made a precedent; and then it 
 would mortify Mr. Adams and please Mr. Washington. 
 All those arguments will appear very weak to you when 
 on paper, but they were urged by a fine lady, by Mrs. 
 Law, and when supported by her handsome black eyes 
 they appeared very formidable. * * *. — Ibid. t 
 194. 
 
 He wrote to Maria Nicholson on July 10, 
 1798, concerning the press, in terms that may 
 well be considered by us: 
 
 * * * I see the persecutions of the printers 
 are going on. I do not admire much the manner in 
 which the new editor of the Time-Piece conducts his 
 paper. Cool discussion and fair statements of facts 
 are the only proper modes of conveying truth and dis- 
 seminating sound principles. Let squibs and virulent 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 13 
 
 paragraphs be the exclusive privilege of Fenno, Porcu- 
 pine & Co., and let the papers which really are in- 
 tended to support republicanism unite candor and 
 moderation to unconquerable firmness. Pieces may be 
 written in an animated style without offending de- 
 cency. * " : *— Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 196. 
 
 In 1700 he again gives us an insight into his 
 own conception of himself. He writes to his 
 
 wife: 
 
 * * * I begin to think that one of the 
 causes of my opposition to a great extension of execu- 
 tive power is that constitutional indolence which, not- 
 withstanding some share of activity of mind, makes 
 me more fit to think than to act. I believe I am well 
 calculated to judge and to determine what course 
 ought to be followed either in private or public busi- 
 ness. But I must have executive officers who will 
 consult me and act for me. * *— Adams' 
 
 Life of Gallatin, n. 226. 
 
 In 1800, in commenting on the sinking fund 
 plan of paying national debts, Gallatin showed 
 that he at that time recognized its fallacy, al- 
 though it was not till many years later that his 
 view was admitted lobe correct, nesajs m 
 part: 
 
 * * * I know but one way that a nation has 
 of paying her debts, and that is precisely the same 
 which individuals practice. Spend less than you re- 
 ceive, and you may then apply the surplus of your re- 
 ceipts to the discharge of your debts. But if you 
 spend more than you receive, you may have recourse 
 to sinking funds, you may modify them as you please. 
 You may render your accounts extremely complex, you 
 may give a scientific appearance to additions and sub- 
 tractions, you must still necessarily increase your debt. 
 If you spend more than you receive, the difference 
 must be supplied by loans; and if out of these receipts 
 you have set a sum apart to pay your debts, 
 * you must borrow so much in order to meet your 
 expenditures. If your revenue is nine millions of dol- 
 lars, and your expenditures fourteen, you must borrow. 
 
14 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 you must create a new debt of five millions. But if 
 two millions of that revenue are, under the name of a 
 sinking fund, applicable to the payment of the prin- 
 cipal of an old debt, and pledged for it, then the por- 
 tion of your revenue applicable to discharging your 
 current expenditures of fourteen millions is reduced to 
 seven millions; and instead of borrowing five millions 
 you must borrow seven; you create a new debt of 
 3even millions, and you pay an old debt of two. It is 
 still the same increase of five millions of debts * 
 * *— Annals of Congress. 
 
 Gallatin's ideas in regard to the work of the 
 new administration, Jefferson's, may be gath- 
 ered from a letter of November 16, 1801. He 
 says: 
 
 If we cannot * * * pay the debt at the 
 rate proposed and support the establishments on the 
 proposed plans, one of three things must be done: 
 either to continue the internal taxes, or to reduce the 
 expenditure still more, or to discharge the debt with 
 less rapidity. The last recourse is to me the most ob- 
 jectionable, not only because I am firmly of the opinion 
 that if the present administration and Congress do not 
 take the most effective measures for that object, the 
 deb>b will be entailed on us and the ensuing genera- 
 tions, together with all the systems which support it 
 and which it supports, * * *. 
 
 On the other hand, if this administration shall not 
 reduce taxes, they never will be permanently reduced. 
 To strike at the root of the evil, and avert the danger 
 of increasing taxes, encroaching government, temp- 
 tations to offensive wars, etc., nothing can be more 
 effectual than a repeal of all internal taxes; * * 
 * *. I agree most fully with you that pretended 
 tax-preparations, treasurer-preparations, and army- 
 preparations against contingent wars tend only to en- 
 courage wars. If the United States shall unavoidably 
 be drawn into war, the people will submit to any 
 necessary tax, * * *. — Adams' Life of Gallatin, 
 pp. £70-71. 
 
 In regard to the policy he would have pur- 
 sued in regard to appointment to and removal 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 15 
 
 from office, the following extract will give a 
 general idea: 
 
 [There is] but one sentiment I wish to communicate; 
 it is that the door of the office be no longer shut 
 against any man merely on account of his political 
 opinion, but that whether he shall differ or not from 
 those avowed by you or by myself, integrity and capac- 
 ity suitable to the station be the only qualifications 
 that shall direct our choice. 
 
 Permit me, since I have touched this topic, to add 
 that whilst freedom of opinion and freedom of suffrage 
 at public elections are considered by the president as 
 unprescriptible rights which, possessing as citizens, 
 you cannot have lost by becoming public officers, he 
 will regard any exercise of official influence to restrain 
 or control the same right in others as injurious to that 
 part of the public administration which is confided to 
 your care, and practically destructive of the fundamen- 
 tal principles of a republican constitution. — Ibid., pp. 
 278-79. 
 
 Gallatin from Washington to his wife, 1802: 
 
 * * * Indeed, dinners of a political cast 
 cannot, in the present state of parties, be very cheerful 
 unless confined to one party. * * * I had 
 another cause which damped my spirits. We were in 
 an enclosure, * * * and some marines were 
 placed as sentries to prevent intrusion; * * • 
 The very sight of a bayonet to preserve order amongst 
 citizens rouses my indignation, and you may judge of 
 my feelings when I tell you that one of the sentries ac- 
 tually stabbed a mechanic who abused him because he 
 had been ordered away. The bayonet went six inches 
 in his body and close to his heart. He is not dead, but 
 still in great danger, and the marine in jail. 3 Such are 
 th* effects Of what is called discipline in times of 
 peace. The distribution of one little army to distant 
 garrisons where hardly any other inhabitant is to be 
 found is the most eligible arrangement of that perhaps 
 necessary evil that can be contrived. But I never 
 want to see the face of one in our cities and intermixed 
 with the people. 
 
16 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Nothing but the hope of seeing you soon has kept in 
 any degree my spirits from sinking; whether in the 
 plains or over the hills, whether in city or in retreat, I 
 cannot live without you. It is trifling with that share 
 of happiness which Providence permits us to enjoy to 
 be forever again and again parted. I am now good for 
 nothing but for you, and good for nothing without you. 
 You will say that anyhow I am not good for much; 
 that may be, but such as I am, you are mine, and you 
 are my comfort, my joy, and the darling of my soul. 
 Now do not go and show this to Maria [Mrs. Gallatin's 
 sister] ; not that I am ashamed of it, for I glory in my 
 love for you; but she will think my expressing myself 
 that way very foolish, and I am afraid of her. — Life, 
 pp. 304-5. 
 
 A letter of Gallatin's to Jefferson, written in 
 1803, will indicate his ideas in regard to the 
 powers of the national government: 
 
 To me it would appear, 1st, That the United States 
 as a nation have an inherent right to acquire territory. 
 
 2d. That whenever that acquisition is by treaty, the 
 same constituted authorities in whom the treaty mak- 
 ing power is vested have a constitutional right to 
 sanction the acquisition. 
 
 3d. That whenever the territory has been acquired, 
 Congress have the power either of admitting into the 
 Union as a state, or of annexing to a state with the 
 consent of that state, or of making regulations for the 
 government of such territory. — Adams' Life of Galla- 
 tin, p. 320. 
 
 That Gallatin was not unaffected by the at- 
 tack on the "Chesapeake," and the course of 
 France and England toward the United States 
 stands forth plainly in the following extracts: 
 
 The attack of the British on the Chesapeake and their 
 subsequent conduct near Norfolk has much irritated 
 every one here, and all are anxious to learn what the 
 president intends to do. * * * If war must 
 be we ought to prosecute it with the same zeal that 
 we have endeavored to preserve peace, and by great 
 exertions convince the enemy that it is not from fear 
 
ALBEKT GALLATIN. 17 
 
 or cowardice that we dread it. But peace, if we can 
 have it. is always best for us, and if the Executive 
 can get justice done and preserve it, that executive will 
 deserve the thanks of every democrat in the Union. — 
 
 Life, p. 360. 
 
 July 17, 1807, he writes to his brother-in-law, 
 J. H. Nicholson, concerning the same subject: 
 
 * * * . With you I believe that war is in- 
 evitable, and there can be but one opinion on the 
 question whether the claims of the parties prior to the 
 attack on the Chesapeake should be a subject of discus- 
 sion. * * * 
 
 I feel no apprehension of the immediate result. We 
 w T ill be poorer, both as a nation and as a government; 
 our debt and taxes will increase, and our progress in 
 every respect be interrupted. But all those evils are not 
 only not to be put into competition with the indepen- 
 dence and honor of the nation. They are, moreover, tem- 
 porary, and very few years of peace will obliterate their 
 effects. Nor do I know whether the awakening of 
 nobler feelings and habits than avarice and luxury might 
 not be necessary to prevent our degenerating, like the 
 Hollanders, into a nation of mere calculators. In fact, the 
 greatest mischiefs which I apprehend from the war are 
 the necessary increase of the executive pow r er and influ" 
 ence, the speculation of contractors and jobbers, and the 
 introduction of permanent military and naval establish- 
 ments * * * . — Adams' Life of Gallatin, 
 pp. 361-62. 
 
 The spirit of the English Orders in Council 
 which finally, together with the Decrees of 
 Napoleon, led to the Embargo policy of 
 Jefferson, may be seen in this letter of Spencer 
 Perceval, a member of the English govern- 
 ment He says: 
 
 The short principle is that trade in British produce and 
 manufactures, and trade either from a British port or 
 with a British destination, is to be protected as much as 
 possible. For this purpose all the countries where 
 French influence prevails to exclude the British flag 
 
18 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 shall have no trade but to or from this country or from 
 its allies. All other countries, the few that remain 
 strictly neutral ( * * * ) cannot trade but 
 through this being done as an ally with any of the 
 countries connected with France. If, therefore, we 
 can accomplish our purpose, it will come to this, that 
 either those countries will have no trade, or they must 
 be content to accept it through us, * * *. 
 
 Jefferson was in favor of having no trade, 
 rather than accept it on such conditions, hence 
 he recommended the Embargo. How Gallatin 
 thought on the subject we may see from the 
 following extracts: 
 
 In every point of view, privations, sufferings, 
 revenue, effect on the enemy, politics at home, etc., I 
 prefer war to a permanent embargo. Governmental 
 prohibitions do always more mischief than had been 
 calculated; and it is not without much hesitation that 
 a statesman should hazard to regulate the concerns of 
 individuals as if he could do it better than themselves. 
 —Ibid,, p. 366. 
 
 A few months later, July 29, 1808, after the 
 Embargo policy had been in force for some 
 time, Gallatin again wrote in these terms: 
 
 I am perfectly satisfied that if the embargo must be 
 persisted in any longer, two principles must necessarily 
 be adopted in order to make it sufficient; 1st, That 
 not a single ^«ssel shall be permitted to move without 
 the special permission of the Executive; 2d, That the 
 collectors be invested with the general power of seizing 
 property anywhere * * *. I am sensible 
 that such arbitrary powers are equally dangerous and 
 odious, * * *. 
 
 That in the present situation of the world every 
 effort should be attempted to preserve the peace of 
 this nation cannot be doubted. But if the criminal 
 party rage of Federalists and Tories shall have so far 
 succeeded as to defeat our endeavors to attain that 
 object by the only measure [ Embargo J that could pos- 
 sibly have affected it, we must submit and prepare for 
 war. * * *.—JUd, pp. 370-71. 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 19 
 
 A letter of November 8, 1809, to Jefferson, 
 gives us an insight into the aims of Gallatin as 
 Secretary of the Treasury. In part he says : 
 
 * * * rpk e reduction of the public debt was 
 certainly the principal object in bringing me into office, 
 and our success in that respect has been due both to 
 the joint and continuous efforts of the several branches 
 of government and to the prosperous situation of the 
 country. * * * — Adams' Life, p. 409. 
 
 Gallatin writes to Jefferson, March 10, 1812, 
 in regard to the war conditions, in a few brief 
 sentences as follows: 
 
 * * * You have seen from your retreat that 
 our hopes and endeavors to preserve peace during the 
 present European contest have at last been frustrated. 
 I am satisfied that domestic faction has prevented 
 that happy result. But I hope, nevertheless, that our 
 internal enemies and the ambitious intriguers who 
 still attempt to disunite will ultimately be equally dis- 
 appointed. I rely with great confidence on the good 
 sense of the mass of the people to support their own 
 government in an unavoidable war, and to check the 
 disordinate ambition of individuals. * * * 
 With respect to the war, it is my wish * * * 
 that the evils * * * be limited to its dura- 
 tion, and that at its end the United States may be 
 burthened with the smallest possible quantity of debt, 
 perpetual taxation, military establishments, and other 
 corrupting or anti-republican habits or institution. 
 — Adams' Life, pp. 455-456. 
 
 May 5, 1813, he writes to J. W. Nicholson 
 concerning the war and the need of peace. He 
 says: 
 
 * * * Peace, at all times desirable, is much 
 more so for two reasons: 1, The great incapacity for 
 conducting the wax * * * 2, The want of 
 union, or, rather, open hostility to the war and to the 
 Union, which, however disgraceful to the parties con- 
 cerned, and to the national character, is not less formid- 
 able. * * * Finally, provided we can ob- 
 
20 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 tain security with respect to impressments, peace will 
 give ns everything we want. Taught by experience 
 we will apply a part of our resources to such naval 
 preparations and organization of the public forces as 
 will within less than five years place us in a command- 
 ing situation. * * * To keep down the 
 Tory faction at home and ultimately to secure in an 
 effectual manner our national rights against England, 
 peace is equally necessary. * * * —Ibid, 
 pp. 4S2-S3. 
 
 June 20, Gallatin had an interview with the 
 Emperor Alexander in London. Of it he 
 writes: 
 
 His friendly dispositions toward the United States 
 are unimpaired. He earnestly wishes that peace may be 
 made between them and England; but he does not give 
 or seem to entertain any hope that he can on that sub- 
 ject be of any service. * * * England will 
 not admit a third party to interfere in her disputes with 
 you * * *.— Ibid., 5U. 
 
 June 13, he wrote of the conditions: 
 Whatever may be the object and duration of the war, 
 America must rely on her resources alone. From Eu- 
 rope no assistance can for some time be expected. * 
 * * Above all, there is nowhere any navy in ex- 
 istence, and years of peace must elapse before the 
 means of resisting with effect the sea-power of Great 
 Britain can be created, * * * and the most 
 favorable times of peace that can be expected are the 
 status ante-bellum, and a postponement of the ques- 
 tions of blockades, impressments, and all other points 
 which in time of European peace are not particularly 
 injurious; * * *. — Writings I, p. 628. 
 
 His view of the effects of the war may be 
 gathered from a letter to Matthew Lyon, of 
 May 7, 1816 : 
 
 * * * The war has been productive of evil 
 and good, but I think the good preponderates. Inde- 
 pendent of the loss of lives and of the losses in prop- 
 erty by individuals, the war has laid the foundation of 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 21 
 
 permanent taxes and military establishments which 
 the Republicans had deemed unfavorable to the happi- 
 ness and free institutions of the country.. But under 
 our former system we were becoming too selfish, too 
 much attached exclusively to the acquisition of wealth, 
 above all, too much confined in our political feelings 
 to local and state objects. The war has renewed and 
 reinstated the national feelings and character which 
 the Revolution had given, and which were daily less- 
 ened. The people have now more general objects of 
 attachment with which their pride and political opin- 
 ions are connected. They are more Araeri m; they 
 feel and act more as a nation, and I hope that the per- 
 manency of the Union is thereby better secured. * 
 * *— Writings, I., p. 700. 
 
 He writes from Paris, July 17, 1817, in a 
 tone that shows the change in Europe concern- 
 in g America: 
 
 * * * The growing prosperity of the United 
 States is an object of admiration for all the friends of 
 liberty in Europe, a reproach on almost all the Euro- 
 pean governments. At no period has America stood on 
 higher ground abroad than now. * * 
 
 I thirst for America, and I hope that the time is not 
 distant when I may again see her shores and enjoy 
 the. blessings which are found only there. * * * 
 [He remained as minister in France, however, till 1823 ] 
 — Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 565. 
 
 Gallatin to «his wife, from Washington, Jan- 
 uary 24, 1824: 
 
 * * • * Mr. Crawford is mending slowly. His 
 friends are not perfectly easy about his final recovery, 
 and Early adduced this to me as a reason why I should 
 be made Vice President. My answer was that I did 
 not want the office, and would dislike to be proposed 
 and not elected.— Adams' Life of Gallatin, p. 694. 
 
 After the election of 1824 Gallatin's name 
 was suggested for a cabinet position. In that 
 connection, he writes: 
 
 As to my accepting the Treasury Department, it is 
 out of the question [too much labor] * * *. 
 
22 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 But even with respect to the Department of State, for 
 which I am better calculated than any other, and as fit 
 as any other person, it appears to me, 
 it would not be proper for me to become a member of 
 it [the cabinet].* This is much strengthened by the 
 surmises to which Mr. Clay's conduct has given birth, 
 and by the circumstance of his accepting one dt the 
 Departments. I must, and will at all events, remain 
 above the reach of suspicion. — i bid. , p. 608. 
 
 About 1830 Gallatin entered politics again in 
 so far as taking part in public discussions may 
 be called entering politics. He wrote in favor 
 of the bank, and against protection. In regard 
 to his mental habits, he says: 
 
 I can lay no claim to either originality of thinking or 
 felicity of expression. If I have met with any success 
 either in public bodies, as an executive officer, or in 
 foreign negotiations, it has been exclusively through a 
 patient and most thorough investigation of all the at- 
 tainable facts, and a cautious application of these to 
 the questions under discussion; * * *.— Adams' 
 Life of Gallatin, p. 637. 
 
 Henry Adams has given this summary of the 
 
 life of Gallatin : 
 
 Under these pleasant conditions, Mr. Gallatin's active 
 mind turned to those scientific pursuits for which it 
 was so well fitted and in which it took so much delight. 
 Perhaps one might not wander far from the truth if one 
 added that these pursuits were, on the whole, his most 
 permanent claim to distinction. The first debater and 
 parliamentarian of his day, his fame as a leader of Con- 
 gress has long since ceased to give an echo, and his 
 most brilliant speeches are hardly known even by name 
 to the orators of the present generation. The first 
 of all American financiers, his theories, his methods, 
 and his achievements as secretary of the treasury are 
 as completely forgotten by politicians as his speeches 
 in Congress. First among the diplomatists of his time, 
 his reputation as a diplomat has passed out of men's 
 minds. First as a writer and an authority on political 
 economy in America, very few economists can now re- 
 
Albert gallatin. 23 
 
 member the titles of his writings or the consequences 
 of his action. But he was the father of American 
 ethnology, and there has been no time since his death 
 when the little band of his followers have forgotten 
 him. * * * Thus it was he who first es- 
 
 tablished the linguistic groups of the North American 
 Indians on a large scale, and made the first ethnograph- 
 ical map of North America which had real merit. * 
 * * .—Adams' Life of Gallatin, pp. 643-U- 
 
 In 1833 he writes a long letter to his friend, 
 John Badollet, in which occurs this sentence: 
 
 The present aspect of our national politics is extremely 
 discouraging; yet, having hitherto always seen the good 
 sense of this nation ultimately prevail against the ex- 
 cesses of party spirit, and the still more dangerous ef- 
 forts of disappointed ambition, I do not despair.— I o id., 
 p. 648. 
 
 To Badollet he again writes in 1836: 
 
 The energy of this nation is not to be controlled; it 
 is at present exclusively applied to the acquisition of 
 wealth and to improvements of stupendous magnitude, 
 * * * The apparent prosperity and the progress 
 of cultivation, population, commerce, and improve- 
 ment are beyond expectation. But it seems to me as if 
 general demoralization was the consequence; and I 
 would have preferred a gradual, slow, and more 
 secure progress. I am, however, an old man, and the 
 young generation has a right to govern itself 
 *.—Ibid, p. 653. 
 
 Miss Martineau has left us an account of an 
 interview of 1834 with Gallatin that is worthy 
 to be quoted entire. However, space forbids, 
 and only some extracts may be taken. 
 
 Mr. Gallatin called. Old man. Began his career in 
 1787. Has been three times in England. Twice as 
 minister. Found George IV. a cipher * * 
 William IV. silly as duke of Clarence. Gallatin would 
 have the president a cipher, too, if he could, i. e. , would 
 have him annual, so that all would be done by the min- 
 teters. * * *. The office was made for the 
 
24 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 man — Washington— who was wanted (as well as fit) to 
 reconcile all parties. Bad office, but well filled till 
 now. Too much power for one man: therefore it fills 
 all men's thoughts to the detriment of better things. 
 Jackson " a pugnacious animal. " * * *. 
 
 New Englanders the best people, perhaps, in the 
 world. Prejudiced, but able, honest, and homogeneous, 
 compound elsewhere. * * *. 
 
 All great changes have been effected by the Demo- 
 cratic party, from the first up to the universal suffrage, 
 which practically exists. 
 
 Would have no United States Bank. Would have 
 free banking as soon as practicable. It cannot be yet. 
 Thinks Jackson all wrong about the bank, but has 
 changed his opinions as to its powers. It has no po- 
 litical powers, but prodigious commercial. If the bank 
 be not necessary, better avoid allowing this power. 
 Bank has not overpapered this country. 
 
 Gallatin is tall, bald, toothless, speaks with burr, 
 looks venerable and courteous. Opened out airl apolo- 
 gized for his full communication. Kissed my hand. — 
 Adams' Life of Gallatin, pp. 650-51. 
 
 He opposed the annexation of Texas, the war 
 with Mexico, and the extension of slavery. 
 From 1844 to 1848 he worked with the greatest 
 energy in these directions. Born in 1761, he 
 died in 1849, but as late as 1848 he writes con- 
 cerning his work to secure peace with Mexico : 
 
 I write with great difficulty, and I become exhausted 
 when I work more than four or five hours per day. 
 Ever since the end of October all my faculties, im- 
 paired as they are, were absorbed in one subject; not 
 only my faculties, but I may say all my feelings; I 
 thought of nothing else; * * *" I postx>oned 
 everything else, * * * even answering the 
 letters which did not absolutely require immediate at- 
 tention.— Writings I., p. 569. 
 
 QUESTIONS. 
 
 (1) What was Gallatin's native country? (2) From 
 what class did he come? (8) Was he aristocratic or 
 
ALBERT GALLATIN. 
 
 25 
 
 democratic himself? (4) What can be said of Galla- 
 tin's education? (5) What of his interest in education? 
 (6) In what states do yon find Gallatin lived ? (7) What 
 did Gallatin spend money for, for his marriage* (8) 
 From the letter given what do you think of his first 
 wife? (9) What the nature of his home life after his 
 second marriage? 
 
 (1) Name the public positions that Gallatin held. (2) 
 Make a list of his political views. ( 3) What can you say 
 of the success of his statesmanship? (4) What argu- 
 ments were set forth by the people of western Pennsyl- 
 vania against the excise tax? (5) How did Gallatin re- 
 gard the French Revolution? (6) What was the error 
 in Mr. Breckenridge's account of the " Whiskey Insur- 
 rection"? (7) Why did Gallatin like Pennsylvania 
 better than New York? (8) Do you agree with him in 
 principle? (9) Why did Breckenridge wish to choose 
 juries in the way he suggests? 
 
 (1) What was Gallatin's place in national politics? 
 (2) Why was he so strong a leader? (3) Have our most 
 successful statesmen had the same quality in general? 
 (4) What did Gallatin think of the forms and cere- 
 monies of Washington life? (5) How does he criticise 
 President Washington? (6) How did Gallatin propose 
 to pav the national debt ? < 7) Find out what you can of 
 the ''Sinking fund" theory. (8) What were Gallatin's 
 essential ideas in managing the Treasury Department? 
 (9) Was he a "spoilsman "? (10) What would Gallatin 
 say, if living now, in regard to the right to annex Cuba, 
 etc.? 
 
 (1) What did Gallatin think of war? (2) How did he 
 regard the war of 1812? (3) Discuss his views regard- 
 ing an embargo. (4) Find out what you can of an em- 
 bargo policy. 1 5) Was the war of 1812 well managed? 
 (6) What did he think of the Federalists? (7) What 
 name did he give them? (8) Did he like America or 
 Europe best? Why? (9) Did he care for office? (10) 
 For what work in politics did he believe himself best 
 fitted? (11) What qualities made him so successful? 
 (12) What American characteristic did he *hink the 
 most dominant? (13) What do you learn from Miss 
 Martmeau's interview of Gallatin's views? 
 
 (1) Name Gallatin's dominant characteristics as you 
 
 3 
 
26 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 gather them from these extracts. (2) Write a life of 
 Gallatin from this material. (3) Do you admire him or 
 not? Why your answer? 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS 
 
 Born at Braintree, Mass., 1767. American Am- 
 bassador in Holland, 1797-1801. Senator, 1803- 
 1808. Peace commissioner, 1813-1815. Minister 
 to England, 1815-1817. Secretary of state, 1817- 
 1825. President, 1825-1829. Candidate for re- 
 election, 1828— defeated. Member of House of 
 Representatives, 1832-1848. Died, 1848. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 JOHN QUINCY ADAMS 
 
 ONE of the few really learned legislators 
 in American history is presented in this 
 study. Every opportunity almost that 
 could in any way tend to prepare him for this 
 work was his. As a boy with his father he 
 became familiar with Europe and its states- 
 men. His youthful years were passed in the 
 midst of diplomats, and at an extremely early 
 age he became one of the foreign ministers of 
 his country. At home he was senator, secre- 
 tary of state, president, and congressman. 
 
 But during all the years of his public life he 
 was ever the hard and persistent student. Sys- 
 tem in everything characterizes his methods. 
 The result was that before his death he had ac- 
 cumulated a mass of information that was al- 
 most phenomenal. His knowledge of history, 
 especially of his own country, was deep and 
 minute. Adams had some faults of disposition 
 that detracted from his lovableness, but when all 
 has been said, he yet remains one of the great 
 characters in our country's history. 
 
 Mr. F. G. Franklin, instructor in American 
 history in the University, has prepared the ex- 
 tracts for this number. They tell much of the 
 life, and indicate clearly the thought, of Adams 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. . 29 
 
 on most of the great questions of his clay. The 
 necessity of cutting out many chosen passages, 
 in order to reduce the article to its space limits, 
 will explain some gaps in this number as well 
 as in the preceding, and I doubt not in many of 
 the succeeding numbers. 
 
 Farts of letters to his father and to his 
 mother show us the boy first at his home, and 
 then at a school in France: 
 
 Braintree, June the 2nd, 1777. 
 
 Dear Sir, — I love to receive letters very well; much 
 better than I love to write them. I make but a poor 
 figure at composition, my head is much too fickle, my 
 thoughts are running after birds eggs play and trifles, 
 till I get vexed with myself. Mamma has a trouble- 
 some task to keep me steady, and I own I am ashamed 
 of myself. * * * I wish, Sir, you would 
 give me some instructions, with regard to my time, & 
 advise me how to proportion my Studies & my Play, in 
 writing, & I will keep them by me, & endeavor to 
 
 follow them. 
 
 Passy, September the 27th, 1778. 
 
 Honoured Mamma,— My Pappa enjoins it upon me 
 to keep a journal, or a diary of the Events that happen 
 to me, and of objects that I see, and of Characters that 
 I converse with from day to day; and altho. I am 
 convinced of the utility, importance & necessity of this 
 Exercise, yet I have not patience and perseverance 
 enough to do it so Constantly as I ought. My Pappa, 
 who takes a great deal of Pains to put me in the right 
 way, has also advised me to Preserve copies of all my 
 letters, & has given me a Convenient Blank Book for 
 this end; and altho I shall have the mortification a few 
 years hence to read a great deal of my Childish non- 
 sense, yet I shall have the Pleasure and advantage of 
 Remarking the several steps by which I shall have ad- 
 vanced in taste judgment and knowledge. A journal 
 Book & a letter Book of a Lad of Eleven years old Can 
 not be expected to contain much of Science, Littera- 
 ture, arts, wisdom, or wit, yet it may serve to perpetu- 
 ate many observations that I may make, & may 
 
30 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 hereafter help me to recollect both persons & things 
 Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, I, 7-9. 
 
 Washington wrote of him in 1797: 
 
 I give it as my decided opinion that 
 Mr. Adams is the most valuable public character we 
 have aboard, and there remains no doubt in my mind 
 that he will prove himself to be the ablest of our diplo- 
 matic corps.— Ibid., 19 J*. 
 
 The following account of his life in Holland 
 (July, 1796) shows how he became so valuable: 
 
 The reading of the month has carried me through 
 Luzac's Richesse de la Hollande, and the Traite General 
 de Commerce; . . . the Life of Dumouriez, Garat's 
 Memoirs, and Pratt's Gleanings. Of all these books I 
 have made mention, and some slight observations at 
 the time of finishing, and also of Pitt's translation of 
 the Aeneid, Howe's Lucan, which I have gone through, 
 and Garth's compilation of the Metamorphoses, which 
 I have no't yet finished. To improve in the Dutch Lan- 
 guage I have usually translated a page every day; and 
 after going thus through the Constitution of the Na- 
 tional Assembly, which is now in session, I took the 
 Introduction to Rendorp's Memoirs. I shall give the 
 preference to all interesting state papers; because I send 
 the translations to the Secretary of State, and thus 
 answer two good purposes at once. My progress in 
 Italian is slow, and I can only translate two or three 
 stanzas of Tasso at a time. The language itself is en- 
 chanting, but, with no opportunity to speak or hear it 
 spoken, my advances are very small, and, with my 
 other occupations, I may perhaps grow tired of that. 
 To keep alive my Latin, I have begun to translate a 
 page of Tacitus every day, and am going through the 
 life of Agricola, which in the year 1784, at this place, I 
 translated into French. ... My other writ- 
 ing is principally confined to writing and answering 
 letters, or to the journal. — Ibid., 176-7. 
 
 While in London he wrote in his diary for 
 July 26, 1797: 
 At nine this morning , I was married to 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 31 
 
 Louisa Catharine Johnson, the second daughter of 
 Joshua and Catharine Johnson, by Mr. Hewlett.— I bid., 
 199. 
 
 Both lived to celebrate in Quincy, Mass., the 
 semi-centennial of this event. 
 
 The political revolution of 1800, bringing into 
 power Jefferson and the Republican party, in- 
 terrupted John Quincy Adams's diplomatic ca- 
 reer abroad. January 28, 1802, he wrote: 
 
 I feel strong temptation and have great provocation 
 to plunge into political controversy. But I hope to pre- 
 serve myself from it by the considerations which have 
 led me to the resolution of renouncing. A politician in 
 this country must be the man of a party. I would fain 
 be the man of my whole country."— Ibid., 249. 
 
 In the cl ary, October 21, 1803, he wrote: 
 
 At eleven this morning I took my seat in the Senate 
 of the United States. 
 
 The following extracts from his diary reveal 
 the character and views of Mr. Adams at this 
 period : 
 
 I have already seen enough to ascertain that no 
 amendments of my proposing will obtain in the Senate 
 as now filled.— Ibid., 270. 
 
 Unanimous consent was necessary [for declaring war 
 with Morocco] and I alone objected. My principle was, 
 that a declaration of war was the last thing in th e 
 world to make with unusual precipitation.— Ibid., 273. 
 
 The country is so totally given up to the spirit of 
 party, that not to follow blindfold the one or the other 
 is an inexpiable offence.— Ibid., 282. 
 
 The cooperation of the Senate in all appointments is 
 at present a mere formality, and a very disgusting 
 formality. —1 b id. , 320. 
 
 In public affairs, it appears to me, there is no quality 
 more useful and important than good humor, because 
 it operates continually to soften the asperities that are 
 continually rising in the collisions of adverse interests 
 and opinions, . . .—Ibid., 377. 
 
32 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 My political prospects continue declining. [January 
 1, 1806.] -Ibid., 380. 
 
 Feeble and insignificant as my influence upon the 
 counsels of the nation is, I feel a load of responsibility 
 weighing upon me to the utmost I can bear. Ronest 
 intention and sincerity must be my only substitute for 
 more efficacious powers. — 1 bid., 895. 
 
 Constitutional difficulties never will stand in the 
 way of a majority . . . even in so select a 
 body as the Senate of the United States, a mere varia- 
 tion of phrase will contrive a loophole to creep from 
 the most barefaced usurpation of power.— Ibid, 417. 
 
 In the afternoon I was installed as Boylston Prof esse .... 
 of Rhetoric and Oratory [at Harvard, June 12, 1806].— 
 Ibid., Ul- 
 
 My defects of elocution are incurable, and amidst so 
 many better speakers, when the debates are to be re 
 ported, I never speak without mortification. The process 
 of reasoning in my mind is too slow for uninterrupted 
 articulation. My thoughts arise at first confused, and 
 require lime to shape into a succession of sentences. 
 Hence the transition from thought to thought is awk- 
 ward and inelegant, and expression often fails me to ac- 
 complish a sentence commenced; so that I often begin 
 a thought with spirit and finish it with nonsense. 
 The chain of my argument often escapes me, and when 
 lost can seldom be retrieved. I then finish as I can, 
 without producing half the arguments I proposed be- 
 fore I began to speak. These faults would be so over- 
 powering that I should sink into perpetual silence, 
 from mere impotence, were it not that sometimes in the 
 ardor of debate, when my feelings are wound up to a 
 high tone, elocution pours itself along with unusual 
 rapidity, and I have passages which would not shame 
 a good speaker: this is the only thing that makes me 
 tolerable to others or to myself.— I hid,, 445. 
 
 [December 81, 1807.] My general consideration 
 among my fellow-citizens, though not marked by any 
 new public testimonial in the course of the year, has 
 been to my observation apparently rising. During the 
 present session of the Senate my standing in that body 
 lias been singular— apparently so distinguished as to 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAM3. 
 
 33 
 
 have excited jealousies, with little more real influence 
 than heretofore. . . . On most of the great 
 national questions now under discussion, my sense of 
 duty leads me to support the administration, and I find 
 myself of course in opposition to the federalists in gen 
 eral. — Ibid., 497. 
 
 I fully opened to him [Quincy] my motives for sup- 
 porting the administration at this crisis [danger of 
 war with England] , and my sense of the danger which 
 a spirit of opposition is bringing upon the Union. I 
 told him where that opposition in case of war must in 
 its nature end— either in a civil war, or in a dissolution 
 of the Union, with the Atlantic States in subserviency 
 to Great Britain. That to resist this I was ready, if 
 necessary, to sacrifice everything I have in life, and 
 even life itself.— Ibid. . 510. 
 
 The following entry (June 8, 1808) will 
 mark the close of this period: 
 
 I found on going into State Street, that Mr. 
 Wheaton's Anti-embargo resolutions were yesterday 
 adopted by the Senate [of Massachusetts ]. I therefore 
 this day sent a letter to the two Houses with my 
 resignation of my seat as a Senator of the United 
 States.— I bid., 535. 
 
 In 1809 President Madison appointed John 
 Quincy Adams minister to Russia and later he 
 was prominent among the American peace com- 
 missioners at Ghent. September 25, 1814, he 
 
 wrote: 
 
 in repelling an insolent charge of the 
 British Plenipotentiaries against the government of 
 the United States, of a system of perpetual encroach- 
 ment upon the Indians under pretence of purchase's, I 
 had taken the ground of the moral and religious duty 
 of a nation to settle, cultivate, and improve their terri- 
 tory- a principle perfectly recognized by the law of 
 nations, and in my own opinion, the only solid and un- 
 answerable defense against the charge in the British 
 note. Gallatin saw and admitted the weight of the 
 argument, but was afraid of ridicule, 
 the terms God, and Providence, and Heaven, Mr. 
 
34 AMERICAN HISTORY S1UDTES. 
 
 Clay thought were canting, and Russell laughed at 
 then). I was obliged to give them up, and with them 
 what I thought the best argument we had. — Memoirs, 
 ILL, 42. 
 
 Clay and Gallatin were associated with Adams 
 to negotiate a convention to regulate commerce 
 and navigation with Great Britain. Adams 
 writes of it when drawn up: 
 
 I observed then that there had been another error, 
 both in the preamble and in the order of signatures, at 
 Ghent, which it would be necessary to avoid repeating 
 at present. ... in the copies on both sides 
 the King of Great Britain and the British Plenipoten- 
 tiaries were first named; and . . . the sig- 
 natures ail followed each other in succession, the 
 American Plenipotentiaries signing under those of 
 Great Britain. The usage of all treaties between 
 European sovereigns we understood to be what is 
 called the alternative, each of the parties and his pleni- 
 potentiaries being first named in the copy which he 
 receives; the signatures of the respective plenipoten- 
 tiaries being on a line and alternate— those of each 
 party signing first in the copy which he receives. 
 
 I told Goldburn that if he would take the 
 trouble of inquiring at the foreign office he would find 
 it a universal usage. . . . if he would have 
 a draft copy made out . . . as they intended 
 to execute their copy, and send it to me, I would have 
 our copy made out corresponding to it, ... 
 They promised to send me such a draft copy. 
 
 ) [ A day later ] Mr. Gallatin then said that I must 
 give the transcriber orders to make out the copy with- 
 out any alteration in the body of the treaty; which I 
 peremptorily refused, and added, in a heated and angry 
 manner, ' ' Mr. Gallatin, you and Mr. Clay may do as 
 you please, but I will not sign the treaty without the 
 alternative observed throughout." "Now, don't fly 
 off in this manner," said Mr. Gallatin. "Indeed, Sir,'' 
 said I, " I will not sign the treaty in any other form. 
 I am so far from thinking with Mr. Clay that it is of 
 no importance, that I think it by much the most im- 
 portant thing that we shall obtain by this treaty."— 
 Ibid.. Ill m (1815). 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 
 
 35 
 
 Many rumors of his probable appointment as 
 Secretary of State under Monroe reached Mr. 
 Adams in England. December 24, 1816, he 
 wrote: 
 
 I had no expectation, or belief, that the office would 
 be offered to me, until the receipt of my mother's let- 
 ter, and now I consider it still a matter of great uncer- 
 tainty. The question whether I ought to accept the 
 place, if it should be offered, is not without difficulties 
 in my mind. A doubt of my competency for it is very 
 sincerely entertained, and ought perhaps to be decisive. 
 At all events, if I could be rationally justified in ac- 
 cepting it, if offered, I perceive no propriety in taking 
 any step whatever to seek it.— Ibid:, 458. 
 
 Some months later he wrote to his mother: 
 The manner in which the President has thought 
 proper to nominate me was certainly honorable to him- 
 self, as it was without any intimation from me, or, as 
 far a3 I knew, from any of my friends, which could 
 operate as an inducement to him. His motives were 
 altogether of a public nature; . - our senti- 
 
 ments upon subject of great public interest have at 
 particular periods of our public life been much at vari- 
 ance. That they may be so again is as certainly not 
 impossible. If I had any present reason for expecting 
 it, I should deem it my duty to decline the office 
 
 Ever since his appointment to the Department 
 of State ha3 brought me into official relations with him, 
 I have known few of his opinions with which I did not 
 cordially concur. . . . For myself, I shall 
 enter upon the functions of my office with a deep sense 
 of the necessity of union with my colleagues, and with 
 a suitable impression that my place is subordinate; that 
 my duty will be to support, and not to counteract or 
 oppose, the President's administration, and that if from 
 any cause I should find my efforts to that end ineffect- 
 ual it will be my duty seasonably to withdraw from 
 the public service . . —Ibid., 502-0 k- & 
 
 The following extracts from his report of an 
 interview with the British Minister, Canning, 
 on the Oregon question, will indicate the vigor- 
 oat -110 s of his diplomacy: 
 
36 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 But you will understand that I am not pleased either 
 with the grounds upon which you have sought this con- 
 ference, nor with the questions which you have seen 
 fit to put to me. . . . The members of the 
 legislature of this country are not only perfectly inde- 
 pendent of the Executive, but the Executive cannot 
 permit itself to be questioned by any foreign minister 
 upon anything said or done by them. And as little do 
 I admit your right to ask any question of our intentions 
 with regard to the mouth of Colombia River. 
 
 "No," said I, " I have not heard that you claim 
 exclusively any part of the moon; but there is not a 
 spot or. this habitable globe that I could affirm you do 
 not claim; and there is none which you may not claim 
 with as much color of right as you can have to Colom- 
 bia River or its mouth." . . . "Sir," said 
 I, "you may report to your Government just what you 
 please . . . every word that I have said to 
 you not only now, but at any time, or that I ever shall 
 say, provided you report nothing but the truth, as I 
 have no doubt you will." . . . "But, 
 
 I request you to state explicitly, that I took 
 strong exception both to the form and to the substance 
 of your application to me on this occasion. To the 
 form, because you came to put questions to me of an 
 irritating nature upon the foundation of the speeches 
 \nd reports of individual members of Congress; and to 
 the substance, because the questions were of a nature 
 which we do not admit your right to ask. 
 the tone and manner assumed by you in reply con- 
 vinced me that nothing useful to either party could re- 
 sult from any further verbal conference between us. " 
 —Ibid., V, 2U-254. 
 
 The following extracts contain some views of 
 Adams's concerning his elevation to the presi- 
 dency and his duty therein: 
 
 To one thing, however, I had made up my mind; I 
 would take no one step to advance or promote pretensions 
 to the presidency. ^ If that office was to be the prize of 
 cabal and intrigue, of purchasing newspapers, bribing 
 by appointments, or bargaining for foreign missions, I 
 had no ticket in that lottery. Whether I had the qual- 
 ifications necessary for the President of the TJuiipd 
 
J-OTIN QUIXCY ADAMS. 3^ 
 
 States was, to say the least, very doubtful to myself. 
 But that I had no talent for obtaining the office by 
 such means was perfectly clear. — Ibid., V, 298 {1821). 
 I determined to renominate every person against 
 whom there was no complaint which would have war- 
 ranted his removal; and renominated every person 
 nominated by Mr. Monroe, and upon whose nomina- 
 tion the Senate had declined acting. Mr. Monroe al- 
 ways acted on this principle of renomination. — Ibid., 
 VI, 521. > 
 
 Regarding his entering Congress after the 
 expiration of his presidential terra: 
 
 I said I had in that respect no scruple whatever. 
 No person could be degraded by serving the people as a 
 Representative in Congress. Nor, in my opinion, 
 would an ex-President of the United States be degraded 
 by serving as a Selectman of his town, if elected thereto 
 by the people.— I bid,, VIII, 239, 1830. 
 
 . had I alleged my former station as a rea- 
 son for rejecting the suffrages of the people assigning 
 me a seat in the House of Representatives, I should not 
 merely have been chargeable with arrogance, but should 
 have exposed myself to ridicule. . . . My re- 
 turn to public life in a subordinate station is disagree- 
 able to my family, and disapproved by some of my 
 friends; though no one of them has expressed that dis- 
 approbation to me. . . . But this call upon me 
 by the people of the district in which I reside, to rep- 
 resent them in Congress, has been spontaneous, and, 
 although counteracted by a double opposition, federal- 
 ist and Jacksonite, I have received nearly three votes 
 in four throughout the district. My election as Presi- 
 dent of the United States was not half so gratifying to 
 my inmost soul. No election or appointment conferred 
 upon me ever gave me so much pleasure. — Ibid., 246- 
 247. q 
 
 I have been for some time occupied day and night, 
 when at home, in assorting and recording the petitions 
 and remonstrances against the annexation of Texas, 
 and other anti-slavery petitions, which flow upon me 
 in torrents.— Ibid., IX, 377 {1837). 
 
38 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES 
 
 My occupations . . . have been confined 
 . % . for the last ten days to the defence of 
 myself against an extensive combination and conspir- 
 acy, in and out of Congress, to crush the liberties of 
 the free people of this Union by disgracing me with a 
 brand of censnre and displacing me from the chair of 
 the Committee of Foreign Affairs, for my perseverance 
 in "presenting abolition petitions. — Memoirs, XI, 80 
 (1842). & 
 
 One hundred members of the House represent slaves; 
 four-fifths of whom would crucify me if their votes 
 could erect the cross; forty members, representatives 
 of the free, in the league of slavery and mock Democ- 
 racy, would break me on the wheel, if their votes or 
 wishes could turn it round; and four-fifths of the other 
 hundred and twenty are either so cold or so lukewarm 
 that they are ready to desert me at the first scintilla- 
 tion of indiscretion on my part. The only formidable 
 danger with which I am beset is that of my own tem- 
 per.— Ibid., 86 {1842). 
 
 Extracts dealing with the Louisiana Purchase? 
 the slavery struggle, Florida, South America, 
 Cuba, Texas, and related subjects follow. 
 
 In a conversation with Mr. Wirt, the Attor- 
 ney General, about the president's authority to 
 deliver fugitive criminals to England without 
 act of Congress, Adams stated that the presi- 
 dent 
 
 could not be bound by the duty 
 without possessing the authority necessary for its 
 discharge. 
 
 He [Wirt] said that doctrine was too bold for him: 
 he was too much of a Virginian for that. G 
 
 I told him that Virginian Constitutional scruples 
 were accommodating things. Whenever the exercise 
 of a power did not happen to suit them, they would 
 allow of nothing but powers expressly written; but 
 when it did, they had no aversion to implied powers. 
 Where was there in the Constitution a power to pur- 
 chase Louisiana? He said there was a power to make 
 treaties. O" Aye! a treaty to abolish the Constitution 
 of the United States ? " "Oh, no, no ! " 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 39 
 
 But the Louisiana purchase was in substance a dis- 
 solution and recomposition of the whole Union. It 
 made a Union totally different from that for which the 
 Constitution had been formed. It gives despotic pow- 
 ers over the territories purchased. It naturalizes for- 
 eign nations in a mass. It makes French and Spanish 
 laws a part of the laws of the Union. It introduces 
 whole systems of legislation abhorrent to the spirit and 
 character of our institutions, and all this done by an 
 Administration which came in blowing a trumpet 
 against implied powers. After this, to nibble at a 
 bank, a road, a canal, the mere mint and cummin of 
 the law, was but glorious inconsistency. 
 
 He said the people had sanctioned it. "How the 
 people?" By their Representatives in Congress; they 
 were the people. 
 
 "Oh," said I, "that doctrine is too bold for me." — 
 Ibid., V, 400 {1821). 
 
 And so it is that a law for perpetuating slavery m 
 Missouri, and perhaps in North America, has been 
 smuggled through both Houses of Congress. I have 
 been convinced from the first starting of this question 
 that it could not end otherwise. The fault is in the 
 Constitution of the United States, which has sanctioned 
 a dishonorable compromise with slavery. There is 
 henceforth no remedy for it but a new organization of 
 the Union to effect which a concert of all the white 
 States is indispensable. Whether that can ever be ac- 
 complished is doubtful. . . . the cement of 
 common interest produced by slavery is stronger and 
 more solid than that of unmingled freedom, 
 the slave States have clung together in one unbroken 
 phalanx, and have been victorious by the means of ac- 
 complices and deserters from the ranks of freedom. 
 Time only can show whether the contest may ever be 
 with equal advantage renewed.— Ibid., V, 4 {1820). 
 
 I have favored this Missouri compromise, believing it 
 to be all that could be effected under the present Con- 
 stitution, and from extreme unwillingness to put the 
 Union at hazard. But perhaps it would have been a 
 wiser as well as a bolder course to have persisted in 
 the restriction upon Missouri, till it should have ter- 
 minated in a convention of the States to revise and 
 amend the Constitution. This would have produced a 
 
40 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES 
 
 new Union of the thirteen or fourteen States unpolluted 
 with slavery, with a great and glorious object to effect, 
 namely, that of rallying to their standard the other 
 States by the universal emancipation of their slaves. If 
 the Union must be dissolved, slavery is precisely the 
 question upon which it ought to break. For the pres- 
 ent, however, this contest is laid asleep.— Ibid., V, 10. 
 
 A dissolution of the Union for the cause of slavery 
 would be followed by a servile war in the slave-holding 
 States, combined with a war between the two severed 
 portions of the Union. It seems to me that its result 
 must be the extirpation of slavery from this whole con- 
 tinent; and, calamitous and desolating as this course 
 of events in its progress must be, so glorious would be 
 its final issue, that, as God shall judge me, I dare not 
 say that it is not to be desired.— 1 bid., V, 210 {1820). 
 
 "I told him that I understood the map of the country 
 rather too well to suppose it would ever be possible for 
 me to do anything that could make me popular in the 
 Western country; that as to the treaty [of 1819 ], I had 
 never set the value upon it that was supposed, and of 
 all the members of the Administration, I was the last 
 who had consented to take the Sabine for our western 
 boundary. I had no doubt that if the treaty should be 
 set aside we should ultimately obtain more territory 
 than it would secure to us, but we should get the same 
 territory with the treaty sooner than we should want 
 it; and even now I thought the greatest danger of this 
 Union was in the overgrown extent of its territory 
 combining with the slavery question. I added as my 
 belief, that there would be a majority of the House of 
 Representatives now who would not accept of the 
 province of Texas as a gift unless slavery should be ex- 
 cluded from it. Since the Missouri debate, I con- 
 sidered the continuance of the Union for any length of 
 time as very precarious, and entertained serious doubts 
 whether Louisiana and slavery would not ultimately 
 break us up.— Ibid., V, 67-68 [1S20). 
 
 They [the South Americans] are not likely to pro- 
 mote the spirit either of freedom or order by their ex- 
 ample. 'The} 7 have not the first elements of good or 
 free government. Arbitrary power, military and ec- 
 clesiastical, was stamped upon their education, upon 
 their habits, and upon all their institutions. Civil dis 
 
JOHN QU1NCY ADAMS. 41 
 
 sension was infused into all their seminal principles. 
 War and mutual destruction was in every member of 
 their organization, moral, political, and physical. I 
 had little expectation of any beneficial result to this 
 country from any future connection with them, politi- 
 cal or commercial. We should derive no improvement 
 to jur own institution by any communion with theirs. 
 Nor was there any appearance of a disposition in them 
 to take any political lesson from us.— Ibid., V, 325 
 U821). 
 
 Neither were the United States desirous of making 
 it [Cuba] a part of their confederation. But the island 
 was at their doors; they could not suffer it to be trans- 
 ferred from Spain to any other European power, nor 
 could they willingly see it conquered, either by Mexico 
 or Columbia. . . . Cuba was to the United 
 States an object of paramount commercial importance. 
 The capital employed in the trade was greater than 
 that with all the dominion of France; the tonnage 
 employed in it nearly equal to that with Great Britain. 
 We were content that it should remain in its present 
 condition, under the dominion of Spain, but enjoying 
 a free trade with us.— Ibid., VII, 10 {1825). 
 
 With regard to the project of a separate northern 
 confederacy, formed in the winter of 1833 and 4, in 
 consequence of the Louisiana cession, it is not to me 
 that you must apply for copies of the correspondence 
 in which it was contained. To that and to every other 
 project of disunion, I have been constantly opposed. 
 My principles do not admit the right even of the peo- 
 ple, still less of the legislature of any one state in the 
 union, to secede at pleasure from the union. No pro- 
 vision is made for the exercise of this right, either by 
 the federal or any of the state constitutions. The act 
 of exercising it, presupposes a departure from the prin- 
 ciple of compact and a resort -to that of force. 
 
 But to those who think that each state is a 
 sovereign judge, not only of its own rights, but of the 
 extent of powers conferred upon the general govern- 
 ment by the people of the whole union; and that each 
 state, giving its own construction to the constitutional 
 powers of congress, may array its separate sovereignty 
 against every act of that boily transcending this 
 estimate of their powers— to say of men holding these 
 4 
 
42 AMERICAN HISTORY STUblES. 
 
 principles, that, for the ten years from 1804 to 1814, 
 they were intending a dissolution of the union, and the 
 formation of a new confederacy, is charging them with 
 nothing more than with acting up to their principles. 
 — Niks, XXXV, 415-416. 
 
 Nullification is the provocative to that brutal and 
 foul contest of force, which has hitherto baffled all the 
 efforts of the European and Southern American nations, 
 to introduce among them constitutional governments 
 of liberty and order. It strips us of that peculiar and 
 unimitated characteristic of all our legislation — free de- 
 bate. It makes the bayonet the arbiter of the law; it 
 has no argument but the thunderbolt. 
 ^Oration, July 4 (1831). Niks, XL, 431. 
 
 Rouse in the heart of the slave holder the terror of 
 his slave, and it will be a motive with him paramount 
 to all others never to vote for any man not a slave 
 holder like himself.— Memoirs, IX, 252 (1835). 
 
 I gave them [an anti-slavery committee] a full and 
 candid exposition of my own principles and views with 
 regard to the institution of domestic slavery, differing 
 from theirs under a sense of the compact and compro- 
 mise in the Constitution of the United States. I de- 
 clined attendance at any public meeting of the socie- 
 ties, and said I believed the cause itself would be more 
 benefitted by such service as I could render to it in 
 the discharge of my duty in Congress than by giving 
 notoriety to any action on my part in support of the so- 
 cieties or in connection with them. — Ibid. , IX,302 (1 836). 
 
 The prohibition of the internal slave- trade is within 
 the constitutional power of Congress, and, in my opin- 
 ion, is among their incumbent duties. I have gone as 
 far upon this article, the abolition of slavery, as the 
 public opinion of the free portion of the Union will 
 bear, and so far that scarcely a slave-holding member 
 of the House dares to vote with me upon any question. 
 I have as yet been thoroughly sustained in my own 
 State; but one step further and I hazard my own stand- 
 ing and influence there, my own final overthrow, and 
 the cause of liberty itself for in definite time, certainly 
 for more than my remnant of life.— Ibid., IX, 418 (1834). 
 
 ' ' The world, the flesh, and all the devils in hell are 
 arrayed against any man who now in this North Amer- 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 43 
 
 ican Union shall dare to join the standard of Almighty 
 God to put down the African slave-trade; and what 
 can I, upon the verge of my seventy-fourth birthday, 
 with a shaking hand, a darkening eye, a drowsy brain, 
 and with all my faculties dropping from me one by one, 
 as the teeth are dropping from my head— what can I do 
 for the cause of God and man, for the progress of hu- 
 man emancipation, for the suppression of the African 
 slave-trade? Yet my conscience presses me on; let me 
 but die upon the breach."— I bid., X, 454 (1841). 
 
 Hamilton's report . . . represents the 
 
 Texans as a people struggling for their liberty, and 
 therefore entitled to our sympathy. The fact is di- 
 rectly the reverse— they are fighting for the establish- 
 ment and perpetuation of slavery, and that is the cause 
 of the South Carolinian sympathy for them.— Ibid., IX, 
 333 (1886). 
 
 I offered an amendment ... . : That the 
 power of annexing the people of a foreign Government 
 to this Union has not been delegated to the Congress 
 nor to any Department of the Government of the United 
 States, but has been reserved to the people. That any 
 attempt by Act of Congress or by treaty to annex the re- 
 public of Texas to this Union would be an usurpation 
 of power, which it would be the right and the duty of 
 the free people of the Union to resist and annul.— Ibid., 
 X, SO (1838). 
 
 This was a memorable day in the annals of the world. 
 The treaty for the annexation of Texas to this Union 
 was this day sent in to the Senate: and with it went 
 the freedom of the human race.— Ibid., XII, 13 {1844). 
 I record this vote [rejecting the Texan treaty] as a 
 deliverance, I trust, by the special interposition of Al- 
 mighty God, of my country and of human liberty from 
 a conspiracy comparable to that of Lucius Sergius Cati- 
 lina. May it prove not a mere temporary deliverance, 
 like that, only preliminary to the fatally successful 
 conspiracy of Julius Caesar! The annexation of Texas 
 to this Union is the first step to the conquest of all 
 Mexico, of the West India Islands, of a maritime, col- 
 onizing, slave-tainted monarchy, and of extinguished 
 freedom.— I bid., XII, 49 {18W- 
 I do not admit that there is, even among the peace 
 
44 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES 
 
 powers of Congress, such authority; but in war there 
 are many ways by which Congress not only have the 
 authority, but are bound to interfere with the institu- 
 tion of slavery in the states. . . . Mr. 
 Chairman, are you ready for all these wars? A Mexi- 
 can war? a war with Great Britain, if not with France? 
 a general Indian war? a servile war? and, as an inevit- 
 able consequence of them all, a civil war? And do you 
 imagine that while with your eyes open you are wil- 
 ful ly kindling, and then closing your eyes and blindly 
 rushing into them; do you imagine that while, in the 
 very nature of things, your own Southern and South- 
 western States, must be the Flanders of these compli- 
 cated wars, the battlefield upon which the last great 
 conflict must be fought between slavery and emancipa- 
 tion ? do you imagine that your Congress will have no 
 constitutional authority to interfere with the institu- 
 tion of slavery in any ivay in the States of this confed- 
 eracy? Sir, they must and will interfere with it— per- 
 haps to sustain it by war; perhaps to abolish it by 
 treaties of peace; and they will not only possess the 
 constitutional power so to interfere, but they will be 
 bound in duty to do it by the express provisions of the 
 Constitution itself. From the instant that your slave- 
 holding states become the theatre of war, civil, servile* 
 or foreign, from that instant the war powers of Con- 
 gress extend to interference with the institution of 
 slavery in every way by which it can be interfered 
 with, from a claim of indemnity for slaves taken or 
 destroyed, to the cession of the State burdened with 
 slavery to a foreign power. — Cong. Globe, 24th Cong., 
 1st Sess., App., 434-435. 
 
 References to Jackson's administration: 
 
 To feed the cormorant appetite for place, and to 
 reward the prostitution of canvassing detainers, are 
 the only principles yet discernible in the conduct of the 
 President, and indecision and instability are already 
 strongly marked in his movements . . Me- 
 
 moirs, VIII, 113. 
 
 The appointments, almost without exception, are 
 conferred upon the vilest purveyors of slander during 
 the late electioneering campaign, and an excessive die- 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 45 
 
 proportion of places is given to editors of the foulest 
 presses. Very few reputable appointments have been 
 made, . . . —Ibid., 188. 
 
 Jackson rides roughshod over all the rights and 
 powers of the Senate relating to appointments. Many 
 of his own party in the Senate are disgusted with him 
 for it; but they dare not oppose him 
 —Ibid., 206. 
 
 I would not be present to witness her [Harvard's] 
 disgrace in conferring her highest literary honors upon 
 a barbarian who could not write a sentence of gram- 
 mar and hardly could spell his own name.— I b id., 546. 
 
 The Monroe Doctrine in outline: 
 
 I told him [the Russian Minister] specially that we 
 should contest the right of Russia to any territorial es- 
 tablishment on this continent, and that we should 
 assume distinctly the principle that the American con- 
 tinents are no longer subjects for any new European 
 colonial establishments. — Memoirs, VI, 163 [1823). 
 
 Extracts follow relating to various important 
 subjects: 
 
 The question of the power of congress to authorize 
 the making of internal improvements, is, in other 
 words, a question whether the people of this union, in 
 forming their common social compact, as avowedly for 
 the purpose of promoting their general welfare, have 
 performed their work in a manner so ineffably stupid, 
 as to deny themselves the means of bettering their own 
 condition. I have too much respect for the intellect of 
 my country to believe it.— Xiles, XXVI, 251 (1824). 
 
 if the house shall settle this question 
 by declaring that they will engage in no more works of 
 internal improvement, this Union will soon break in 
 pieces; and I will add that it will not deserve to be pre- 
 served.— Co rig. Debates, 22nd Cong., 1st Sess., 3256. 
 
 << . . . the Pre-emption bill was taken up 
 . the thirst of a tiger for blood is the 
 fittest emblem of the rapacity with which the members 
 of all the new states fly at the public lands. The con- 
 stituents upon whom they depend are all settlers, or 
 tame and careless spectators of the pillage. They are 
 themselves enormous speculators and land-jobbers. It 
 
±0 AMERICAN III: TORY STUDIES. 
 
 were a vain attempt to resist them here. — Memoirs, 
 X, 19 (1838). 
 
 I said that the ultimate principle of my system with 
 reference to the great interests of the country was con- 
 ciliation and not collision, I was satisfied with the tar- 
 iff as now established, and should, if any change in it 
 should be desired, incline rather to reduce than to in- 
 crease it. There was, in my opinion, no constitutional 
 question involved in the discussion. The revenue was 
 abundant, and the protection to manufactures adequate 
 to their fair claims for support; and if the tariff should 
 be found to bear hard upon the agricultural and com- 
 mercial interests, I should incline to an alleviaf ion of 
 it in their favor.— Ibi d., VI, 451 (1824). 
 
 The subscriber [J. Q. Adams] has long entertained 
 the opinion that the existence of a national bank is 
 indissolubly connected with the continuance of our 
 National Union. The fiscal operations of the Govern- 
 ment in all its branches, he believes, can not, without 
 the aid of such an institution, be conducted, he will 
 not say well, but at all. He does not say that the pres- 
 ent Bank of the United States is indispensable; 
 —From Report on The Bank of the United States, Cong. 
 Debates, 22 Cong., 1st Sess., App., 72. 
 
 The spirit of party has become so inveterate and so 
 virulent in our country; it has so totally absorbed the 
 understanding, and the heart of almost all the distin- 
 guished men among us, that I, who can not cease to 
 consider all the individuals of both parties as my coun- 
 trymen; who can neither approve nor disapprove, in a 
 lump, either of the men or the measures of either party; 
 who see both sides claiming an exclusive privilege of 
 patriotism, and using against each other weapons of 
 political warfare which I never can handle, can not but 
 cherish that congenial spirit which has always pre- 
 served itself pure from the infectious vapors of faction; 
 which considers temperance, as one of the first political 
 duties; and which can perceive a very distinct shade 
 of difference between political candor and political 
 hypocrisy.— Niles, XXXVI, 17 -IS (1S09). 
 
 Concerning Clay (i820): 
 
 In politics, as in private life, Clay is essentially a 
 gamester, and, with a vigorous intellect, an ardent 
 
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. 47 
 
 spirit, a handsome elocution, though with a mind very 
 defective in elementary knowledge, and a very undi- 
 gested system of ethics, he has all the qualities which 
 belong to that class of- human characters. — Memoirs, 
 V,59. 
 
 Of Daniel Webster he says (1841): 
 
 my speech . . . has given 
 him the means of saving himself from ruin, and his 
 country from a most disastrous war. My reward from 
 him will be professions of respect and esteem, speeches 
 of approbation and regard for me to my friends, know- 
 ing that they will be reported to me, secret and deep- 
 laid intrigues against me, and still more venomous 
 against my son. Such is human nature, in the gigan- 
 tic intellect, the envious temper, the ravenous ambi- 
 tion, and the rotten heart of Daniel Webster. His 
 treatment of me has been, is, and will be, an improved 
 edition of Andrew Jackson's gratitude." — Ibid., XI, 
 20. 
 
 PERSONAL ITEMS 
 
 My short discipline of fifteen months at Harvard 
 University was the introduction to all the prosperity 
 that has ever befallen me, and perhaps saved me from 
 early ruin. — Ibid., IX, 35 k- 
 
 Five or six small crackers and a glass of water give 
 me a sumptuous dinner. ... I am calm and 
 composed for the evening session, and far better pre- 
 pared for taking part in any debate than after the most 
 temperate dinner at home or abroad. — Ibid., IX, 408 
 (1837). 
 
 I informed Mr. Whitney also of my wish to join in 
 communion with the church of which he is the pastor. 
 I ought to have joined it thirty years ago and more, 
 but the tumult of the world, false shame, a distrust of 
 my own worthiness to partake of the communion, and 
 » residence elsewhere, and continually changing, made 
 me defer it to a more convenient opportunity. — Ibid., 
 VII, 1A7 (1826). 
 
 I deem it the duty of every Christian man, when he 
 betakes himself to his nightly pillow, in self-examina- 
 tion to eay, What good have I done this day? Ay! and 
 wbat evil have I done that may be repaired or repented 
 of? Nor should he rise from that pillow the next morn- 
 
48 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ing till after the enquiry, What good can I do and to 
 whom this day? I have made this my rule for many 
 years.— Ibid., IX, 269 (1S42). 
 
 My self-examination this night gave rise to many 
 mortifying reflections. I often se^ and often condemn 
 my faults. But for the efficacy of correction I am 
 afraid some penalty is necessary. — Ibid., I, 276 {1803). 
 conversation, an art of which I never 
 had an adequate idea. . . I never knew 
 
 how to make, to control, or to change it. I am by 
 nature a silent animal, . . . my deficiency 
 —the talent of starting the game. A man who has 
 that need talk but little himself.— I bid., V, 165. 
 
 Literature has been the charm of my life, and, could 
 I have carved out my own fortunes, to literature would 
 my whole life have been devoted.— I bid., V, 219 (1820). 
 
 At certain seasons, however, the propensity becomes 
 too strong for me. I walk and muse and poor forth 
 premeditated verse, which it takes me six or nine 
 months to lay by and resume to find it goo 1 for noth- 
 ing. It never appears eo to me when I compose it. In 
 a few instances I have suffered the publication of my 
 effusions, and I am accredited as one of the smallest 
 poets of my country.— I bid., VIII, 339 (1831). 
 
 OTHER BRIEF EXTRACTS 
 
 A letter book, a diary, a book of receipts and ex- 
 penses—these three books, kept without intermission, 
 should be the rule of duty of every man who can read 
 and write. But to keep them perseveringly requires a 
 character to which toil is a pleasure, and of which un- 
 tiring patience is an essential element.— 1 bid., IX, 159. 
 
 Democracy has no monuments; it strikes no medals; 
 it bears the head of no man upon a coin; its very essence 
 is iconoclastic. This is why Congress has never been 
 able to erect a monument to Washington.— I bid,, 
 VIII, 483. 
 
 in this country, politicians of desperate 
 private fortunes Always find the means of keeping 
 themselves -above water as public men. — Ibid., V, 39. 
 In the turbid stream of political life, a conscientious 
 man must endeavor to do justice to all, and to return 
 good for evil ; but he must always expect a return of 
 evil for good.— Ibid,, IX, 2U2. 
 
JOHN QU1KCY ADAMS. 49 
 
 A remark that I have occasion frequently to make is, 
 that moral considerations seldom appear to have much 
 weight in the minds of our statesmen, unless connected 
 with popular feelings. . . My own delib- 
 
 erate opinion is, that the more of pure moral principle 
 is carried into the policy and conduct of a Government, 
 the wiser and more profound will that policy be — 
 Ibid., V, 47(1820). 
 
 This fashion of peddling for popularity by travelling 
 round the country gathering crowds together, hawking 
 for public dinners, and spouting empty speeches, is 
 growing into high fashion. It was formerly confined 
 to the Presidents, but De Witt Clinton made some un- 
 successful experiments of it. Mr. Clay has mounted 
 that hobby often, and rides him very hard.— Ibid, 
 IX J 5 U833). 
 
 QUESTIONS. 
 
 1. What can you find about Adam's early training 
 and education? 2. What were his views of office hold- 
 ing? 3. What languages do you find him studying at 
 one time? 4. How wide was his range of reading? 
 
 1. Compare his views of the tariff and the Naviga- 
 tion Act. 2. Wherein are they similar subjects? 8. 
 What were the relations of Adams to the political par- 
 ties of his time? 4. What were his views of parties 
 and partisanship? 5. What reasons did he give for 
 any change of party? 6. What did he think the duty 
 of the Senate as to appointments? 7. What was his 
 influence in the Senate first and last? 8. What change 
 occurred in his political prospects while in the Senate, 
 and why? 9. What was his position on the embargo 
 and its effect ? 10. Can you decide whether he thought 
 the embargo a wise measure? 
 
 1 . Views of Adams as to the settlement of the West 
 and Indian rights to land. 2. What stand did he take 
 as to signatures to treaties, and why was he so decided 
 about it? 3. Form an opinion of Adams as a diplomat. 
 4. How long before his election do you find him to be a 
 presidential possibility? 5. Why was he so much grat- 
 ified at his election to the House of Representatives? 
 6. What does he regard as the causes of the opposition 
 to him in Congress? 7. Compare the views of Wirt and 
 Adams as to implied powers in the constitution.® 8. 
 Can you determine whether Adams opposed the Louisi- 
 ana purchase? 9. Determine his views as to expansion 
 in general.' 10. What conditions affected them in some 
 cases that are now non-existent? 
 
50 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 1. What solutions of the slavery problem did Adami 
 suggest ? 2. Which one was highly prophetic of the his- 
 torical solution? 3. Find prophetic elements in the 
 others as far as possible. 4. Why could not Adams be 
 popular in the West? 5. What were his views as to 
 Texas in 1819? 6. Much later? 7. How nearly cor- 
 rect was his judgment as to the S. A. republics? 8. 
 What can you learn of projects to dissolve the Union? 
 9. How near did Adams come to favoring a dissolution 
 of it? 10. What were his views at different periods as 
 to its stability? 11. What did he think of nullification? 
 12. Of the abolitionists and of abolition? 13. Collect 
 his views on all possible phases of the slavery question. 
 14. How important did Adams consider the work of 
 internal improvements? 15. How much of the Monroe 
 Doctrine can you find? 16. What did Adams think of 
 the public lands? 
 
 1. Sum up the personal traits of J. Q. Adams. 2. 
 What elements of character contributed to his success- 
 ful career. 3. Write his life based on these extracts. 
 4. What points are too obscure for satisfactory treat- 
 ment? 5. Which of the questions of his time are open 
 questions to-day? 6. On which of the settled questions 
 was he right? 7. On which was he wrong? 8. Were 
 there any changes in views due to wider experience or 
 to changed conditions? 9. Which of your answers to 
 the above questions are you sure of? 10. Which are 
 merely an opinion. 11. Which questions are unanswer- 
 able from the given data? 12. Consider the value of 
 the material of this study. 13. What are your conclu- 
 sions concerning the man? 14. Ask and answer other 
 questions of your own? 15. Use the questions of last 
 month so far as they are adapted to this study. 
 
HENRY CLAY 
 
 Born near Richmond, 1777. Moved to Ken- 
 tucky, 1797. Member of Kentucky legislature, 
 off and on, 1801-1811. Senator, 1806; again, 
 1809. Speaker House of Representatives, 1811- 
 1821. 1823-1825. Secretary of State, 1825-1829. 
 Candidate for President, 1824, 1832, 1844. Can- 
 didate for nomination, 184C, 1848. Senator, 
 1829-1842; again, 1849-1852. Died, 1852. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 HENRY CLAY 
 
 PERHAPS no man in American history has 
 had so great a direct influence on legis 
 lation as Henry Clay. As Speaker of the 
 House for about twelve years he appointed the 
 committees, and thus determined largely the 
 direction legislation should take. His influence 
 as Speaker was also a powerful factor in other 
 ways. From 1831 to 1852 he was in the Senate 
 for the larger part of the time, and shared with 
 Webster and Calhoun in its leadership. In 
 many ways, probably, he was not the equal of 
 either, but as a leader of men he was their su- 
 perior. It thus happened that he could secure 
 his will more frequently than either. On the 
 whole his career was more completely legislative 
 than any of our other great statesmen. Only 
 once, in 1814-15, did he turn to diplomacy, 
 and but once, from 1825-29, did he enter the 
 field of administration. His life was given over 
 to a study of legislative processes and legisla- 
 tive needs. 
 
 It may be confidently affirmed that legisla- 
 tion is more fundamental, and more important, 
 than either administrative or judicial processes. 
 Primarily it has to do with determining the 
 will of the state, and securing its proper and 
 adequate expression To be sure, the execu- 
 
HENRY CLAY. 53 
 
 tive department of government must carry that 
 will into operation, or it is worthless, or possi- 
 bly worse. The judiciary must be capable of 
 judging what that will is, and, in nations with 
 constitutions like our own, holding the legisla- 
 ture down to an interpretation of its powers in 
 accordance with its constitutional rights. Yet, 
 when all has been said, it still remains true 
 that to will is of greater importance than to ex- 
 ecute or to judge. A government must fail that 
 can not find an easy and adequate expression 
 for its will; it may fail, even when this is se- 
 cured, if the other departments of government 
 are incompetent or not properly organized. If 
 this analysis then be correct, our series of 
 studies for this year, concerned as it is with the 
 men who as legislators have had to do with 
 the will of the nation, with its most important 
 function, becomes of the highest value. There 
 is perhaps one time in a nation's history when 
 the executive surpasses in importance even the 
 legislature, and that is in time of war. Of 
 course, then it is the force of the nation that 
 must be wielded. For nations, therefore, 
 whose life has been m.irtial, not industrial, the 
 reverse of what I have said above may be true. 
 But for nations like our own, peaceful, indus- 
 trial, and democratic, the important field of 
 work for the statesman is in legislation, in find- 
 ing out and properly expressing its will. In 
 the list of men who have had to do in formu- 
 lating this will, Clay stands second, perhaps, to 
 none. The very few names in American his- 
 tory— Washing ton's, Hamilton's, Jefferson's, 
 Lin oln's— that tower above his, were great 
 personalities a< well— were administrators in 
 
54 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 moments of great need; or were creators of great 
 policies. 
 
 Of Clay's writings in early years we have 
 almost nothing left. It is not till he becomes 
 the nation's that we can let him speak of 
 himself. This study, therefore, is necessarily 
 largely a direct study of his course in Congress, 
 acting for the people. 
 
 In 1829 in a speech to his constituents Clay 
 tells us something of himself, and gives us an 
 insight into his character in many ways when he 
 does not directly speak of himself: 
 
 I fear, friends and fellow-citizens, that if I could find 
 language to express the feelings which now animate 
 me, I could not be heard throughout this vast assembly. 
 My voice, once strong and powerful, has had its vigor 
 impaired by delicate health and advancing age . . . 
 I behold gathered here, sires far advanced in years, en- 
 deared to me by an interchange of friendly office and 
 sympathetic feeling, beginning more than thirty years 
 ago. Their sons, grown up during my absence in the 
 public councils, accompany them; and all, prompted 
 by ardent attachment, affectionately surrounding and 
 saluting me, as if I belonged to their own household. 
 . . . I consider this day the proudest of my life. 
 * * * # 
 
 No occasion can be more appropriate than the present, 
 when surrounded by my former constituents, to say a 
 few words upon the unimportant subject of myself. 
 Prior to my return home I had stated, in answer to all 
 inquiries whether I should be again presented as a can- 
 didate to represent my old district in the house of rep- 
 resentatives, that I should come to no absolute decision, 
 until I had taken time for reflection, and to ascertain 
 what might be ' the feelings and wishes of those who 
 had so often honored me with their suffrages. The 
 present representative of the district has conducted 
 himself towards me with the greatest liberality. . 
 . He had promptly declined being a candidate, if 1 
 would offer, and he warmly urged me to offer. Since 
 my return home, I have mixed freely as 1 could with 
 
HENRY CLAY. 55 
 
 toy fellow-citizens of the district. They have met me 
 with the greatest cordiality. Many of them have ex- 
 pressed a wish that I would again represent them. 
 Some of the most prominent and respectable of those 
 who voted for the present chief magistrate [Jackson] 
 have also expressed a similar wish. I have every 
 reason to believe, that there would be no opposition to 
 me, from any quarter or any party, if I were to offer 
 But . . . under all circumstances, I think that, 
 . I may continue at home for a season, if not 
 during the remainder of my life, among my friends 
 and old constituents, cheering and cheered by them, 
 and interchanging all the kind and friendly offices in- 
 cident to private life. . . . 
 
 And now, my friends and fellow-citizens, I cannot 
 part from you, on possibly this last occasion of my ever 
 publicly addressing you, without reiterating the ex- 
 pression of my thanks from a heart overflowing with 
 gratitude. I came among you, now more than thirty 
 years ago, an orphan boy, penniless, stranger to you 
 all, without friends, without the favor of the great. 
 You took me up, cherished me, caressed me, protected 
 me, honored me. You have constantly poured upon 
 me a bold and unabated stream of innumerable favors. 
 Time, which wears out everything, has increased and 
 strengthened your affection for mo. When I seemed 
 deserted by almost the whole world, and assailed by 
 almost every tongue, and pen, and press, you have fear- 
 lessly and manfully stood by me, with unsurpassed zeal 
 and undiminished friendship. When I felt as if I should 
 sink beneath the storm of abuse and detraction, which 
 was violently raging around me, I have found myself 
 upheld and sustained by your encouraging voices, and 
 your approving smiles. I have doubtless committed 
 many faults and indiscretions, over which you have 
 thrown the broad mantle of your charity. But I can 
 say, and in the presence of my God and this assembled 
 multitude, I will say, that I have honestly and faith- 
 fully served my country: that I have never wronged it; 
 and that, however unprepared I lament that I am to 
 appear in the Divine presence on other accounts, 1 in- 
 voke the stern justice of His judgment on my public 
 conduct, without the smallest apprehension of his dis- 
 
56 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 pleasure.— Cotton, Life and Speeches of Clay, Vol. L,pp, 
 
 568, 569, 582, 585. 
 
 That Clay was sensitive to public criticism, 
 in his early years at least, may be seen in this 
 letter from Mr. Brown, his brother-in-law. of 
 September 1, 1808: 
 
 . . . I am sorry you do not live in better times, 
 for you have talents to adorn a public station, and to 
 be useful to your country. But to me character is more 
 dear than every other thing; and can any man hope to 
 preserve it in the present miserable state of things? 
 You have carried your election. I am rejoiced at it. 
 Your enemies will be wounded. But I pray you to quit 
 public life, or muster up sufficient philosophy to bear 
 up under all the hard names with which you will be 
 christened in the papers. You are, it seems, a Burrite 
 . . . What you may next be called is uncertain; 
 but as long as you retain your brains and your inde- 
 pendence you will be abused. Republicanism demands 
 that a man of talents should be kept down by detrac- 
 tion. Too much genius, like too much wealth, de- 
 stroys equality, the very soul of democracy. But I for- 
 bear. You will say that I have become splenetic, or 
 rather that I have always been subject to that infirm- 
 ity.— Cotton, Private Correspondence of Clay, p. 16. 
 
 The following is an extract from the earliest 
 preserved speech of Clay made in Congress. 
 
 ... In inculcating the advantages of domestic 
 manufactures, it never entered the head, I presume, of 
 any one, to change the habits of the nation from an 
 agricultural to a manufacturing community. No one, 
 I am persuaded, ever thought of converting the plow- 
 share and the sickle into the spindle and the shuttle. 
 
 . . . The opponents of the manufacturing system 
 transport themselves to the establishments of Manches- 
 ter and Birmingham, and, dwelling on the indigence, 
 vice, and wretchedness prevailing there, by pushing it 
 to an extreme, argue that its introduction into this 
 country will necessarily be attended by the same mis- 
 chievous and dreadful consequences. But what is the 
 fact? That England is the manufacturer of a great 
 
HENRY CLAY. 1 
 
 part of the world; and that, even then, the numbers 
 thus employed bear an inconsiderable proportion to the 
 whole mass of population. Were we to become the 
 manufacturers of other nations, effects of the same kind 
 might result. But if we limit our efforts, by our own 
 wants, the evils apprehended would be found to be 
 chimerical. The invention and improvement of ma- 
 chinery, . . . dispensing in a great degree with 
 manual labor; and the employment of those persons, 
 who, if we were engaged in the pursuit of agriculture 
 alone, would be either unproductive, or exposed to in- 
 dolence and immorality, will enable us to supply our 
 own wants without withdrawing our attention from 
 agriculture— that first and greatest source of national 
 wealth and happiness. ... It is certainly desir- 
 able, that the exports of the country should continue 
 to be the surplus production of tillage, and not become 
 those of manufacturing establishments. But it is im- 
 portant to diminish our imports: to furnish ourselves 
 with clothing, made by our own industry; and to cease 
 to be dependent, for the very coats we wear, upon a 
 foreign and perhaps inimical country. The nation that 
 imports its clothing from abroad is but little less de- 
 pendent than if it imported its bread. . . . Gay's 
 Speeches, I., pp. 195, 196. 
 
 Fourteen years later Clay made his first really 
 great speech on the tariff. Webster responded, 
 and the two speeches may be regarded as class- 
 ics on the subject, Clay had not been silent on 
 the topic in the preceding years, but none of 
 these earlier speeches had added much of value 
 to the discussion. Now in 1824 he says: 
 
 Two classes of politicians divide the people of the 
 United States. According to the system of one, the 
 produce of foreign industry should be subjected to no 
 other impost than such as may be necessary to provide 
 -a public revenue; . . . According to the system of 
 the other class, whilst they agree that the imposts 
 should be mainly . . . relied on as a fit and con- 
 venient source of public revenue, they would so adjust 
 and arrange the duties on foreign fabrics as to afford a 
 
 5 
 
OS AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 gradual but adequate protection to American industry, 
 and lessen our dependence on foreign nations, by secur- 
 ing a certain and ultimately a cheaper and better sup- 
 ply of our own wants from our own abundant 
 resources. Both classes are equally sincere, in their 
 respective opinions, equally honest, equally patriotic, 
 and equally desirous of advancing the prosperity of 
 the country. . . . 
 
 In casting our eyes around us, the most prominent cir- 
 cumstance which fixes our attention, and challenges our 
 deepest regret, is the general distress which pervades 
 the whole country. . . . This distress pervades 
 every part of the union, every class of society; . . . 
 what, again I would ask, is the CAUSE of the unhappy 
 condition of our country, which I have faintly de. 
 picted? It is to be found in the fact that, during almost 
 the whole existence of this government, we have shaped 
 our industry, our navigation, and our commerce, in 
 reference to an extraordinary war in Europe, and to 
 foreign markets, which no longer exist; in the fact that 
 we have depended too much upon foreign sources of 
 supply, and excited too little the native: . . . 
 
 Both the inability and the policy of foreign powers, 
 then, forbid us to rely upon the foreign market, as be- 
 ing an adequate vent for the surplus produce of Amer- 
 ican labor. . . . 
 
 Our agriculture is our greatest interest. It ought ever 
 to be predominant. All others should bend to it. . . . 
 Can we do nothing to invigorate it; nothing to correct 
 the errors of the past, and to brighten the still more 
 unpromising prospects which lie before us? . . . We 
 have seen, that an exclusive dependence on the foreign 
 market must lead to still severer distress, to impover- 
 ishment, to ruin. We must then change somewhat our 
 course. We must give a new direction to some portion 
 of our industry. We must speedily adopt a genuine 
 American policy. Still cherishing the foreign market, 
 let us create also a home market, to give further scope 
 to the consumption of the produce of American indus- 
 try. . . . 
 
 The creation of a home market is not only necessary 
 to procure for our agriculture a just reward of its labor, 
 but it is indispensable to obtain a supply of our neces- 
 sary wants. If we cannot sell, we cannot buy. . . . 
 
HENRY CLAY. 59 
 
 Mr. Chairman, our confederacy comprehends, within its 
 vast limits, great diversity of interests; agriculture, plant- 
 ing, farming, commercial, navigating, fishing, manufac- 
 turing. . . . All these great interests are confided to 
 the protection of one government — to the fate of one ship; 
 . . . If we prosper, and are happy, protection must be 
 extended to all; it is due to all. . . . [For the other 
 side read Webster's reply.] — ( lay's Speeches, I, 
 
 441, 442, 443, 440, 450, 478. 
 
 Eight years now pass away before we again 
 notice Clay's position on the tariff. He had 
 made many speeches in the meantime, but all 
 were in harmony with the one quoted for 1824. 
 January 11, 1832, he moved the following reso- 
 lution, and then addressed the Senate in its sup- 
 port: 
 
 Resolved, that the existing duties upon articles imported 
 from foreign countries, and not coming into competition 
 with similar articles made or produced within the United 
 States, ought to be forthwith abolished, except the duties 
 upon wines and silks, and that the se ought to be reduced. 
 
 He then says: 
 
 It forms no part of my present purpose to enter into a 
 consideration of the established policy of protection. . . . 
 
 Although it may be impracticable to say what the exact 
 amount of the public revenue should be for the future, 
 
 we may safely assume that the revenue may now be 
 reduced, and considerably reduced. This reduction may 
 be effected in various ways and on different principles. 
 Only three modes shall now be noticed. 
 
 First, to reduce duties on all articles in the same ratio, 
 without regard to the principle of protection. Second, to 
 retain them on the unprotected articles, and augment them 
 on the protected articles, and, Third, to abolish and reduce 
 the duties on unprotected articles, retaining and enforcing 
 the faithful collection of those on the protected articles. 
 
00 American history studies. 
 
 To the first mole there are insuperable objections. 
 Tt would leal inevitably to the destruction of our home 
 manufactures. 
 
 The second would be still more objectionable to the 
 fees of the tariff than either of the others. 
 The consequence of such an augmentation would be a 
 great dimunition in the importation of the foregoing 
 article, and of course of the duties upon it. But against 
 entire x>rohibition, except perhaps in a few instances, I 
 have been always and still am opposed. By leaving the 
 door open to the foreign rival article, the benefit is se- 
 cured of a salutary competition. If it be hermetically 
 closed, the danger is incurred of monopoly. 
 
 The third mode is the most equitable and reasonable. 
 . . . It exacts no sacrifice of principle from the op- 
 ponents of the American Systern, it comprehends none 
 on the part of its friends. . . . Clay's Speeches, Vol. 
 I, pp. 614, 619, 620. 
 
 These resolutions and this speech brought 
 forth a long debate. In reply to General 
 Hayne, of South Carolina, Clay made the 
 longest speech of his life on the tariff. For 
 three days he discussed the question. Of course 
 only a few extracts c n be here given: 
 
 . . . When gentlemen have succeeded in their 
 design of an immediate or gradual destruction of the 
 American system, what is their substitute? Free 
 trade? Free trade! The call for free trade is as una 
 vailing, as the cry of a spoiled child in its nurse's arms, 
 for the moon, or the stars that glitter in the firmament 
 of heaven. It never has existed, it never will exist. 
 Trade implies at least two parties. To be free, it should 
 be fair, equal, and reciprocal. But if we throw our 
 ports wide open to the admission of foreign productions, 
 free of all duty, what ports of any other foreign nations 
 shall we find open to the free admission of our surplus 
 produce ? We may break down all barriers to free trade 
 on our part, but the work will not be complete, until 
 foreign powers shall have removed theirs. There would 
 be freedom on one side, and restrictions, prohibitions, 
 and exclusions on the other. The bolts and the bars 
 
 '■?;---,-- / 
 
HENRY CLAY. 61 
 
 and the chains of all other nations will remain 
 undisturbed. . . . 
 
 . . . I will now, Mr. President, proceed to a more 
 particular consideration of the arguments urged against 
 the protective system, . . . It is alleged, that the 
 system operates prejudicially to the cotton planter, by 
 diminishing the foreign demand for this staple; that 
 we cannot sell to Great Britain unless we buy from her; 
 that the import duty is equivalent to an export duty, 
 and falls upon the cotton grower; that South Carolina 
 pays a disproportionate quota of the public revenue; 
 that an abandonment of the protective policy would 
 lead to an augmentation of our exports; of an amount 
 not less than one hundred and fifty millions of dollars; 
 and finally that the South cannot partake of the ad- 
 vantages of manufacturing, if there be any. 
 I conclude this part of the argument with the hope 
 that my humble exertions have not been altogether un- 
 successful in showing, 
 
 First, That the policy we have been considering ought 
 to continue to be regarded as the genuine American 
 system. 
 
 Secondly, That the free trade system, which is pro- 
 posed as its substitute, ought really to be considered as 
 the British colonial system. 
 
 Thirdly, That the American system is beneficial to all 
 parts of the Union, and absolutely necessary to much 
 the larger portion. 
 
 Fourthly, that the price of the great staple of cotton, 
 and of all our chief productions of agriculture, has been 
 sustained, and a decline averted, by the protective 
 system. 
 
 Fifthly, that if the foreign demand for cotton has 
 been at all diminished, . . . the diminution has 
 been more than compensated, in the additional demand 
 created at home. 
 
 Sixthly, That the constant tendency of the system, by 
 creating competition among ourselves, and between 
 American and European industry, ... is to re- 
 duce prices of manufactured objects. 
 
 Eighthly, That if, in a season of peace, these bene- 
 fits are experienced, in a season of war, . , . they 
 would be much more extensively felt. 
 
62 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Ninthly, and finally, [its abandonment] would lead 
 to the prostration of our manufactures, general im- 
 poverishment, and ultimate ruin. — Clay's Speeches, Vol. 
 II pp. 17, 23, 45, 46. 
 
 February 12, 1833, Olay argued in favor of 
 the compromise tariff bill. In part he said: 
 
 I yesterday, sir, gave notice that I should ask leave 
 to introduce a bill to modify the various acts imposing 
 duties on imports, ... I am anxious to find out 
 some principle of mutual accommodation, to satisfj 7 , 
 as far as practicable, both parties ... I propose 
 to give protection to our manufactured articles, ade- 
 quate protection for a length of time, . . . and on 
 the other, proposing to reduce the duties to that 
 revenue standard, for whici th? opponents of the sys- 
 tem have so long cob kn, ltd. 
 * * * * 
 
 If there be any who want civil war, ... I am not 
 one of them. I wish to see war of no kind ; but above all I 
 do iiuo desire to see civil war. . . . When a civil 
 war shall be lighted up in the bosom of our own happy 
 land, and armies are marching, and commanders are 
 winning their victories, and fleets are in motion on our 
 coast, tell me, if you can . . . its duration. 
 
 In conclusion, allow me to entreat and implore each 
 individual member of this body to bring into the con- 
 sideration of this measure, which I have had the honor 
 of proposing, felie same love of country, which, if I 
 know myself, has actuated me, and the same desire of 
 restoring harmony to the Union which has prompted 
 this effort. . . . —Clay's Speeches, II, pp. 107, 108, 
 WO. 
 
 Compare this with the above: 
 
 The foreign policy which I think this country ought 
 „o adopt, presents one of those exceptions. It would 
 perhaps be better for mankind, if, in the intercourse 
 between nations, all would leave skill and industry to 
 their unstimulated exertions. But this is not done; 
 and if other powers will incite the industry of their 
 subjects, and depress that of our citizens, in instances 
 where they may come into competition, we must imi- 
 
HENRY CLAY. 63 
 
 tate their selfish example. Hence the necessity to pro- 
 tect our manufacturers.— Cljy's Spe dies, Vol. I, p. 
 318. 
 
 The second speech made by Clay in Congress, 
 which has come down to us, argued that West 
 Florida was a part of the Louisiana Purchase. 
 After a careful historical argument, Clay says: 
 
 . . . The gentleman conceives it ungenerous, 
 that we should at this moment, when Spain is encom- 
 passed and pressed on all sides, by the immense power 
 of her enemy, occupy West Florida. Shall we sit by, 
 passive spectators, and witness the interesting transac- 
 tions of that country— transactions which tend, in the 
 most imminent degree, to jeopardize our rights, with- 
 out attempting to interfere? Are you prepared to see 
 a foreign power seize what belongs to us? . . . I 
 have no hesitation in saying, that if a parent country, 
 will not or cannot maintain its authority, in a colony 
 adjacent to us, and there exists in it a state of misrule 
 and disorder, menacing to our peace; . . . we have 
 a right, upon the eternal principles of self-preservation, 
 to lay hold upon it. This principle alone, independent 
 of any title, would warrant our occupation of West 
 Florida, But it is not necessary to resort to it— our 
 title being, in my judgment, incontestably good . . 
 . But the gentleman reminds us that Great Britain, 
 the ally of Spain, may be obliged, by her connection 
 with that country, to take part with her against us, 
 and to consider this measure of the president [taking 
 possession of West Florida] as justifying an appeal to 
 arms. Sir, is the time never to arrive, when we may 
 arrange our own affairs without the fear of insulting 
 his Britannic majesty? Is the rod of British power to 
 be forever suspended over our heads? . . . Mr. 
 President, I have before said on this floor, and now 
 take occasion to remark, that I mo3t sincerely desire 
 peace and amity with England ; that I ever prefer an 
 adjustment of all differences with her, before one with 
 any other nation. But if she persists in a denial of jus- 
 tice to us, or if she avails herself of the occupation of 
 West Florida, to commence war upon us, I trust and 
 hope that all hearts will unite, in a bold and vigorous 
 vindication of our rights. . . , 
 
64 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 I am not, sir, in . favor of cherishing the passion of 
 conquest. But I must be permitted, in conclusion, to 
 indulge the hope of seeing, ere long, the new United 
 States (if you will allow me the expression) embracing 
 not only the old thirteen states, but the entire country 
 east of the Mississippi, including East Florida, and 
 some of the territories of the north of us also.— Clay's 
 Speeches, Vol. I, p. 207, 208. 
 
 A year later Clay, in speaking in favor of 
 increasing the army, showed still more clearly 
 what he conceived the United States should do 
 in the then existing foreign conditions: 
 
 What are we to gain by the war? has been emphat- 
 ically asked. In reply, he would ask, what are we not 
 to lose by peace? Commerce, character, a nation's 
 best treasure, honor. ... 
 
 He had no disposition to magnify or dwell upon the 
 catalogue of injuries we had received from England. 
 He could not, however, overlook the impressment of 
 our seamen— an aggression upon which he never re- 
 flected, without feelings of indignation. . . . Not 
 content with seizing upon all our property which falls 
 within her rapacious grasp, the personal rights of our 
 countrymen— rights which forever ought to be sacred 
 —are trampled upon and violated. . ' . . 
 
 He contended, that the real cause of British aggres- 
 sion was, not to distress an enemy, but to destroy a 
 rival. A comparative view of our commerce with that 
 of England and the continent, would satisfy anyone of 
 the truth of this remark. . . . Clay's Speeches, Vol. 
 I, jyp- 226-228. 
 
 Again he says: 
 
 . . . An honorable peace is attainable only by an 
 efficient war. My plan would be, to call out the ample 
 resources of the country, give then a judicious direc- 
 tion, prosecute the war with the utmost vigor, strike 
 wherever we can reach the enemy, at sea or on land, 
 and negotiate the terms of peace at Quebec or at Hali- 
 fax. We are told that England is a proud and lofty 
 nation, which, disdaining to wait for danger, meets it 
 half way. Haughty as she is, we once triumphed oyer 
 
HENRY CLAY. 65 
 
 her, and. if we do not listen to the counsels of timidity 
 and despair, we shall again prevail. In such a cause 
 with the aid of providence, we must come out crowned 
 with success; but if we fail, let us fail like men, lash 
 ourselves to our gallant tars, and expire together in 
 one common struggle, fighting for free trade and 
 Seamen's rights. . . . [Speech on the Army 
 Bill]- Clay's Speeches, Vol 7, i>. $58. 
 
 Clay used the following arguments, in 1811, 
 in his discussion of the question whether the 
 national bank should be rechartered: 
 
 This vagrant power to erect a bank, after having 
 wandered throughout the whole constitution in quest 
 of some congenial spot to fasten upon, has been at 
 length located by the gentleman from Georgia on that 
 provision which authorizes congress to lay and collect 
 taxes, etc. In 1791, the power is referred to one part 
 of the instrument; in 1811 to another. Sometimes it is 
 alleged to be deducible from the power to regulate 
 commerce. Hard pressed here, it disappears, and shows 
 itself under the grant to coin money. The sagacious 
 secretary of the treasury in 1791, pursued the wisest 
 course; he has taken shelter behind general high 
 sounding and imposing terms. He has declared in the 
 preamble to the act establishing the bank, that it will 
 be very conducive to the successful conducting of the 
 national finances; will tend to give facility to the 
 obtaining of loans, and will be productive of consider- 
 able advantage to trade and industry in general. No 
 allusion is made to the collection of taxes. What is 
 the nature of this government? It is emphatically 
 federal, vested with an aggregate of specified powers 
 for general purposes, conceded by existing sovereignties, 
 who have themselves retained what is not so conceded.' 
 It is said that there are cases in which it must act on 
 implied powers. This is not controverted, but the im- 
 plication must be necessary, and obviously flow from 
 the enumerated power with which it is allied. The 
 power to charter companies is not specified in the 
 grant, and I contend is of a nature not transferable by 
 meio implication 
 
 I couceive, then, sir, that we were not empowered by 
 
66 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 the constitution, nor bound by any practice under it, to 
 renew the charter of this bank, and I might here rest the 
 
 argument [Speech on Bank charter] — Clay's 
 
 Speeches, Vol. I, pp. 2 3, 220. 
 
 In 1832, his feelings towards the bank may be 
 seen in this quotation : 
 
 I voted, in 1811, against the old bank of the United 
 States, and I delivered on that occasion, a speech, in which, 
 among other reasons I assigned that of its being unconstitu- 
 tional. My speech has been read to the Senate, during the 
 progress of this bill, but the reading of it excited no other 
 regret than that it was read in such a wretched, bungling, 
 mangling manner. During a long public life, (I mention 
 the fact not as claiming any merit for it,) the only great 
 question in which I have ever changed my opinion, is that 
 of the bank of the United States. If the researches of the 
 Senator had carried him a little further, he would, by turn- 
 ing over a few more leaves of the same book from which he 
 read my speech, have found that which I made in 1816, in 
 support of the present bank. By the reasons assigned in it 
 for the change of my opinion, I am ready to abide in the 
 judgment of the present generation and of posterity. _ . . . 
 — Clay's Speeches, Vol. II, p. 98. 
 
 Study the following extracts to find Clay's 
 views in regard to the relation of State and 
 Union : 
 
 . . . Greatly as I venerate the state which gave me 
 birth, and much as I respect the judges of its supreme court, 
 several of whom are my personal friends, I am obliged to 
 think that some of the doctrines which that state has re- 
 cently held concerning state rights, are fraught with much 
 danger. If those doctrines had been asserted during the 
 late war, a large share' of the public disapprobation which 
 has been given to Massachusetts would have fallen to Vir- 
 ginia. What are these doctrines? The courts of Virginia 
 assert, that they have a right to determine on the constitu- 
 tionality of any law or treaty of the United States, and to 
 expound them according to their own views, even if they 
 
HENRY CLAY. 07 
 
 should vary from the decision of the Supreme court of 
 the United States. They assert more — that from their 
 decision there can be no appeal to the supreme court of 
 the United States; that there exists in congress no 
 power to frame a law, obliging the court of the state, 
 in the last resort, to submit its decision to the super- 
 vision of the supreme court of the United States. . 
 . . Clay's Speeches, Vol I, p. 305. 
 
 * # * * 
 
 In cases where there are two systems of government, 
 operating at the same time and place, over the same 
 people, the one general, the other local or particular, 
 one system or the other must possess the right to de- 
 cide upon the extent of the powers, in cases of collision, 
 which are claimed by the general government. No 
 third party of sufficient impartiality, weight or respon- 
 sibility, other than such a tribunal as a supreme court, 
 has yet been devised, or perhaps can be created. The 
 doctrine of one side is that the general government 
 though limited in its nature, must necessarily possess 
 the power to ascertain what authority it has, and, by 
 consequence, the extent of that authority. 
 
 # * # * 
 
 The South Carolina doctrine, on the other side, is, 
 that that state has the right to determine the limits of 
 the powers granted to the general government; and 
 that whenever any of its acts transcend those limits, 
 in the opinion of the state of South Carolina, she is 
 competent to annul them. . . . It is admitted that 
 the South Carolina doctrine is liable to abuse; but 
 it is contended, that th3 patriotism of each state is 
 an adequate security, and that the nullifying power 
 would only be exercised, ' in an extraordinary case 
 where the powers reserved to the states, under the con- 
 stitution, are usurped by the federal government. 
 And is not the patriotism of all the states, as great a 
 safeguard against the assumption of powers, not con- 
 ferred upon the general government, as the patriotism 
 of one state is against the denial of powers which are 
 clearly granted. . . . [Speech on Nullification] 
 Clay's Speeches, Vol. I, p. 601, 602. 
 
 Spanish- American relations: 
 I beg. in the first place, to correct misconceptions, if 
 
68 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 any exist in regard to my opinions. I am averse to 
 war with Spain, or with any power. I would give 
 no just cause of war to any power— not to Spain herself. 
 I have seen enough of war, and of its calamities, even 
 when successful. No country upon earth has more in- 
 terest than this in cultivating peace and avoiding war, 
 as long as it is possible honorably to avoid it. 
 
 Spain has undoubtedly given us abundant and just 
 cause of war. But it is not every cause of war that 
 should lead to war. War is one of those dreadful 
 scourges, that so shakes the foundations of society, 
 overturns or changes the character df governments, in- 
 terrupts or destroys the pursuits of private happiness, 
 Tarings, in short, misery and wretchedness in so many 
 forms, and at last is, in its issue so doubtful and haz- 
 ardous, that nothing but dire necessity can justify an 
 appeal to arms. ... I am no propagandist. I 
 would not seek to force upon other nations our princi- 
 ples and our liberty, if they do not want them. I 
 would not disturb the repose even of a detestable des- 
 potism. But if an abused and oppressed people will 
 their freedom; if they seek to establish it; if, in truth 
 they have established it; we have a right as a sover- 
 eign power, to notice the fact, and to act as circum- 
 stances and our interests require. . . . [Speech on 
 the Emancipation of South America]. — Clay's Speeches, 
 Vol. I, pp. 325, 326. 
 
 Jackson's actions in connection with the 
 Seminole War bring forth the following cutting 
 remarks from Clay: 
 
 The gentleman from Massachusetts may tell me if 
 he chooses what he pleases about the tomahawk and 
 scalping knife; about Indian enormities, and foreign 
 miscreants and incendiaries. I, too, hate them; from 
 my very soul I abominate them. But I love my coun- 
 try and its constitution; I love liberty and safety, and 
 fear military despotism more, even, than I hate these 
 monsters. 
 
 v ^ * T 
 
 I hope not to be misunderstood; I am far from inti- 
 mating that General Jackson cherishes any designs in- 
 mical to the liberties of the country. I believe his in- 
 
HENKY CLAY. 69 
 
 teDtions to be pure and patriotic. I thank God that he 
 would not, but I thank him still more that he could 
 not if he would, overrun the liberties of the republic. 
 But precedents, if bad, are fraught with the most 
 dangerous consequences. ... To you Mr. Chair- 
 mr-n, belongs the high privilege of transmitting, un- 
 impaired, to posterity, the fair character and liberty 
 of our country. Do you expect to execute this high 
 trust, by trampling, or suffering to be trampled down, 
 law, justice, the constitution, and the rights of the 
 people? by exhibiting examples of inhumanity, and 
 cruelty and ambition? . . . I am not disposed to 
 censure the President for not ordering a court of in- 
 quiry, or a general court martial. Perhaps, impelled 
 by a sense of gratitude, he determined, by anticipa- 
 tion, to extend to the general that pardon which he had 
 the undoubted right to grant after sentence. Let us 
 not shrink from our duty. Let us assert our constitu- 
 tional powers, and vindicate the instrument from mili- 
 tary violation. [Speech on the Seminole War].— Clay's 
 Speeches, Vol. I, p. 389. 
 
 Clay breaks forth in these impassioned words 
 in his speech on the Greek Revolution: 
 
 Are we so humble, so low, so debased, that, we dare 
 not express our sympathy for suffering Greece; that we 
 dare not articulate our detestation of the brutal ex- 
 cesses of which she has been the bleeding victim, lest 
 we might offend some one or more of their imperial 
 and royal majesties? . . . Are we so mean, so base, 
 so despicable, that we may not attempt to express our 
 horror, utter our indignation, at the most brutal and 
 atrocious war that ever stained earth or shocked high 
 heaven? at the ferocious deeds of a savage and infuri- 
 ated soldiery, stimulated and urged on by the clergy of 
 a fanatical and inimical religion, and rioting in all the 
 excesses of blood and butchery, at the mere details of 
 which the heart sickens and recoils? . . . [Speech 
 on the Greek Revolution] — Clay's Speeches, Vol. I, p. 
 437. 
 
 These extracts give us an insight into Clay's 
 ideas concerning the negro, and what could be 
 done for him: 
 
70 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 The object of the society was the colonization of the 
 free colored people, not the slaves of the country. . . 
 
 Numbers of the free African race among us are will- 
 ing to go to Africa. The society has never experienced 
 any difficulty on that subject except that its means of 
 comfortable transportation have been inadequate to 
 accommodate all who have been anxious to migrate. 
 Why should they not go? Here they are in the lowest 
 stage of social gradation; aliens, political, moral, and 
 social aliens — strangers though natives. There they 
 would be in the midst of their friends and their kin- 
 dred, at home, though born in a foreign land, and ele- 
 vated above the natives of the country, as much as 
 they are degraded here below the other classes of the 
 community. . . . 
 
 # * * * 
 
 The colonization society has never imagined it to be 
 practicable, or within the reach of any means which 
 the several governments of the union could bring to 
 bear on the subject, to transport the whole of the Afri- 
 can race within the limits of the United States. 
 
 * * * * 
 
 This society is well aware, I repeat, that they can 
 not touch the subject of slavery. ... Of all de- 
 scriptions of our population, that of the free colored, 
 taken in the aggregate, is the least prolific, because of 
 the checks arising from vice and want. ... If I 
 could be instrumental in eradicating the deepest stain 
 uyon the character of the country, and removing all 
 cause of reproach on account of it, by foreign nations ; 
 if I could only be instrumental in ridding of this foul 
 blot that revered state that gave me birth, or that not 
 less beloved state which kindly adopted me as her son; 
 I would not exchange the proud satisfaction which I 
 should enjoy, for the honor of all the triumphs ever de- 
 creed to the most successful conqueror. . , There 
 is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her 
 children, whose ancestors have been torn from her by 
 the ruthless hand of fraud and violence. Transplanted 
 in a foreign land, they will carry back to their native 
 soil the rich fruits of religion, civilization, law, and lib- 
 erty. , . Of all classes of our population, the 
 
HENRY CLAY. ?1 
 
 most vicious is that of the free colored. It is the inev- 
 itable result of their moral, political, and civil degra- 
 dation. Contaminated themselves, they extend their 
 vices to all around them, to the slaves and to the 
 whites. If the principle of colonization should be con- 
 fined to them; if a colony can b9 firmly established and 
 successfully continued in Africa which should draw off 
 annually an amount of that portion of our population 
 equal to its annual increase, much good will be done. 
 . . . Every emigrant to Africa is a missionary car- 
 rying with him credentials in the holy cause of civili- 
 zation, religion, and free institutions. 
 
 We are reproached with doing mischief by the agita- 
 tion of this question. The society goes into no house- 
 hold to disturb its domestic tranquility; it addresses 
 itself to no slaves to weaken their obligations of obe- 
 dience. It seeks to effect no man's property. It has 
 neither the power nor the will to effect the property of 
 any one contrary to his consent. The execution of its 
 scheme would augment instead of diminishing the 
 value of the property left behind. [On African Colon- 
 ization].— Clays Speeches, Vol I, pp. 5 IS, 519, 520, 523, 
 515, 526, 5J7. 
 
 Clay on the abolitionists: 
 
 There are three classes of persons opposed, or appar- 
 ently opposed to the continued existence of slavery in 
 the United States. . . . And the third class are 
 the real ultra abolitionists, who are resolved to persevere 
 in the pursuit of their object at all hazards, and with- 
 out regard to any consequences, however calamitous 
 they may be. With them the rights of property are 
 nothing; the deficiency of the powers of the general 
 government are nothing; the acknowledged and incon- 
 testable powers of the states are nothing; civil war, a 
 dissolution of the union, and the overthrow of a gov- 
 ernment in which are concentrated the fondest hopes 
 of the civilized world, are nothing. 
 * * * * 
 
 The next obstacle in the way of abolition, arises out 
 of the fact of the presence in the slave states of three 
 millions of slaves. They are there, dispersed through- 
 out the land, part and parcel of our population. They 
 
72 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 were brought in to the country originally under the au- 
 thority of the parent government, whilst we were col- 
 onies, and their importation was continued, in spite of 
 all the remonstrances of our ancestors. If the question 
 were an original question, whether, there being no 
 slaves in the country, we should introduce them, and 
 incorporate them into our society, that would be a to- 
 tally different question. Few, if any, of the citizens of 
 the United States would be found to favor their intro- 
 duction. No man in it would oppose, upon that sup- 
 position, their admission with more determined resolu- 
 tion and conscientious repugnance than I should. . . . 
 What is best to be done for their happiness and our 
 own? In the slave states the alternative is. that the 
 white man must govern the black, or the black govern 
 the white. . . . [Abolition Petitions].— Clay's 
 Speeches, Vol. II, pp. 357, 3G7. 
 
 The relations that existed between Clay and 
 President Jackson are well set forth in the 
 following extracts: 
 
 We are in the midst of a revolution, hitherto blood- 
 less, but rapidly tending towards a total change of the 
 pure republican character of the government, and to 
 the concentration of all power in the hands of one man. 
 The powers of congress are paralyzed, except when ex- 
 erted in conformity with his will, by a frequent and an 
 extraordinary exercise of the executive veto, not an- 
 ticipated by the founders of our constitution, and not 
 practised by any of the predecessors of the present 
 chief magistrate.— [ On the removal of the deposits ]. 
 # * * * 
 
 The constitutional participation of the senate in the 
 appointing power is virtually abolished by the constant 
 use of the power of removal from office, without any 
 known cause, and by the appointment of the same in- 
 dividual to the same office, after his rejection by the 
 senate. . . . The judiciary has not been exempt 
 from the prevailing rage for innovation. Decisions of 
 the tribunals, deliberately pronounced have been con- 
 temptuously disregarded. . . . By the third of 
 March, ts:}7, if the progress o? the innovation continues, 
 there will be scarcely a vesfcage of the government re- 
 
HENRY CLAY. 73 
 
 maining and its policy, as they existed prior to the 
 third of March 1829. In a term of eight years, a little 
 more than equal to that which was required to estab- 
 lish our liberties, the government will have been trans- 
 formed into an elective monarchy— the worst of all 
 forms of governments. ... [On the removal of 
 the deposits j. 
 * # * * 
 
 For more than fifteen years, Mr. President, I have 
 been struggling to avoid the present state of things. 
 I thought I perceived in some proceedings, during the 
 conduct of the Seminole war, a spirit of defiance to the 
 constitution and to the law. With what sincerity and 
 truth, with what earnestness and devotion to civil 
 liberty, I have struggled, the searcher of all human 
 hearts best knows. With what fortune the bleeding- 
 constitution of my country fatally attests. [On the 
 removal of the deposits].— Clay's Speeches, Vol VI 
 pp. 145, 146, 164. 
 
 Clay supposed seemingly in 1842 when he 
 delivered his Farewell Address to the Senate 
 that he was leaving its halls forever. Instead 
 he returned again in 1849, and made some of 
 his most famous speeches in favor of the Com- 
 promise of 1850. Space, however, forbids any 
 further extracts. 
 
 In retiring, as I am about to do, forever, from the 
 senate, suffer me to express my heartfelt wishes that all 
 the great and patriotic objects of the wise framers of 
 our constitution may be fulfilled. That the high des- 
 tiny designed for it may be fully answered; and that 
 its deliberations, now and hereafter, may eventuate in 
 s curing the prosperity of our beloved country, in 
 maintaining its rights and honors abroad, and uphold- 
 in- its interests at home. I retire, I know, at a period 
 of infinite distress and embarrassment. I wish I could 
 take my leave of you under more favorable auspices; 
 but, without meaning at this time to say whether on 
 any or on whom reproaches for the sad condition of the 
 country should fall, I appeal to the senate and to the 
 world to bear testimony to my earnest and continued 
 
 6 
 
7± AMERICAN HtSTORY STUDIES. 
 
 exertions to avert it, and to the truth that no blame 
 can justly attach to me. [ Valedictory address to the 
 senate ]. — Clay's Speeches, Vol. XI, p. 568. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 1. What was the character of Clay's oratory? (2) 
 Point out some of the reasons that gave him a strong 
 hold on the people. (3) Do you see any traces of 
 egotism? (4) From what class did Clay come? (5) 
 How had the people of Kentucky treated him? (6) 
 Could Clay bear criticism unaffectedly? (7) What 
 question earliest aroused Clay's interest? (8) Outline 
 the arguments he used in favor of protection. (9) 
 What did he name the system? (10) Was the name he 
 chose a good political stroke? (11) How did his argu- 
 ments differ from those now used? (12) Were his ar- 
 guments all logical? (13) Were they all consistent 
 with each other? 
 
 (1) Trace Clay's position in regard to a national 
 bank. (2) What theory of the Constitution in his first 
 bank speech? (3) Compare it with the theory found in 
 his speech on nullification. 
 
 (1) What position did Clay take in regard to acquisi- 
 tion of territory? (2) Would he now, judged by these 
 speeches, be for or against annexation of Cuba, for ex- 
 ample? (3) What were his feelings in regard to war? 
 (4) Was he entirely consistent? (5) How did he feel in 
 regard to the war of 1812? (6) Who decide on the con- 
 stitutionality of laws? (7) What claim did Virginia 
 make in regard to such a decision? (8) What view did 
 Clay hold? (9) What names in history are the two 
 views- known by? (10) How did he argue on the 
 South Carolina position ? 
 
 (1) Show what Clay's feelings were toward Jackson. 
 (2) Can you explain his bitter tone? (3) Have his pre- 
 dictions been in any way fulfilled? (4) May they yet 
 be fulfilled? 
 
 (1) Was Clay a lover of popular liberty? (2) Bring 
 together as many extracts to prove your answer as you 
 can. (3) For what purpose does he say the coloniza- 
 tion society was formed? (4) What did he assert was 
 the character of the free negroes? (5) Why did he 
 claim they ought to be sent back to Africa? (6) Are 
 his two assertions consistent? (7) Why does he wish 
 the free negroes removed? (8) Were his remarks in 
 regard to the negroes consistent with his speech on 
 Greek liberty? (9) Did Clay desire emancipation of 
 the slaves? 
 
 (1) Judged by these extracts do you consider Clay a 
 deep thinker or not? (2) Write a life of Clay from 
 these extracts. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Born in New Hampshire, 1782. Member of 
 House of Representatives, 1813-1817, 1823-1827. 
 Senator, 1827-1841, 1845-1850. Candidate for 
 President, 1836. Secretary of state, 1841-1S43, 
 1850-1852. Debate with Clay on tariff, 1824. 
 Webster-Hayne debate, 1830. Webster-Cal- 
 houn debate, 1833. Great " Seventh of March" 
 speech, 1850. Died, 1852. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 f"^HE names of Clay and Webster are so in- 
 timately associated in American history 
 that one name is rarely mentioned un- 
 less it is accompanied by the other. A third 
 name is usually joined with theirs; in many ways 
 the antithesis of both. It is fitting, therefore, 
 that this study, following the one on Clay 
 should deal with Webster. It will be no less 
 proper that Calhoun should come before us for 
 cur next study. 
 
 Webster was five years the junior of Clay. 
 Born on a farm in New Hampshire, his early 
 years were scarcely more favorable than Clay's. 
 However, he had a father who was ready to 
 sacrifice for him, so he was able to obtain a col- 
 lege education, graduating at Dartmouth in 
 1S00 (?) the recognized leader in composition 
 and public speaking of his class. 
 
 As in the case of Clay, the mass of material 
 from which to select in his manhood years is so 
 rich that its wealth overwhelms one when he 
 attempts to choose. There are also quite a 
 large number of youthful letters accessible, so 
 it would be possible to let Webster tell the 
 story of his own life from an early time; but 
 as it could only be done by the omission of 
 more interesting, or, at least, more important, 
 matter from his public life, it has been thought 
 best to incorporate but few extracts here. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 77 
 
 PART I 
 
 EXTRACTS MADE FROM WEBSTER'S PRIVATE CORRE- 
 SPONDENCE, EDITION 1857, COMPILED BY HIS 
 SON, FLETCHER WEBSTER 
 
 I believe I made tolerable progress in most branches 
 which I attended to, while in this school; but there 
 was one thin- I could not do. I could not make a de- 
 clamation. I could not speak before the school. The 
 kind and excellent Buckminster sought, especially, to 
 persuade me to perform the exercise of declamation, 
 like other boys; but I could not do it.— Autobiography. ' 
 
 With respect to Daniel Webster's college life, his 
 habits of study were good. He was a strict observer of 
 order. His mind was too dignified to do otherwise. He 
 never engaged in college disturbances.— .Rev. E. Smith 
 1852. 
 
 "Ay," said he, "but the opinion of my scholarship 
 was a mistaken one. It was overestimated. I will ex- 
 , plain what I mean. Many other students read more 
 than I did and knew more than I did. But so much as 
 I read, I made my own. When a half hour or an hour 
 had elapsed, I closed my book and thought over what 
 I had read. If there was anything peculiarly interest- 
 ing or striking in the passage, I endeavored to recall it 
 and lay it up in my memory, and commonly effected 
 my object. — Letter of McGaw, 1852. 
 
 Webster was never an idle student, as some persons 
 falsely and erroneously believe. I have often been 
 questioned on that subject, and have always taken 
 upon myself the pleasing task of promptly denying the 
 charge and correcting the mistake.— Letter of Mr 
 HotchJciss, 1852. 
 
 [1800J I have read Robertson, Vattel, and three 
 volumes of Blackstone, and a little miscellaneous stuff 
 of no account. I hope to go on more rapidly now, for 
 I feel more at ease than I have done heretofore. 
 
 [1802] I have now by me two cents in lawful federal 
 currency; next week I will send them, if they be all; 
 they will buy a pipe; with a pipe you can smoke, smok- 
 ing inspires wisdom; wisdom is allied to fortitude; 
 from fortitude it is but one step to stoicism; and stoi- 
 
78 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 cism never pants for this world's goods; so perhaps my 
 two cents, by this process, may put you quite at ease 
 about cash. Write ma this minute, if you can; tell me 
 all your necessities; no, not all, a part only, and any- 
 thing else you can think of to amuse me. 
 
 [1803] A man can never gallop over the fields of 
 law on Pegasus, nor fly across them on the wing of 
 oratory. If he would stand on terra firnia he must de- 
 sccni; if he would be a great lawyer, he must first con- 
 sent to be only a great drudge. 
 
 [1804] The contagion of democracy will prevade 
 every place and corrupt every generous and manly sen- 
 timent. It cannot be successfully resisted. The pes- 
 tilence will spread in a favorable state of the atmos- 
 phere, notwithstanding all the medical exertions of the 
 most skillful physicians. 
 
 [1804] It were much easier for me to form connec- 
 tions than to support them. There are many young 
 men of my own age with whom it would be easy to as- 
 sociate; but a young man who has a fortune to spend, 
 is not a proper companion for another who has a for- 
 tune to make. 
 
 [1813] We shall probably get up some resolutions, 
 directly attacking the war. If so, I suppose I shal] 
 shoot my little gun. We have some fine fellows on oui 
 side of the House. 
 
 [1816] The events of the times, the policy of Eng- 
 land, the consequences of our war, and the Ghent 
 Treaty, have bereft us of our commerce, the great 
 source of our wealth. If any great scenes are to be 
 acted in this country within the next twenty years, 
 New York is the place in which those scenes are to 
 be viewed. More of this hereafter. 
 
 [1823] Dear Daniel, — I received yours this morn- 
 ing. Of all the candidates named for the Presidency, 
 the people of New Hampshire would undoubtedly pre- 
 fer Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams being out of the question, 
 I think Mr. Calhoun would be their choice. I think 
 neither Jackson, Crawford, nor Clay could ever ob- 
 tain the votes of this state.— [N. H.] 
 
 [1823] Many of the Federalists in the western dis- 
 trict, it is supposed, favor Mr. Adams; otherwise, in the 
 city and its neighborhood. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 79 
 
 [1824] I hope all New England will support Mr. 
 Calhoun for the Vice-Presidency. If so, he will prob- 
 ably be chosen, and that will be a great thing. He is a 
 true man, and will do good to the country in that 
 situation. 
 
 [1824] The tariff will not pass the Senate without 
 great amendment. 
 
 We have struck a mortal blow on the tariff principle. 
 If it were not for instruction and other nonsense, two- 
 th'rds nearly of our House would be against it. 
 
 [1829] General Jackson will be here about loth Feb- 
 ruary. . . . 
 
 My opinion is, that when he comes he will bring a 
 breeze with him. Which way it will blow I cannot tell. 
 
 [1832] Mr. Calhoun, as you are doubtless aware, has 
 published a labored defence of nullification, in the form 
 of a letter, to Governor Hamilton. It is far the ablest 
 and most plausible, and therefore the most dangerous 
 vindication of that particular form of revolution, which 
 has yet appeared. 
 
 In the silence of abler pens, and seeing as I think I 
 do, that the affairs of this government are rapidly ap- 
 proaching a crisis, I have felt it to be my duty to an- 
 swer Mr. Calhoun. 
 
 [1835] You express a wish, however, that for the 
 satisfaction of friends in other parts of the state, I 
 should enable you to make known my sentiments 
 respecting the order of Free masonrj 7 . I have no hesita- 
 tion, gentlemen, in saying that, however unobjection- 
 able may have been the original objects of the institu- 
 tion, or however pure may be the motives and purposes 
 of individual members, and notwithstanding the many 
 great and good men who have from time to time be- 
 longed to the order, yet, nevertheless, it is an institu- 
 tion, which, in my judgment, is essentially wrong in the 
 principal of its formation; that, from its very nature, 
 it is liable to great abuses; that among the obligations 
 which are found to be imposed on its members, there 
 arc such as are entirely incompatible with the duty of 
 good citizens; and that all secret associations, the mem- 
 bers of which take up m themselves extraordinary obli- 
 gations to one another, and are bound together by secret 
 
80 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 oaths, are, naturally, sources of jealousy and just alarm 
 to others; are especially unfavorable to harmony and 
 mutual confidence among men, living together under 
 popular institutions; and are dangerous to the general 
 cause of civil liberty and good government. Under the 
 influence of this conviction, I heartily approved the 
 law, lately enacted in the State of which I am a citi 
 zen, for abolishing all such oaths and obligations 
 
 [1838] I entertain no doubt whatever that Congresi 
 have full authority to regulate slavery within the saic 
 District, or abolish it altogether; . . . 
 
 More than all, it is my opinion, " that the citizens oi 
 the United States have an unquestionable constitu- 
 tional right to petition Congress for the restraint 01 
 abolition of slavery and the slave trade within the said 
 District; . . . 
 
 [1840] I see, too, that the money crisis is not over in 
 England. Our concerns are indeed much connected, 
 an "! the same causes affect them all. I am coming tc 
 the opinion fast, that new mode3 of regulation must be 
 adopted in both countries, or else the frequent con- 
 traction and expansion of the paper circulation will 
 compel us to give it up, and go back to gold or iron, or 
 the Lord knows what. 
 
 [1840] The question of accepting a seat in youi 
 cabin et, should it be tendered to me, has naturally 
 been the subject of my reflections and consultation 
 wi th friends. The result of these reflections and con- 
 sultations has been that I should accept the office of the 
 Secretary of State, should it be offered to me, under 
 circumstances such as now exist. 
 
 [184.1] The Senate yesterday engrossed a bill for a 
 bank Its shape is the result of many compromises, 
 but it may still be doubtful whether it will become a 
 law. Probably it may pass both Houses, but whether 
 the President will approve it, is a question which I 
 hardly dare ask myself. If he should not, I know not 
 what will become of our administration. 
 
 [1842] Of one thing I am glad, and that is, that I 
 am out of Congress. I liked Congress very much, 
 formerly; very much; but men and things, habits, 
 tempers, principles, all have changed. My present 
 situation would be pleasant enough, if all things were 
 right. But I do not mean to turn grumbler. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTEft. 81 
 
 [1844] I maintained in that speech that duties could 
 not be laid by treaty, because the imposition of duties 
 appropriately belongs to Congress, and especially to 
 the House of Representatives, and I now maintain that 
 the two Houses cannot by majority ratify treaties, be- 
 cause the treaty-making power belongs exclusively to 
 the President and Senate. 
 
 [1845] While we feel as we ought about the annexa- 
 tion of Texas, we ought to keep in view the true grounds 
 of objection to that measure. Those grounds are, want 
 of constitutional power, danger of too great an extent 
 of territory, and opposition to the increase of slavery, 
 and slave representation. 
 
 [1850] It is a stranga and a melancholy fact, that 
 not one single national speech has been made in the 
 House of Representatives this session. Every man 
 speaks to defend himself, and to gratify his own con- 
 stituents. That is all. No one inquires how the 
 Union is to be preserved, and the peace of the country 
 restored. Meantime all important public measures are 
 worse than stationary. The tariff, for instance, is los- 
 ing important friends through the irritation produced 
 by these slavery debates. I suppose no history shows a 
 case of such mischiefs arising from angry debates and 
 disputes, both in the government and the country, on 
 questions of so very little real importance. 
 
 [1850] You have heard how all things have gone, so 
 far. I confess I feel relieved. Since the 7th of March, 
 there has not been an hour in which I have not felt a 
 "crushing" weight of anxiety and responsibility. I 
 have gone to sleep at night, and waked in the morning 
 with the same feeling of eating care. And I have set 
 down to no breakfast or dinner to which I have brought 
 an unconcerned and easy mind. It is over. My part 
 is acted, and I am satisfied. The rest I leave to stronger 
 bodies and fresher minds. 
 
 [1850] For your sake, however, I will say, that my 
 public speeches show my opinion to have been decid- 
 edly in favor of a proper, efficient, and well-guarded 
 law, for the recovery of fugitive slaves. 
 
 [1851] If I have endeavored to defend and uphold 
 the Union of the United States it is because my fixed 
 
82 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 judgment and my unalterable affections have impelled 
 me, and still impel me, to regard that Union as the 
 only security for general prosperity and national glory. 
 Yes, Gentleman, the Constitution and the Union! 1 
 place them together. If they stand, they must stand 
 together; if they fall they must fall together. 
 
 Vol. I, page 9, 45, 51, 66, 100, 123, 151, 175, 194, 236, 
 256, 323, 329, 347, 350, 467, 526; Vol. II, pp, 13, 32, 75, 
 93, 106, 144, 196, 204, 369, 385, 402, 424. 
 
 PART II. 
 
 Soon after Webster entered Congress he be- 
 gan his pleas for the Union: here is an early 
 example: 
 
 What else is it, but the unrestrained and free opera 
 tion of that same Federal Constitution, which it has 
 been proposed now to hamper, and manacle, and null- 
 ify? Who is there among us, that, should he find 
 himself on any spot of the earth where human beings 
 exist, and where the existence of other nations is 
 known, would not be proud to say, I am an American? 
 I am a countryman of Washington? I am a citizen of 
 that republic, which, although it has suddenly sprung 
 up, yet there are none on the globe who have ears to 
 hear, and have not heard of it; who have eyes to see, 
 and have not read of it; who knows anything, and yet 
 do not know of its existence and its glory?— Webster's 
 Works, Vol. I, p. 205. 
 
 In combatting the views of some men in Con- 
 gress in regard to the management of the pub- 
 lic lands, he said: — 
 
 [Land System] Yet, of late years, an idea has been 
 suggested, indeed seriously advanced, that these lands, 
 of right, belong to the States respectively in ivhich they 
 happen to lie. This doctrine, Sir, which, I perceive, 
 strikes this assembly as being somewhat extravagant, 
 is founded on an argument derived, as is supposed, 
 from the nature of State sovereignty. It has been 
 openly espoused, by candidates for office, in some of 
 the new States, and, indeed, has been announced in the 
 Senate of the United States. — Webster's Works, Vol. i, 
 p. 250. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 83 
 
 Webster discusses the Freedom of the Press 
 in the following extracts in a characteristic 
 manner: 
 
 In all popular governments a Free Press is the 
 nost important of all agents and instruments. 
 
 The conductors of the press, in popular governments, 
 occupy a place, in the social and political system of 
 the very highest consequence. They wear the charac- 
 ter of public instructors. Their daily labors bear di- 
 rectly on the intelligence, the morals the tastes, and 
 the public spirit of the country. Not only are they 
 journalists, recording political oocurrences, but they 
 discuss principles, they comment on measures, they 
 canvass characters; they hold the power over the rep- 
 utation, the feelings, the happiness, of individuals. 
 
 But remember, Sir, that these are the attributes of a 
 free press only. And is a press that is purchased or 
 pensioned more free than a press that is fettered? 
 Can the people look for truths to partial sources, 
 whether rendered partial through fear or through fa- 
 vor? Why shall not a manacled press be trusted with 
 the maintenance and defense of popular rights ? Be- 
 cause it is supposed to be under the influence of a 
 power which may prove greater than the love of truth. 
 — Webster's Works. Vol. I, p. 26k. 
 
 In a speech before the National Republican 
 Convention, October 12, 1832, he treated of 
 nullification in these words, in part: 
 
 Mr. President, I shall not discuss the doctrine of nul- 
 lification. I am sure it can have no friends here. 
 Gloss it and disguise it as we may, it is a pretense in- 
 compatible with the authority of the Constitution. If 
 direct separation be not its only mode -of operation, 
 separation is, nevertheless, its direct consequence. 
 That a state may nullify a law of the Union and still 
 remain in the Union; that she may have Senators and 
 Representatives in the government, and yet be it lib- 
 erty to disobey and resist that government; that she 
 may partake in the common councils and yet not be 
 bound by their results; that she may control a law of 
 
84 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 congress, so that it shall be one thing with her, while 
 it is another thing with the rest of the States;— all these 
 propositions seem to me so absolutely at war with com- 
 mon sense and reason, that I do not understand how 
 any intelligent person can yield the slightest assent to 
 them Nullification . . is dissolution; it is dismem- 
 berment; it is the breaking up of the Union.— Webster, 
 Works, Vol I, p. 173. 
 
 In the last number of the Monthly a quota- 
 tion was given to show Clay's views on the 
 Greek cause. Here are Webster's resolutions, 
 and a few extracts from his speech: 
 
 On the assembling of Congress in December, 1823, 
 President Monroe made the revolution in Greece the 
 subject of a paragraph in his annual message and on 
 the 8th of December Mr. Webster moved the following 
 resolution in the House of Representatives: 
 
 "Resolved, That provision ought to be made, by 
 law, for defraying the expense incident to the appoint- 
 ment of an Agent or Commissioner to Greece whenever 
 the President shall deem it expedient to make such 
 appointment." 
 
 These, it is believed, are the first official expressions 
 favorable to the independence of Greece uttered by 
 any of the Governments of Christendom, and no doubt 
 contributed powerfully towards the creation of that 
 feeling throughout the civilized world which eventu- 
 ally led to the battle of Navarino and a liberation of a 
 portion of Greece from the Turkish yoke. ... It 
 is believed that the whole world takes a deep interest 
 in their welfare. Although no power has declared in 
 their favor, yet none, according to our information 
 has taken part against them. Their cause and their 
 name have protected them from dangers which might 
 ere this have overwhelmed any other people. . . . 
 . It is certainly true that the just policy of this 
 country is, in the first place, a peaceful policy. No 
 nation ever had less to expect from forcible aggrand- 
 izement In the next place I take it that 
 
 !>he policy of this country, springing from the nature 
 of our government and the spirit of all our institutions 
 Is, so far as it respects the interesting questions which 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER- 85 
 
 agitate the present age on the side of liberty and en- 
 lightened sentiments It cannot be denied 
 
 that the great political question of this a^»e is that be- 
 tween absolute and regulated governments. . . . 
 This asserted right of forcible intervention in the 
 affairs of other nations is in open violation of the pub- 
 lic law of the world. Who has authorized these 
 learned doctors of Troppau to establish new articles in 
 this code? Whence are their diplomas? Is the whole 
 world supposed to acquiesce in principles which en- 
 tirely subvert the independence of nations? On the 
 basis of this independence has been reared the beauti- 
 ful fabric of inter-national law I think it 
 
 is sufficient answer to this to say that we are one of 
 the nations of the earth; that we have an interest 
 therefore, in the preservation of that system of na- 
 tional law and national intercourse, which has hereto- 
 fore subsisted, so beneficially for all It 
 
 may, in the next place, be asked, perhaps, Supposing 
 all this to be true what can we do? Are we to go to 
 war? Are we to interfere in the Greek cause or any 
 other European cause? Are we to endanger our pacific 
 relations? No, certainly not. . . . Sir, this reason- 
 ing mistakes the age. The time has been indeed, when 
 fleets, armies, and subsidies, were the principal reli- 
 ances even in the best cause. But happily for man- 
 kind, a great change has taken place in this respect. 
 Moral causes come into consideration in proportion as 
 the progress of knowledge is advanced; and the public 
 opinion of the civilized world is rapidly gaining an 
 ascendancy over mere brutal force. . . . 
 
 . . . The Greeks address the civilized world with 
 a pathos not easy to be resisted. They invoke our 
 favor by more moving considerations than can well be- 
 long to the condition of any other people. They stretch 
 out their arms to the Christian communities of the 
 earth, beseeching them by a generous recognition of 
 their ancestors, by the consideration of their desolated 
 and ruined cities and villages, by their wives and chil- 
 dren sold into an accursed slavery, by their blood which 
 they seem willing to pour out like water, by the com- 
 mon faith, and in the name, which unites all Christians, 
 that they would extend to them at least some token of 
 
86 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 compassionate regard.— Webster, Works Vol. Ill, pp. 
 
 60, 63, 64, 65, 74, 75, 77, 92-93. 
 
 The nature of the Union as defined and de- 
 scribed by Webster, January 26, 1830: 
 
 There remains yet to be performed, Mr. President, 
 by far the most grave and important duty, which I 
 feel to be devolved on me by this occasion. It is to 
 state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true 
 principles of the Constitution under which we are here 
 assembled. I might well have desired that so weighty 
 a task should have fallen into other and abler hands. 
 
 I understand the honorable gentleman from South 
 Carolina to maintain, that it is a right of the State 
 legislatures to interfere, whenever, in their judgment 
 this government transcends its constitutional limits, 
 and to arrest the operation of the laws. 
 
 I understand him to maintain this right, as a right 
 existing under the Constitution, not as a right to 
 overthrow on the ground of extreme necessity, such as 
 would justify violent revolution. 
 
 I understand him to maintain, that the ultimate 
 power of judging of the constitutional extent of its 
 own authority is not lodged exclusively in the general 
 government, or any branch of it; but that, on the con- 
 trary, the States may lawfully decide for themselves, 
 and each State, for itself, whether, in a given case, the 
 act of the general government transcends its power. 
 
 I understand him to insist, that, if the exigency of 
 the case, in the opinion of any state government, re- 
 quire it, such state government may, by its own sover- 
 eign authority, annul an act of the general government 
 which it deems plainly and palpably unconstitutional. 
 
 Allow me to say, . . . that I call this the South 
 Carolina doctrine only because the gentleman himself 
 has so demonstrated it. I do not feel at liberty to say 
 that South Carolina as a state, has ever advanced these 
 sentiments. I hope she has not, and never may.— 
 Webster's Works, Vol. Ill, pp. 317, 318. 
 
 This leads us to inquire into the origin of this gov- 
 ernment and the source of its power. Whose agent is 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 87 
 
 it? Is it a creation of the State legislatures, or the cre- 
 ation of the people? 
 
 If the government of the United States be the agent 
 of the State governments, then they may control it; 
 . . . if it be the agent of the people, then the peo- 
 ple alone can control it, restrain it, modify, or reform 
 it. 
 
 It is, Sir, the people's Constitution, the people's gov- 
 ernment, made for the people, made by the people, and 
 answerable to the people. The people of the United 
 States have declared that this Constitution shall be the 
 supreme law. — Ibid., Vol. Ill, p. 321. 
 
 If there be no power to settle such questions, inde- 
 pendent of either of the States, is not the whole Union 
 a rope of sand ? Are we not thrown back again, pre- 
 cisely, upon the old Confederation. 
 
 It is too plain to be argued. Four-and-twenty inter- 
 preters of constitutional law, each with a power to de- 
 cide for itself, and none with authority to bend any 
 body else, and this constitutional law the only bond of 
 their union! What is such a state of things but a 
 mere connection during pleasure, or, to use the phrase- 
 ology of the times, during feeling? And that feeling, 
 too, not the feeling of the people, who established the 
 Constitution, but the feeling of the State governments. 
 —Hid,, Vol. Ill, p. 324. 
 
 For myself, Sir, I do not admit competency of South 
 Carolina, or any other State, to prescribe my constitu- 
 tional duty; or to settle, between me and the people, the 
 validity of laws of Congress, for which I have voted. 
 
 To avoid all possibility of being misunderstood, allow 
 me to repeat again, in the fullest manner, that I claim 
 no powers for the government by forced or unfair con- 
 struction. I admit that it is a government of strictly 
 limited powers; of enumerated, specified, and particu- 
 larized powers; and whatsoever is not granted, is with- 
 held.— I bid., Vol III, p. 336. 
 
 Webster prepared a bill on the Appointment 
 and Removal of government officials; these ex- 
 tracts from his speech in support of the bill 
 indicate his views on the question: 
 
88 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Mr. President. The professed object of this bill is 
 the reduction of executive influence and patrorage. 1 
 concur in the propriety of that object. Having no 
 wish to diminish or control, irt the slightest degree, the 
 constitutional and legal authority of the presidential 
 office, yet I think the indirect and rapidly increasing 
 influence which it possesses and which arises from the 
 power of bestowing office and taking it away again at 
 pleasure, and from the manner in which that power 
 seems now to be systematically exorcised is productive 
 of serious evils. The unlimited power to grant office 
 and to take it away, gives a command over the hopes 
 and fears of a vast multitude of men. It is generally 
 true that he who controls another man's means of living 
 controls his will. . . . The existence of parties in 
 popular governments is not to be avoided ; and if they 
 are formed on constitutional questions, or in regard to 
 great measures of public policy, and do not run to ex- 
 cessive length it may be admitted that on the whole, 
 they do no great harm. But the patronage of office, 
 the power of bestowing place and emoluments creates 
 parties, not upon any principle or any measure bat upon 
 the single ground of personal interest. Under the di- 
 rect influence of this motive they form round a leader, 
 and they go for the "spoils of victory." And if the 
 party chieftain becomes the national chieftain, he is still 
 but too apt to consider, all who have opposed him as 
 enemies to be punished and all who have supported 
 him as friends to be rewarded. Blind devotion to 
 party, and to the head of a party, thus takes the place 
 of the sentiment of generous patriotism and a high and 
 exalted sense of public duty. . . . Does he not be- 
 hold, every hour, a stronger development of the prin- 
 ciple of personal attachment and a corresponding 
 dimunition of genuine and generous public feeling? 
 Sir, the theory of our institutions is plain, 
 it is, that government is an agency created for the 
 good of the people and that every person in office is 
 an agent and servant of the people. . . . The sec- 
 ond check on executive patronage contained in this bill 
 is of still greater importance than the first. This pro- 
 vision is, that; whenever the president removes any of 
 these officers from office, he shall state to the senate the 
 
DA MET. WHITER. 
 
 89 
 
 reasons for such removal. This part of the bill has 
 been opposed, both on constitutional grounds and 
 grounds of expediency ... I think then, Sir, that 
 the power of appointment naturally and necessarily 
 includes the power of removal, w T here no limitation is 
 expressed, nor any tenure but that at will declared. 
 The power of appointment being conferred on the pres- 
 ident and Senate, I think the power of removal went 
 along w T ith it, and exercised by the same hands. I 
 think consequently that the decision of 1789, which im- 
 plied a power of removal separate from the appointing 
 pow r er was erroneous. 
 
 From Webster's Works, Vol. IV, Speech "Appoint- 
 ing and Removing Power," made in U. S. Senate Feb- 
 ruary 16, 1835.— Webster's Works, Vol IV, pp. 178-198. 
 
 In Webster's speech on the Bank Charter of 
 1S34 he outlines very well his financial views, 
 and discusses the relation of banks to public 
 credit: 
 
 Mr. President, in the midst of ample means of 
 national and individual happiness, w T e have, unex- 
 pectedly, fallen into severe distress. Our course has 
 been suddenly arrested. The general pulse of life 
 stands still, and the activity and industry of the 
 country feels a pause. . . The condition of the 
 
 country is, indeed, singular. It is like that of a strong 
 man chained. In full health, with strength unabated, 
 and all its faculties unimpaired, it is yet incapable of 
 performing its accustomed action. Fetters and man- 
 acles are on its limbs. ... It is often inquired 
 how this enormous amount of evil could spring from a 
 cause apparently so inadequate to produce it. Can it 
 be possible, it is asked, that the Secretary has brought 
 about all this distress simply by removing a few mil- 
 lions of dollars out of one bank into other banks? - . 
 . Every commercial country has one great representa- 
 tive constantly passing and acting between all its 
 citizens. This universal representative is, credit, or 
 money, in some form as its substitute. . • And 
 
 all the distress which the country now suffers arises 
 solely from acts which have deranged the currency of 
 the country and the credit of the commercial com- 
 
90 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 mtmity. The country is as rich in its general appear- 
 ance, as it was before the experiment was begun; that 
 is to say, men have the same houses, lands, ships and 
 merchandise. But the value of these has fallen; or, to 
 speak mere correctly, they have lost the power of being 
 exchanged, and they have lost this power because of 
 the embarrasment which has befallen the general 
 medium of exchange. . . . The secretary disturbed 
 this state of peace. He broke up all the harmony of 
 the system. By suddenly withdrawing all the public 
 moneys from the Bank of the United States, he forced 
 that bank to an immediate correspondent curtailment 
 of its loans and discounts. ... I hold the immedi- 
 ate convertibility of bank notes into specie to be an in- 
 dispensable security for their retaining their value. . 
 . . This commercial credit, Sir, depends on wise 
 laws, steadily administered. Indeed, the best gov- 
 erned countries are always the richest. . . . The 
 history of banks belongs to the history of commerce 
 and the general history of liberty. ... In what 
 instance have they endangered liberty or overcome the 
 laws? This very existence, on the contrary, depends 
 on the rule of both liberty and law. . . . It is felt, 
 by every one, that this is a case in which the acts of 
 the government come directly home to him, and pro- 
 duce either good or evil, every hour, upon his personal 
 and private condition. And how is this public ex- 
 pectation met? How is this intense, this agonized ex- 
 pectation answered. I am grieved to say. I am 
 ashamed to say, it is answered by declamations against 
 the bank as a monster, by loud cries against a moneyed 
 aristocracy, by pretended zeal for a hard money system 
 and by professions of favor and regard to the poor. 
 The poor! We are waging war for the benefit of the 
 poor! We slay the monster, the bank, that we may 
 defeat the unjust purposes of the rich, and elevate and 
 protect the poor. And what is the effect of all this? 
 What happens to the poor, and all the middling classes 
 in consequence of this warfare? Where are they? 
 Are they well fed, well clothed, well employed, in- 
 dependent, happy and grateful? They are all at the 
 feet of the capitalists, they are in the jaws of usury. 
 Sir, let the system of the Administration go on and we 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 91 
 
 shall soon not know our country. We shall see a new 
 America. On the map where these United States have 
 stood, we shall behold a country that is new to us. 
 We shall see a class of idle rich, and a class of idle 
 poor, the former a handful, the latter a host , . . 
 The truth is that banks, everywhere, and especially 
 with us, are made for the borrowers. They are made 
 for the good of the many and not for the good of the 
 few. Even their ownership, to a great extent, is in the 
 hands of men of moderate property. . . . Indeed, 
 Sir, I think it time, high time, that there should be a 
 pause in this outcry against the bank, as dangerous in 
 its political power, or as favoring wealth in its ac- 
 cumulation rather than in its distribution. Prejudice 
 excited against the bank is a much more powerful 
 political engine than the bank itself. It is more than 
 a match for ten banks. — Webster's Works, Vol IV, p. 
 82-95. 
 
 Towards the close of his life he still empha- 
 sized the idea of Union as these extracts show; 
 from a speech in the Senate, March 23, 1848. 
 
 In that little part which I have acted in public life, 
 it has been my purpose to maintain the people of the 
 United States, what the Constitution designed to make 
 them, one people, one in interest one in character, and 
 one in political feeling. If we depart from that, we 
 break it all up. . . . 
 
 Arbitrary governments may have territories and dis- 
 tant possessions, because arbitrary governments may 
 rule them by different laws and different systems, . , 
 We can do no such thing. They must be of us, 
 r>art of us, or else strangers. 
 
 I think I see that in progress which will disfigure and 
 deform the Constitution. While these territories re- 
 main territories, they will be a trouble and an annoy- 
 ance; they will draw after them vast expenses; , . . 
 
 I think I see a course adopted which is likely to turn 
 the Constitution of the land into a deformed monster, 
 into a curse rather than a blessing; in fact, a frame of 
 an unequal government, not founded upon popular rep- 
 resentation, not founded upon equality, but on the gross- 
 est inequality; and I think that this process will go 
 
.92 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 on, or that there is clanger that it will go on, until this 
 Union shall fall to pieces. I resist it, to-day and all 
 ways! Whoever falters or whoever flies, I continue the 
 contest! Webster's Works, Vol. V, p. 300. Speech de- 
 livered in the Senate, March 23, IS 48. 
 
 The annexation of foreign territory was dis- 
 cussed by Webster. His general position may 
 be understood from these extracts: 
 
 . . . And how is it with California. We propose 
 to take California, from the forty-second degree of north 
 latitude down to the thirty-second. . . . But if, 
 jnst about San Francisco, and perhaps Monterey, emi- 
 grants enough should settle to make up one State, then 
 the people five hundred miles off would have another 
 State. And so this disproportion of the Senate to the 
 people will go on, and must go on, and we cannot pre- 
 vent it. I say, Sir, that, according to my conscientious 
 conviction, we are now fixing on the Constitution of 
 the United States, and its frame of government, a mon- 
 strosity, a disfiguration, an enormity! Sir, I hardly 
 dare trust myself. I don't know but I may be under 
 some delusion. It may be the weakness of my eyes 
 that forms this monstrous apparition. . . . 
 
 But then, Sir, what relieves the case of this enormity? 
 What is our reliance? Why, it is that we stipulate 
 that these new States shall be brought in at a suitable 
 time. And pray, what is to constitute the suitableness 
 of time? Who is to judge of it? I tell you, Sir, that 
 suitable time will come when the preponderance of 
 party power here makes it necessary to bring in the new 
 States."— Webster's Works, Vol. V, p. 291-292. 
 
 My first agency in matters of this kind was upon the 
 proposition for admitting Texas into the Union. That 
 I thought it my duty to oppose, upon the general 
 ground of opposing all formation of new States out of 
 foreign territory, and, I may add, and I ought to add 
 in justice, of States in which slaves were to be repre- 
 sented in the Congress of the United States. — Ibid., 
 Vol. V. p. 2S6. 
 
 But it is said we must take territory for the sake of 
 peace. We must take territory. It is the will of the 
 President. If we do not take what he offers, we may 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 93 
 
 fare worse. Mr. Polk will take no less, that he is fixed 
 upon. He is immovable. He— has— put— down— his 
 —foot! Well, Sir, he put it down upon "fifty-four 
 forty," but it didn't stay. I speak of the President, as 
 of all Presidents, without disrespect. I know of no 
 reason why his opinion and his will, his purpose, de- 
 clared to be final, should control us, . . .—Ibid., 
 Vol. V, p. 282. 
 
 I have said I would rather have no peace for the pres- 
 ent, than have a peace which brings territory for new 
 States; and the reason is, that we shall get peace as 
 soon without territory as with it, more safe, more dur- 
 able, and vastly more honorable to us, the great re- 
 public of the world. 
 
 But we hear gentlemen say, we must have some ter 
 ritory, the people demand it. I deny it; at least, I see 
 no proof of it whatever.— Ibid., Vol. V, p. 281. 
 
 Sir, I fear we are not yet arrived at the beginning of 
 the end. I pretend to see but little of the future, and 
 that little affords no gratification. All I can scan is 
 contention, strife, and agitation. Before we obtain a 
 perfect right to conquered territory, there must be a 
 cession. A cession can only be made by treaty. No 
 treaty can pass the Senate, till the Constitution is over- 
 thrown, without the consent of two-thirds of its mem- 
 bers. Now who can shut his eyes to the great prob- 
 ability of a successful resistance to any treaty of 
 cession, from one quarter of the Senate or another? 
 Will the North consent to a treaty bringing in' terri- 
 tory subject to slavery? Will the South consent to a 
 treaty bringing in territory from which slavery is ex- 
 cluded? Sir, the future is full of difficulties and full 
 of dangers. We are suffering to pass the golden op- 
 portunity for securing harmony and the stability of 
 the Constitution. We appear tome to be rushing upon 
 perils headlong, and with our eyes wide open. But I 
 put my trust in Providence, and in that good sense 
 and patriotism of the people, which will yet, 1 hope, 
 be awakened before it is too late.— IUd., Vol V, p 
 261. 
 
 In arguing on the tariff, July, 1846, he said, 
 in part: 
 
 The Northwestern States are destined to be manu- 
 facturing States. They have iron and coal They 
 
94 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. > 
 
 have a people of laborious habits. They have already 
 capital enough to begin works such as belong to new 
 States and new communities; and when the time 
 comes, and it cannot but come soon, they will see their 
 true interest to be, to feed the Northern and Eastern 
 manufacturers, as far as they may require it, and in 
 the mean time begin to vary their own occupations, 
 by having classes of men amongs't them who are not 
 of the now universal agricultural population. The 
 sooner they begin this work the better; and begin it 
 they will, because they are an intelligent and active 
 people, and cannot fail to see in what direction their 
 true interest lies. — Webster's Works, Vol V, p. 233. 
 
 In a letter to Mr. Bolton, of Georgia, in 
 1833, Webster uses this language in regard to 
 slavery: 
 
 In my opinion, the domestic slavery of the Southern 
 States is a subject within the exclusive control of the 
 States themselves; and this, I am sure, is the opinion of 
 the whole North. Congress has no authority to inter 
 fere in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treatment 
 of them in any of the States. This was so resolved in 
 the House of Representatives, when Congress sat in 
 this City in 1790, on the report of a committee consisting 
 almost entirely of Northern members; and I do not 
 know an instance of the expression of a different opin- 
 ion, in either house of Congress, since 
 
 The servitude of so great a portion of the population of 
 the South is undoubtedly regarded at the North as a 
 great evil, moral and political; and the discussions 
 upon it which have recently taken place in the legisla- 
 tures of several of the slaveholding States have been 
 read with very deep interest. But it is regarded, never- 
 theless, as an evil, the remedy for which lies with those 
 legislatures themselves, to be provided and applied 
 according to their own sense of policy and duty. — 
 Webster's Works, Vol. VI, p. 536. 
 
 In 1850, in regard to the danger to the Union 
 from the slavery question, he said: 
 
 These consequences 1 willingly meet, these dangers 
 I encounter without hesitations being resolved to 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 95 
 
 throw myself, with whatever weight may belong to 
 me, unreservedly into the scale of Union. Where 
 Washington led, I am willing to follow, at a vast dis- 
 tance, indeed, and with unequal, but no faltering 
 steps. — Webster's Works, Vol. VI, p. 550. 
 
 With a few extracts from Webster's famous 
 " Seventh of March" speech, our little picture 
 of AVebster must be called finished: 
 
 I wish to speak to-day, not as a Massachusetts man, 
 nor as a Northern man, but as an American, and a 
 member of the Senate of the United States. ... It 
 is not to be denied that we live in the midst of strong 
 agitations, and surrounded by very considerable dan- 
 gers to our institutions and government. The impris- 
 oned winds are let loose. The East, the North, and the 
 stormy South combine to throw the whole sea into com- 
 motion, to toss its billows to the skies, and disclose its 
 
 profoundest depths Now, Sir, upon the 
 
 general nature and influence of slavery there exists a 
 wide difference of opinion between the northern por- 
 tion of this country and the southern. It is said on the 
 one side, that . . . slavery is a wrong; that it is 
 founded merely in the right of the strongest; . . . 
 [In the South. J There are thousands of religious men, 
 with consciences as tender as any of their brethren at 
 the North, who do not see the unlawfulness of slavery: 
 . . . But we must view things as they are. Slavery 
 does exist in the United States. It did exist in the 
 States before the adoption of this Constitution, and at 
 that time. . . . 
 
 Now, as to California and New Mexico, I hold slavery 
 to be excluded from those territories by a law even 
 superior to that which admits and sanctions it in Texas. 
 I mean the law of nature, of physical geography, the 
 law of the formation of the earth. ... I should be 
 unwilling to receive from the legislature of Massa- 
 chusetts any instructions to present resolutions ex- 
 pressive of any opinion whatever en the subject of 
 slavery, . ., for two reasons: first, because I do 
 
 not consider that the legislature of Massachusetts has 
 anything to do with it; and next, because I do not con- 
 sider that I, as her representative here, have anything 
 to do with it, . . , 
 
96 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Then, Sir, there are the Abolition societies, of which I 
 am unwilling to speak, but in regard to which I have very 
 clear notions and opinions. I do not think them useful. I 
 think their operations for the last twenty years have pro- 
 duced nothing good or valuable. . . . 
 
 I hear with distress and anguish the word "secession," 
 especially when it falls from the lips of those who are patri- 
 otic, and known to the country, and known all over the 
 world, for their political services. Secession ! Peaceable 
 secession ! Sir, your eyes and mine are never destined to 
 see that miracle. ... A voluntary separation, without 
 alimony on one side and on the other. Why? What would 
 be the result ? Where is the line to be drawn ? What States 
 are to secede? What is to remain American? What am I 
 to be? An American no longer? Where is the flag of the 
 republic to remain ? 
 
 And now, Mr. President, instead of speaking of the pos- 
 sibility or utility of secession, instead of dwelling in those 
 caverns of darkness, instead of groping with those ideas so 
 full of all that is horrid and horrible, let us come out into 
 the light of day ; let us enjoy the fresh air of Liberty and 
 Union ; let us cherish those hopes that belong to us ; let us 
 devote ourselves to those great objects that are fit for our 
 consideration and our action : let us raise our conceptions 
 to the magnitude and the importance of the duties that 
 devolve upon us ; let our comprehension be as broad as the 
 country for which we act, our aspirations as high as its 
 certain destiny ; let us not be pigmies in a case that calls for 
 men.— Webster's Works, Vol. V, pp. 325, 330, 333, 350, 356, 
 357, 361, 365. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 (1) What peculiar point do you notice in the first extract? 
 (2) What is said of Webster as a student? (3) What was his 
 method of work? (4) What does he lay down as a rule 
 necessary to follow for success? (5) How did he regaid 
 democracy in the early years of his public life? (6) How 
 did he regard Calhoun? (7) How Adams? (8) Whom did 
 the Federalists support for president? (9) What did Webster 
 think about the tariff? (10) Did Webster understand Jack- 
 son? (11) What did Webster think of Free Masonry? Why? 
 (12) Write an essay about Webster basing it upon the ex- 
 tracts from his private letters. 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER. 97 
 
 (1) For what thought especially does Webster stand in 
 American politics? (2) Bring together all the expres- 
 sions that prove your conclusion. (3) What doctrine 
 did he combat in regard to the public lands? (4) 
 Why? Can you expand upon his argument? (5) What 
 position did he take in regard to the press ? (6) In what 
 ways may it be corrupted? (7) What do you think in 
 regard to the duty of newspapers? (8) What remedy 
 would Webster suggest? 
 
 (li What arguments did Webster use in regard to 
 the doctrine of nullification? (2) Trace his arguments 
 in regard to the nature of the Constitution. (3) Whom 
 did he mean by " the people"? (4) Compare his argu- 
 ments for the Constitution with Clay's. 
 
 (1) Analyze Webster's speech on Greece. (2) Com- 
 pare it with Clay's. (3) Which was the more eloquent? 
 (4) Which one the more argumentative? (5) What lead- 
 ing thought had each in mind ? 
 
 (1) Discuss Webster's views about the appointing 
 power. (2) About the right to remove offices. (3) 
 What evils did he find in the method then practiced? 
 
 (4) What was his remedy? (5) Would the remedy h»Y# 
 led to other evils, in your opinion? (6) What did Wa- 
 ster believe in regard to a national bank? (7) State hi* 
 opinion in regard to the causes of the crisis of 18S4 
 (8) Can you find an expression in his private letters 
 that seems to contradict his public speech on this ques- 
 tion? (9; What was to be the result of the destruction 
 of the Bank? (10) Was his prediction verified? 
 
 (1) What did Webster believe in regard to slavery? 
 (2) In regard to the rights of the slave master? (3) In 
 regard to the rights of the states over slavery? (4i In 
 regard to the rights of the United States over slavery? 
 
 (5) How would he settle the issue? (6) Was his idea 
 practical? (7) Did his "Seventh of March" speech 
 have a different tone from earlier speeches? 
 
 (1) What did he think about annexing new territory? 
 (2) State his arguments. (3) Would they be applicable 
 now? (4) Were he living would he probably support 
 or oppose the annexation of the Philippines? (5j 
 Choose the passages you believe justify your conclu- 
 sion. 
 
 (1) What passage do you believe to be his most elo- 
 quent one ? Why ? (2) Make out a series of « ' outlines, " 
 one for each topic treated. 
 
JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN 
 
 Bora in South Carolina, 1782. Member of state 
 legislature, 1807-1811. Member of House of 
 Representatives, 1811-1817. Secretary of war, 
 1817-1S25. Vice-President, 1825-1830. Senator, 
 1830-1844. Secretary of state, 1844-1845. Sen- 
 ator, 1845-1850. Famous articles on nullifica- 
 tion, 1828-1832. Great speech, March 4, 1850. 
 Died, 1850. 
 
CHAPTER Y 
 JOHN CALDWELL CALHOUN 
 
 IN the two preceding numbers, we have 
 studied the lives and works of two of onr 
 great national statesmen. In this number 
 we have brought before us the greatest of all 
 the States Eights' men. Calhoun began life as 
 a supporter of the national idea. He never 
 teased to love the Union, and died, I believe, 
 coping that the impossible might yet be 
 Achieved — the continued association of two op- 
 posing principles in the same nation. In one 
 sense Calhoun was never a secessionist. He 
 argued that simple justice should be done the 
 South; and this could be done, he asserted, by- 
 allowing to that section the right to settle its 
 own local questions. Perhaps he did not see 
 that he was asking the North to cease thinking 
 and willing; it was to have no opinion in re- 
 gard to the character of slavery. To him the 
 Constitution meant that the North had no right 
 to have or at least to express an opinion on the 
 subject. The whole question had 1 een, by the 
 Constitution, left with the states. Each state 
 was free to act for itself as it pleased. As far 
 as action was concerned, Webster, Clay, and 
 even Lincoln agreed with him. Calhoun, how- 
 ever, held that expressing opinions, calling 
 slavery a wrong or a sin, was also within the 
 prohibition. Here we come upon the insoluble 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 1Q1 
 
 phnse of the question. Yet when all has b?en 
 said for Calhoun, it is doubtless true that he 
 was a powerful factor in developing the events 
 which led to secession. Slavery was a necessity; 
 the Union was not. If slavery could not con- 
 tinue in the Union, then the Union must fall. 
 
 The speech, of March 4, 1S50, the last words 
 almost of Calhoun, show that he yet believed 
 that l oth could continue; and, when less than 
 a month later he passed away, it was with the 
 hope that the result which he saw so plainly 
 under certain conditions might not come to 
 pass. Certainly he thought " the two sections 
 will do justice to each other, and the Union can 
 thus continue." 
 
 So large a part of the public life of Caihoun 
 was intimately connected with slavery and the 
 nature of the Union that I have let these two 
 ideas dominate in the selections chosen. 
 
 There were no quotable letters accessible for 
 Calhoun's earlier years, nor for his private 
 life. A few words, therefore, about him may 
 be necessary here. 
 
 Kis father was born in Ireland of Scotch- 
 Irish stock, but came to this country when a 
 lad. In 1770 he married Miss Caldwell of a 
 Virginia family. When Calhoun was thirteen 
 years old his father died, leaving him to the 
 care of his mother. He was raised on a small 
 plantation and as his health was rather deli- 
 cate and means not abundant, he did not start 
 to college until he was nineteen, c He gradu- 
 ated at Vale, however, four years later, and 
 after three years study of law, began its prac- 
 tice at twenty-six. Before he was thirty he 
 was prominent in the politics of his state, and 
 
102 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 soon became not only its leader, but also one 
 of the foremost statesmen of his time. 
 
 The following extracts from his speech in 
 Congress of December 12, 1811, will show his 
 position on the war of 1812, and incidentally his 
 views about the powers of the Federal govern- 
 ment: 
 
 I understood the opinion of the Committee on For- 
 eign Relations, differently from what the gentleman 
 from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) has stated to be his im- 
 pression. I certainly understood that the committee 
 recommended the measures now before the House, as a 
 preparation for war; . . . Indeed, the report could 
 mean nothing but war or empty menace. I hope no 
 member of this House is in favor of the latter. A bul- 
 lying, menacing system, has everything to condemn 
 and nothing to recommend it. In expense, it almost 
 rivals war. It excites contempt abroad and destroys 
 confidence at home. Menaces are serious things and 
 ought to be resorted to with as much caution and seri- 
 ousness, as war itself; and should, if not successful, be 
 invariably followed by it. . . 
 
 War in our country, ought never to be resorted to 
 but when it is clearly justifiable and necessary; so 
 much so as not to require the aid of logic to convince 
 our understandings; nor the ardor of eloquence to in- 
 flame our passions. There are many reasons why this 
 country should never resort to war but for causes the 
 most urgent and necessary. . . 
 
 Sir, I might prove the war, should it ensue, justifia- 
 ble, by the express admission of the gentleman from 
 Virginia; . . . Why should I mention the impress- 
 ment of our seamen ; depredations on every branch of 
 our commerce, including the direct export trade, con- 
 tinued foy years, and made under laws which profess- 
 edly undertake to regulate our trade with other na- 
 tions; negotiations resorted to, again and again, till it 
 is become hopeless; the restrictive system persisted in 
 to avoid war, and in the vain expectation of returning 
 justice? The evil still grows, and, in each succeeding 
 year, swells in extent and pretention beyond the pre- 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 103 
 
 ceding. . . The question, even in the opinion and 
 admission of our opponents is reduced to this single poin t 
 —Which shall we do, abandon or defend our own com- 
 mercial and maritime rights, and the personal liberties 
 of our citizens employed in exercising them? These 
 rights are vitally attacked and war is the only means 
 of redress. . . . 
 
 The first argument . . . which I shall notice, is 
 the unprepared state of the country. ... If our 
 country is unprepared, let us remedy the evil as soon 
 as possible. . . . Let the gentleman submit his 
 plan; . . . Let him not say, "I have acted in a 
 minority." It is no less the duty of the minority than 
 a majority to endeavor to defend the country. For 
 that purpose we are sent here, and not for that of 
 opposition. 
 
 We are next told of the expenses of the war; and 
 that the people will not pay taxes. Why not? Is it 
 from want of means? . . . 
 
 No, it has the ability; that is admitted; and will it 
 not have the disposition? Is not the cause a just and 
 necessary one? Shall we then utter this libel on the 
 people? Where will proof be found of a fact so dis- 
 graceful? . . . But it may be, and I believe was 
 said, that the people will not pay taxes, because the 
 rights violated will not be worth defending; or that 
 the defence will cost more than the gain. Sir, I here 
 enter my solemn protest against this low and "calcu- 
 lating avarice " entering this hall of legislation. It is 
 only fit for shops and counting houses, and ought 
 not to disgrace the seat of power by its squalid aspect 
 
 We are next told of the dangers of war. I believe 
 we are all ready to acknowledge its hazards and mis- 
 fortunes. . . . 
 
 But we have not yet come to the end of the chapters 
 of dangers. The gentleman's imagination, so fruitful 
 on this subject, conceives that our constitution is not 
 calculated for war, and that it cannot stand its rude 
 shock. ... If true, we must then depend upon the 
 commiseration or contempt of other nations for our 
 existence. The constitution, then, it seems, has failed 
 in an essential object, "to provide for the common de- 
 fence. - . 
 
104 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 The love of France and the hatred of England have 
 also been assigned as the cause of the present measures. 
 France has not done us justice, says the gentleman from 
 Virginia, and how can we, without partiality, resist 
 the aggressions of England? . . . But I protest 
 against the principle from which this conclusion is 
 drawn. . . . Sir, when two invade your rights, you 
 may resist both or either at your pleasure. It is regu- 
 lated by prudence and not by right. The stale impu- 
 tation of partiality for France is better calculated for 
 the columns of a newspaper, than for the wall3 of this 
 House. -Calhoun, Works, Vol. 11, pp. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 
 11. 
 
 January 14, 1813, he used these words in a 
 debate over the New Army Bill: 
 
 . . . Whether, indeed, the principles of '98 are 
 such as the gentleman has represented them to be, I 
 will not inquire, because not necessary to my argu- 
 ment. But if they are, in truth, those of the gentle- 
 man and his present associates, I should be happy to 
 k low with what countenance they can request the 
 p3opie of this country to put the government into their 
 hands. Trust the government to those who are hos- 
 tile to itl If our opponents are, in reality, in favor of 
 such principles, patriotism ought to persuade them to 
 add one other, and that is, ever to remain a minority. 
 
 . . . But, say our opponents, as they were op- 
 posed to war, they are not bound to support it. . . . 
 War has been declared by a law of the land; and what 
 would be thought of similar attempts to defeat any 
 other law, however inconsiderable its object? Who 
 would dare to avow an intention to defeat its opera- 
 tion? Can, that then, be true in relation to war 
 which would be reprobated in every other case? Can 
 that course be right, which, when the whole physical 
 force of the country is needed, withdraws half of that 
 force? . . . 
 
 We are further told, that impressment of seamen 
 was not considered a sufficient cause for war; and are 
 ayked, why should it be continued on that account? 
 Individually (said Mr. Calhoun) I do not feel the force 
 of the argument. . . . 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 105 
 
 But it is said that we ought to offer to England suit- 
 able regulations on this subject. . . . Sir, I deny 
 that we are bound to tender any regulations. Eng- 
 land is the party injuring. . . . But we have 
 made our offer; it is, that the ship should protect the 
 sailor. It is the most simple and only safe rule. — 
 Ibid., pp. jj4, 4-5, 49, 50, 51. 
 
 In the House of Representatives, on tne Bill 
 to increase the Direct Tax: 
 
 Mr. Calhoun said, he did not rise to consider whether 
 the war was originally just and necessary, or whether 
 the administration had abandoned the original objects 
 of the contest . . . You have, for an enemy, a 
 Power the most implacable and formidable ... To 
 meet this state of things, the whole of our resources 
 will have to be called into action; and, what is of equal 
 importance, with such promptitude as to be ready to 
 act as soon as the season will admit . . . 
 
 The enemy at present, presses the war both on our 
 seaboard and interior frontier. The nature of the con- 
 test on either will, if properly considered, indicate the 
 mode in which it ought to be met. On the seaboard it 
 must be strictly defensive. 
 
 On the Canada frontier the war must assume an op- 
 posite character. If we wish to act with effect, it must 
 there be wholly offensive. . . . 
 
 Her bosom is repossessed with the ambition and proj- 
 ects that inspired her in the year seventy-six. It is the 
 war of the Revolution revived; we are again struggling 
 for our liberty and independance. . . . Ibid., pp. 
 110, 111, 112, US, 116. 
 
 Extracts from his speech of February 26, 
 1S16, in the debate concerning the establish- 
 ment of a National Bank: 
 
 He did not propose to comprehend, in this discussion, 
 the powe*- of Congress to grant bank charters: nor the 
 question whether the general tendency of baiiks was 
 favorable or unfavorable to the liberty and prosperity 
 of the country. . . To discuss this question, he con- 
 ceived, would be a useless consumption of time. The 
 constitutional question had been already so freely dis- 
 8 
 
106 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 cussed, that all had made tip their minds on it. The 
 question whether banks were favorable to public lib- 
 erty and prosperity, was one purely speculative. . . . 
 
 Having established, as he conceived, in the course of 
 his remarks, that the excess of paper issue was the true 
 and only cause of depreciation of our paper currency, 
 Mr. C. turned his attention to the manner in which 
 that excess had been produced. It was intimately con- 
 nected with the suspension of specie payments. They 
 stood as cause and effect. First, the excessive issues 
 caused the suspension of specie payments; an advant- 
 age had been taken of that suspension to issue still 
 greater floods of it. . 
 
 A national bank, he said, paying specie itself, would 
 have a tendency to make specie payments general, as 
 well by its influence as by its example. . . . 
 
 The restoration of specie payments, Mr. C. argued, 
 would remove the embarrassments under which the in- 
 dustry of the country labored, and the stains from its 
 public and private faith. It remained to see whether 
 this House, without whose aid it was vain to expect 
 success in this object, would have the fortitude to ap- 
 ply this remedy.— Ibid., pp. 154, 159, 160, 161. 
 
 His views in 1816, in regard to the tariff, are 
 set forth in these extracts from his speech of 
 April 16 of that year: 
 
 The debate heretofore on this subject has been on 
 the degree of protection which ought to be afforded to 
 our cotton and woollen manufacturers: all professing 
 to be friendly to those infant establishments, and to be 
 willing to extend to them adequate encouragement. 
 
 Neither agriculture, manufactures, nor commerce, 
 taken separately, is the cause of wealth; it flows from 
 the three combined, and cannot exist without each. . 
 . . When our manufactures are grown to a certain 
 perfection, as they soon will under the fostering care 
 of Government, we will no longer experience these 
 evils. The farmer will find a ready market for his 
 surplus produce; and, what is almost of equal conse- 
 quence, a certain and cheap supply of all his wants. 
 His prosperity will diffuse itself to every class in the 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 107 
 
 community; and, instead of that languor of industry 
 and individual distress now incident to a state of war 
 and suspended commerce, the wealth and vigor of. »he 
 community will not be materially impaired. . . . 
 To give perfection to this state of things, it will be 
 necessary to add, as soon as possible a system of in- 
 ternal improvements, and at least such an extension of 
 our navy as will prevent the cutting off of our coasting 
 trade. . . . 
 
 On the contrary he firmly believed that the country 
 is prepared, even to maturity, for the introduction of 
 manufactures. We have abundance of resources, and 
 things naturally tend at this moment in that direction. 
 
 Other objections of a political character were made 
 to the encouragement of manufactures. It is said they 
 destroy the moral and physical power of the people. 
 This might formerly have been true to a considerable 
 extent, before the perfection of machinery, and when 
 the success of the manufactures depended on the min- 
 ute subdivisions of labor. At that time it required a 
 large proportion of the population of a country to be 
 engaged in them; and every minute subdivision of labor 
 is undoubtedly unfavorable to the intellect; but the 
 great perfection of machinery has in a considerable 
 degree obviated these objections. . . It has been 
 
 further asserted that manufactures are the fruitful 
 cause of pauperism; and England has been referred to 
 as furnishing conclusive evidence of its truth. For his 
 part, he could conceive no such tendency in them, but 
 the exact contrary, as they furnished new stimulus 
 and means of subsistence to the laboring classes of the 
 community. . . . 
 
 Again, it is calculated to bind together more closely 
 our widely-spread republic. ... He regarded the 
 fact that it would make the parts adhere more closely; 
 that it would form a new and most powerful cement, 
 as out-weighing any political objection that might be 
 urged against the system. In this opinion the liberty 
 and the union of this country were inseparably united. 
 That, as the destruction of the latter would most cer- 
 tainly involve the foimer, so its maintainance, will 
 with equal certainty preserve it. . . . This single 
 
108 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 wor*. comprehended almost the sum of onr political 
 dangers; and against it we ought to be perpetually 
 guarded.— I bid., pp. 163, 166, 167, 169, 171, 172, 173 
 
 March 9, 183G, he made his first great speech 
 on the "Abolition petitions.' 1 In part, he 
 said : 
 
 The decision, then, of the question now before the 
 Senate is reduced to the single point— Are we bound to 
 receive these petitions? Or, to vary the form of the 
 question— Would it be a violation of the right of peti- 
 tion not to receive them? . 
 
 There must be some point all will agree, where the 
 right of petition ends, and that of this body begins. . 
 . . To extend the right of petition beyond represen- 
 tation, is clearly to extend it beyond that point where 
 the action of the Senate commences and, as such, is a 
 manifest violation of its constitutional rights. Here 
 then we have the limits between the right of petition 
 and the right of the Senate to regulate its proceedings 
 clearly fixed, and so perfectly defined as not to admit 
 of mistake— and I would add of controversy, had it not 
 been questioned in this discission. 
 
 . . . At the head of these it has been urged, again 
 and again, that petitions have a right to be heard, and, 
 that not to receive petitions is to refuse a hearing. 
 
 What then is meant by the assertion that these peti- 
 tioners have a right to be heard ? Is it meant that they 
 have a right to appear in the Senate chamber in per- 
 son to present their petition, and to be heard in its de- 
 fence? . • . 
 
 But one more xense can be attached to the assertion. 
 It may be meant that the petitioners have a right to 
 have their petitions discussed by the Senate. . . . 
 
 My object at present is to establish beyond the possi- 
 bility of doubt that we are not bound to receive these 
 petitions; and when that is accomplished, I will then 
 show the disastrous consequences which must follow 
 the reception of the petition, be the after disposition 
 what it may. . . . 
 
 I have now, I trust, established beyond all contro- 
 versy, that we are not bound to receive these petitions; 
 
JOHN G CALHOUN. 109 
 
 and that if we should reject them we would not, in the 
 slightest degree, infringe the right of petition 
 
 Give the right of petition the extent contended for- 
 decide that we are bound under the constitution, to re- 
 ceive these incendiary petitions, and the very motion 
 before the Senate would be out of order. If tlw con- 
 stution makes it our duty to receive, we would have no 
 discretion left to reject, as the motion presupposes. 
 
 Of all the rights belonging to a deliberative body I 
 know of none more universal, or indispensable to a 
 proper performance of its functions, than the right to 
 determine at its discretion what it shall receive over 
 what it shall extend its jurisdiction, and to what it 
 shall direct its deliberation and action To 
 
 what would we commit ourselves ? If a petition should 
 be presented, praying the abolition of the constitution 
 (which we are all bound by our oaths to protect), ac- 
 cording to this abominable doctrine, it must be re- 
 ceived. So if it prayed the abolition of the Decalogue 
 or of the Bible itself. . 
 
 No one can believe that the fanatics, who have flooded 
 this and the other House with their petitions, entertain 
 the slightest hope that Congress would pass a law at 
 this time, to abolish slavery in this District. 
 
 Such would be the advantages yielded to the aboli- 
 tionists. In proportion to their gain would be our loss. 
 What would be yielded to them would be taken from 
 us. Our true position, that which is indispensable to 
 our defence here, is, that Congress has no legitimate 
 jurisdiction over the subject of slavery either here or 
 elsewhere. . 
 
 The Senators from the slaveholding States, who most 
 unfortunately, have committed themselves to vote for 
 receiving these incendiary petitions, tell us that when- 
 ever the attempt shall be made to abolish slavery thev 
 will join with us to repel it. I doubt not the sincer- 
 ity of their declaration. We all have a common inter- 
 est and they cannot betray ours, without betrayin- at 
 he same time, their own. But I announce to them 
 that they are now called on to redeem their pledge 
 The attempt is now being made. The work is goin- 
 on daily and hourly. The war is waged, not only i n 
 
110 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 the most dangerous manner, but in the only manner 
 that it can be waged. Do they expect that the aboli- 
 tionists will resort to arms, and commence a crusade to 
 liberate our slaves by force? Is this what they mean 
 when they speak of the attempt to abolish slavery? If 
 so, let me tell our friends of the South who differ from 
 us, that the war which the abolitionists wage against 
 us is of a very different character, and far more effec- 
 tive. It is a war of religious and political fanaticism, 
 mingled, on the part of the leaders, with ambition and 
 the love of notoriety and waged not against our lives, 
 but against our character. The object is to humble 
 and debase us in our own estimation, and that of the 
 world in general; to blast our reputation while they 
 overthrow our domestic institutions. This is the mode 
 in which they are attempting abolition, with such am- 
 ple means and untiring industry; and now is the time 
 for all who are opposed to them to meet the attack- 
 How can it be successfully met? This is the important 
 question. There is but one way: we must meet the 
 eneny on the frontier on the question of receiving; we 
 must secure that important pass— it is our Thermop- 
 ylae. The power of resistance, by an universal law of 
 nature, is on the exterior. Break through the shell- 
 penetrate the crust, and there is no resistance within. 
 In the present contest, the question on receiving con- 
 stitutes our frontier. Ibid., pp. 466, 467, 469, 470, 471, 
 479, 4S0, 481, 482, 483, 484- 
 
 His relations to General Jackson, in 1837, 
 come out pretty well in the quotation from 
 Jackson's letter, and the reply of Calhoun in 
 the Senate: 
 
 ' ' You cannot but be aware, sir, that the imputations 
 which your language conveys are calculated, if be- 
 lieved, to destroy my character as a man, and that the 
 charge is one which, if true, ought to produce my im- 
 peachment and punishment as a public officer. If I 
 caused the removal of the deposits for the base pur- 
 pose of enriching myself or my friends by the results 
 which might grow out of that measure, there is no term 
 of reproach which I do not deserve, and no punish- 
 ment known to the laws which ought not to be in- 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. HI 
 
 flic ted n^on me. On the contrary, if the whole impu- 
 tation, both as to motive and fact, be a fabrication and 
 a calumny, the punishment which belongs to me, if 
 guilty, is too mild for him who willfully makes it. 
 
 On this Calhoun makes the following com- 
 ments: 
 
 I do not intend, said Mr. C, in what I propose to say, 
 to comment on the character or the language of this ex- 
 traordinary letter. It has excited in my bosom but one 
 feeling, that of pity for the weakness of its author, 
 contempt for his menace, and humiliation that one oc- 
 cupying the office which he does, should place himself 
 in a situation so unworthy of his exalted station. 
 
 My object is to avail myself of the occasion to reiter- 
 ate what I said, as broadly and fully as I uttered them 
 on a former occasion. . . . 
 
 I then asked what had caused this inundation of 
 paper? The answer was, the "experiment" (I love to 
 remind the gentleman of the word) which had re- 
 moved the only restrictions that existed against the 
 issue of bank paper. The consequences were predicted 
 at the time; it was foretold that banks would multiply 
 almost without number, and pour forth their issues 
 without restriction or limitation 
 
 The experiment commenced by a transfer of the pub- 
 lic funds from where they were placed by law, and 
 where they were under safe guard and protection, to 
 banks which were under the sole and unlimited con- 
 trol of the Executive 
 
 I then remarked that, if rumor were to be trusted, it 
 was not only in a political point of view that those in 
 power had profited by the vast means put in the hands 
 of the Executive by the experiment— they had profited 
 in a pecuniary, as well as in a political point of view. 
 
 Having established these points, I next undertook to 
 show that this bill would consummate these specula- 
 tions, and establish the political ascendancy which the 
 experiment had given to the Administration. . . . 
 
 Having established this point, I then undertook to 
 show, that it would increase vastly the power of the 
 government in the new States, if they chose to exer- 
 cise this patronage for political purposes. .... 
 
112 AMEBIC AN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Assuming, then that the power would be exercised 
 with a view to political influence, I showed that it 
 would place a vast number of the citizens of the new 
 States, probably not less than one hundred thousand, 
 in a condition of complete dependence on the receiv" 
 
 ers, and vassalage to the Government 
 
 —Calhoun, Works, Vol III, pp. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, S, 9, 
 
 February 14, 1837, Calhoun sets forth Ms 
 views in regard to the relation of international 
 law to slavery in these remarks in the Senate: 
 
 The three brigs were engaged in the coasting trade; 
 . . . The Enterprise was forced, by stress of weather, 
 into Port Hamilton, Bermuda; where the slaves on 
 board were forcibly seized and detained by the local 
 authorities. . . . 
 
 These are the essential facts of the case. He did not 
 intend to argue the question that grew out of them. 
 There was, indeed, little or no ground for argument. 
 No one, in the least conversant with the laws of na- 
 tions, can doubt that those vessels, were as much under 
 the protection of our flag, while on their voyage, pro- 
 ceeding from one part of the Union to another, as if 
 they were in port, lying at the wharves, within our 
 acknowledged jurisdiction. Nor is it less clear that, 
 forced as the Enterprise was, by stress of weather, and 
 taken, under the circumstances, as the passengers and 
 crews of the other two were, into the British dominions, 
 they lost none of the rights which belong to them w T hile 
 on their voyage on the ocean. So far otherwise— so far 
 from losing the protection which our flag gave them 
 while on the ocean, they had superadded, by their mis. 
 fortunes, the additional rights which the laws of hu- 
 manity extend to the unfortunate in their situation, 
 and which are regarded by all civilized nations as 
 sacred. It follows as a necessary consequence, that the 
 municipal laws of the place could not divest the own- 
 ers of the property which, as citizens of the United 
 States, they held in the slaves who were passengers in 
 the vessels;— and yet, as clear as is this conclusion, 
 they were forcibly seized and detained by the local 
 authorities of the island; and the government of Great 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 113 
 
 Britain, after five years' negotiation, has not only with- 
 held redress, but has not even deigned to answer the 
 oft repeated application of our government in regard 
 to it. We are thus left, by its silence, to conjecture 
 the reason for so extraordinary a course. 
 
 On casting his eyes over the whole subject he could 
 fix but on one that had the least plausibility— and f.hat 
 resting on a principle which it was scarcely credible 
 that a government so intelligent could assume: he 
 meant the principle that there could not be property in 
 persons. 
 
 The principle which would abrogate the property of 
 our citizens in their slaves, would equally abrogate the 
 dominion of Great Britain over the subject nations 
 under her control. If an individual can have no prop- 
 erty in another, how can one nation, which is but an 
 aggregate of individuals, have dominion, which involves 
 the highest right of property, over another? If man 
 has, by nature, the right of self-government, have not 
 nations, on the same principle, an equal right?— Ibid., 
 pp. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 Whether he had changed his views in regard 
 to the constitutionality of a bank may perhaps 
 be inferred from these extracts from a speech 
 of 1837: 
 
 He was not prepared to say what the opinion of the 
 people of the United States is, at this time, in relation 
 to a Bank; and much less was he prepared to commit 
 himself in favor of one in the contingency contemplated 
 by the amendment. Where the Constitution or import- 
 ant principles are involved, his only guide was his judg- 
 ment and his conscience, and not the popular voice. 
 
 He was master of his own move; and acknowledged 
 connection with no party but the States Right party, 
 —the small band of nullifiers— and acted either with or 
 against the administration or the National party just 
 as it was calculated to further the principles and policy 
 which we, of that party, regard as essential to the lib- 
 erty and institutions of the country. . . . 
 
 The object for which he, and those with whom he had 
 
114 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 acted had united with the Nationals, had been accom- 
 plished—Executive usurpation had been arrested. . . . 
 We are sworn enemies both of Executive and Legis- 
 lative usurpation; and of the two, more opposed, if 
 possi>'e, to the latter than the former, because, in the 
 nature of things, they must take precedence in. the 
 order of time. Without Legislative there could be no 
 Executive usurpation. . . .—Ibid., pp. 97, 98, 99. 
 
 The resolutions that Calhoun in'roduced into 
 the Senate in 1837 led to one of the very fa- 
 mous debates in our history. The following ex- 
 tracts from the resolutions and Calhoun's speech 
 in their support will let us see Calhoun better 
 than almost any speech of his senatorial career: 
 
 Resolved, That in the adoption of the Federal Con- 
 stitution, the States adopting the same, acted severally, 
 as free, independent and sovereign States; and that 
 each, for itself, by its own voluntary act, entered into 
 the Union with a view to its increased security against 
 all dangers, domestic, as well as foreign, and the more 
 perfect and secure enjoyment of its advantages, 
 natural political, and social. 
 
 Resolved: That, in delegating a portion of their 
 powers to be exercised by the Federal Government, the 
 states retained, severally, the exclusive and sole right 
 over their own domestic institutions and police,— and 
 are alone responsible for them; . . . 
 
 Resolved,— That this Government was instituted and 
 adopted by the several States of this Union as a com- 
 mon a,gent, in order to carry into effect the powers 
 which they had delegated by the constitution for their 
 mutual security and prosperity ; . . . 
 
 Resolved, That the intermeddling of any State or 
 States, or their citizens, to abolish slavery in this Dis- 
 trict, or in any of the territories, on the ground, or 
 under the pretext, that it is immoral or sinful— or the 
 passage of any act or measure of Congress with that view> 
 would be a direct and dangerous attack on the institu- 
 tions of all the slave holding States. . . . 
 
 After reading his resolutions, he said: 
 
 He did not desire that these resolutions should pass 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 115 
 
 by a bare majority; he wished them to pass by a unani- 
 mous vote. . . . 
 
 He lo./kcd to these resolutions to awake an active 
 spirit in favor of the constitution. The idea that this 
 Republic is made up of one great aggregate of individ- 
 uals, tended to increase the zeal of these fanatics, and 
 the more rapid spread of their doctrines . . 
 
 On the one side, there was a portion of the people of 
 the North, who assert and maintain that our domestic 
 institutions are sinful and immoral. On the other, we 
 claim these institutions as secured to us under the 
 Constitution, which we will not suffer them to inter- 
 fere with; and here is the point at issue. . . . 
 
 Mr. C. professed himself a firm and unflinching 
 friend of the Union. He was averse to making pro- 
 fessions—but he had, on this subject, been shamefully 
 and grossly misrepresented, here and elsewhere. . . 
 
 This spirit of abolition was nothing more or less than 
 that fanaticism, which had carried thousands of vic- 
 tims to the stake. What aroused that demoniacal 
 spirit in past time, but the opinion that the faith of 
 one man was criminal in the eyes of another? Here, 
 the same spirit was attempted to be revived, under the 
 name of abolition; and he trusted the good sense of 
 the country would put it down. 
 
 He now saw with equal clearness, as clear as the 
 noon-day sun, the fatal consequences which would fol 
 low if the present disease be not timely arrested. He 
 would repeat again, what he had so often said on this 
 floor. This was the only question of sufficient magni- 
 tude and potency to divide this Union; and divide it, 
 it- would, or drench the country in blood, if not arrested. 
 
 The assaults daily made on the institutions of nearly 
 one-half of the States of this Union by the other— insti- 
 tutions interwoven from the beginning with their polit- 
 ical and social existence, and which cannot be other 
 than they are, without their inevitable destruction 
 will, and must, if continued, make two peoples of one, 
 by destroying every sympathy between the. two great 
 sections, obliterating from their hearts the recollec- 
 tions of their common danger and glory, and implanting 
 in their place a mutual hatred, more deadly than ever 
 
116 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 existed between two neighboring peoples since the com- 
 mencement of the human race. He feared not the cir- 
 culation of the thousand incendiary and slanderous 
 publications, which were daily issued from an organized 
 and powerful press, among those intended to be villified. 
 
 The Senator next inquired, what was meant by the 
 States Rights party. He did not expect the inquiry from 
 that quarter; but as it was made, he would reply to it. 
 He meant the party who believed that this was a fed- 
 eral republic, a republic, the constituent parts of which 
 were states; in contradistinction to a national consoli- 
 dated republic, in which the constituent parts were the 
 aggregate mass of the American people, taken collec- 
 tively, and in which the states bore the same relation 
 to the whole as counties do to the states. 
 
 He ought not, perhaps, to be surprised that Senators 
 should differ so widely from him on this subject. They 
 did not view the disease as he did. He saw working at 
 the bottom of these movements the same spirit which, 
 two centuries ago, convulsed the Christian world and 
 deluged it in blood; that fierce and cruel spirit of per- 
 secution which originated in assumed superiority and 
 mistaken principles of duty that made one man believe 
 that he was- accountable for the sins of another, and 
 that he was the judge of what belonged to his tem- 
 poral and eternal welfare, and was bound, at the peril of 
 his own soul, to interfere to rescue him from perdition. 
 Against this fell and bloody spirit it was in vain to in- 
 terpose this amendment.— Ibid., pp. 140, 141, 143, 147, 
 148, 153, 154, 166, 177-178. 
 
 In 1847, he makes another speech, which 
 lays Calhoun and his ideas bare to our view: 
 
 Mr. President, it was solemnly asserted on this floor 
 sometime ago, that all parties in the non-slave-holding 
 states had come to a fixed and solemn determination 
 upon two propositions. One was, that there should be 
 no further admission of any States into this Union 
 which permitted, by their constitutions, the existence 
 of slavery; the other was, that slavery shall not here- 
 after exist in any of the territories of the United 
 States; the effect of which would be to give to tiie 
 
JOHN C. CALnOUN. 
 
 11? 
 
 non-slaveholding states the monopoly of the public 
 domain to the entire exclusion of the slave-holding 
 States. . . • 
 
 Sir, there is no mistaking the signs of the times; 
 and it is high time that the Southern States-the slave- 
 holding States should inquire what is now their rela- 
 tive strength in this Union, and what it will be if this 
 determination should be carried into effect. Already 
 we are in the minority, . . except in the Senate 
 
 of the United States. . . . There are 228 represen- 
 tatives, including Iowa, which is already represented 
 there. Of these, 138 are from non-slave-holding States, 
 and 90 are from what are called the slave States— giv- 
 ing a majority, in the aggregate, to the former of 48. 
 In the electoral college there are 168 votes belonging to 
 the non-slave-holding states and 118 to the slave hold- 
 ing, giving a majority of 5!) to the non-slave holding. 
 
 And this equality in this body is one of the most 
 transient character. Already Iowa is a state; . . 
 When she appears here, there will be an addi- 
 tion of two senators to the representatives here of the 
 non-slave holding States. Already Wisconsin has 
 passed the initiatory stage, and will be here the next 
 session. This will add two more, making a clear major- 
 ity of four in this body on the side of the non-slave 
 holding States, who will thus be enabled to sway every 
 branch of this government at their will and pleasure. 
 
 Sir, there is ample space for twelve or fifteen of r.he 
 largest description of States in the territories belong- 
 ing to the United States. . . . 
 
 Sir, if this state of things is to go on— if this deter- 
 mination so solemnly made, is to be persisted in, where 
 shall we stand as far as this federal government of ours 
 is concerned? W T e shall be at the entire mercy of the 
 non slaveholding States. . . . 
 
 Sir, the day that the balance between the two sec- 
 tions of the country— the slaveholding States and the 
 non-slaveholding States— is destroyed, is a day that will 
 not be far removed from political revolution, anarchy, 
 civil war, and widespread disaster. . . 
 
 How, then, do we stand in reference to this territor- 
 
118 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ial question— this public domain of ours? Why, sir, 
 what is it? It is the common property of the states of 
 this Union They are called "the territories of the 
 United States." And what are the "United States but 
 the States united "? Sir, these territories are the prop- 
 erty of the states united; held jointly for their common 
 use. 
 
 Sir, here let me say a word as to the compromise 
 line. I have always considered it a great error— highly 
 injurious to the South, . . . Yet I would have been 
 willing to acquiesce in a continuation of the Missouri 
 Compromise, in order to preserve, under the present 
 trying circumstances, the peace of the country. 
 
 I see my way in the Constitution; I cannot in a com- 
 promise. A compromise is but an act of Congress. It 
 may be overruled at any time. It gives us no security. 
 But the constitution is stable. It is a rock. 
 
 Let us be done with compromises. Let us go back 
 and stand upon the Constitution. 
 
 I am a planter — a cotton-planter. I am a Southern 
 man and a slave holder — a kind and a merciful one— I 
 trust — and none the worse for being a slave holder. I 
 say, for one, I would rather meet any extremity upon 
 earth than give up one inch of our equality— one inch 
 of what belongs to us as members of this great repub- 
 lic! What! acknowledge inferiority! The surrender 
 of life is nothing to sinking down into acknowledged 
 inferiority! . . . 
 
 He ends his speech with these resolutions: 
 Resolved, that the territories of the United States 
 belong to the several states composing this Union, and 
 are held by them as their joint and common property. 
 
 "Resolved, That the enactment of any law, which 
 should directly, or by its effects, deprive the citizens 
 of any of the States of this Union from emigrating 
 with their property, into any of the territories of the 
 United States, will make such discriminations, and 
 would, therefore, be a violation of the Constitution 
 and the rights of the States from which such citizens 
 emigrated, and in derrogation of that perfect equality 
 which belongs to them as members of this Union— and 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 119 
 
 would tend directly to subvert the Union itself. . . « 
 Calhoun Works, IV., p. 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 
 346, 347, 348. 
 
 His views on the acquisition of territory 
 stand out clearly in these extracts, made from 
 a speech of January 4, 1848: 
 
 "Resolved, That, to conquer Mexico, and to hold it- 
 either as a province or to incorporate it in the Union 
 would be inconsistent with the avowed object for which 
 the war has been prosecuted; a departure from the set- 
 tled policy of the government; in conflict with its char- 
 acter and genius; and, in the end, subversive of our 
 free and popular institutions! 
 
 "Resolved, That no line of policy in the further pros- 
 ecution of the war should be adopted which may lead 
 to consequences so disastrous. "... 
 
 He proceeds with the discussion, after read- 
 ing the above resolutions: 
 
 The next reason assigned is, that either holding Mex- 
 ico as a province, or incorporating her into the Union, 
 would be unprecedented by any example in our history. 
 We have conquered many of the neighboring tribes of 
 Indians, but we have never thought of holding them in 
 subjection, or of incorporating them into our Union. 
 They have been left as an independent people in the 
 midst of us, or been driven back into the forest. Nor 
 have we ever incorporated into the Union any but the 
 Caucasian race. To incorporate Mexico would be the 
 first departure of the kind ; for more than half of its 
 population are pure Indians, and by far the larger por- 
 tion of the residue mixed blood. I protest against the 
 incorporation of such a people. Ours is the govern- 
 ment of the white man. . . . 
 
 The next remaining reasons assigned, that it would 
 be in conflict with the genius and character of our gov- 
 ernment, and, in the end, subversive of our free institu- 
 tions, are intimately connected, and I shall consider 
 them together. 
 
 That it would be contrary to the genius and charac- 
 ter of our government, and subversive of our free pop- 
 ular institutions, to hold Mexico as a subject province, 
 
120 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 is a proposition too clear for argument before a body so 
 enlightened as the Senate. You know the American 
 Constitution too well, you have looked into history, 
 and are too well acquainted with the fatal effects which 
 large provincial possessions have ever had on institu- 
 tions of free States,— to need any proof to satisfy you 
 how hostile it vrould be to the institutions of this coun- 
 try to hold Mexico as a subject province. There is not 
 an example on record of any free State holding a prov- 
 ince of the same extent and population without disas- 
 trous consequences. The nations conquered and held 
 as a province, have, in time, retalliated by destroying 
 She liberty of their conquerors, through the corrupting 
 effects of extended patronage and irresponsible power. 
 Such, certainly, would be our case. The conquest of 
 Mexico would add so vastly to the patronage of this 
 government, that it would absorb the whole powers of 
 the State ; the Union would become an imperial power 
 and the states reduced to mere subordinate corpora- 
 tions. But the evil would not end there; the process 
 would go on, and the power transferred from the States 
 to the Union would be transferred from the legislative 
 department to the executive. All the immense patron- 
 age, which holding it as a province would create, the 
 maintenance of a large army to hold it in subjection, 
 and the appointment of a multitude of civil officers 
 necessary to govern it, would be vested in him. The 
 great influence which it would give the president, 
 would be the means of controling the legislative depart- 
 ment, and subjecting it to his dictation, especially when 
 combined with the principle of proscription which has 
 now become the established practice of the government. 
 The struggle to obtain the presidential chair would be- 
 come proportionally great — so great as to destroy the 
 freedom of elections. The end would be anarchy or 
 despotism, as certain as I am now addressing the Senate. 
 
 Nor are the reasons less weighty against incorporat- 
 ing her into the Union. As far as law is concerned, 
 this is easily done. All that is necessary is to establish 
 a territorial government for the several states in 
 Mexico, — of which there are upwards of twenty, — to 
 appoint governors, judges, and magistrates, — and to 
 give to the population a subordinate right of making 
 
JOHN C. CALHOUN. 121 
 
 laws, we defraying the cost of the government. So far 
 as legislation goes, the work will be done; but there 
 would be a great difference between the territorial 
 government, and those which we have heretofore 
 established within our own limits. These are only the 
 offsets of our own people, or foreigners from the same 
 countries from which our ancestors came. 
 During the period of their territorial government, no 
 force is necessary to keep them in a state of subjection. 
 The case will be entirely different from these Mexican 
 territories; when you form them, you must have pow- 
 erful armies to hold them in subjection, with all the ex- 
 penses incident in supporting them. You may call them 
 territories, but they would, in reality, be but provinces 
 under another name, and would involve the country in 
 all the difficulties and dangers which I have already 
 shown would result from holding the country in that 
 condition. How long this state of things would last, 
 before they would be fitted to be incorporated into the 
 Union as States, we may form some idea, from similar 
 instances, with which we are familiar. — Ibid., pp. 
 396, 410, 411, 412, 4U, 415. 
 
 QUESTIONS. 
 
 (1) What did Calhoun think of war? (2) Did he be- 
 lieve in ' ' bluff " ? (3 What effects did it produce ? (4) 
 What causes did he believe we had for war against 
 England? (5) Compare the causes he gives with those 
 given in previous studies by Clay, by Webster. (6) Com- 
 pare the style of setting forth these causes by the three 
 men. (7) 'Which was the most effective? 18) What 
 objections had been made to the war. (9) Find out who 
 had made these objections. (10) What did he think 
 about the responsibility of minorities? (11) Do you 
 agree? (12) How did he believe the war should be car- 
 ried on? (13; Make an outline covering his speeches on 
 the war. 
 
 (1) What would you say Calhoun was, judged by his 
 tariff speech, and his speech on the bank, a nationalist 
 or a states rights' man? (2) Give all your proofs for 
 your opinion. (3) How did Calhoun look at industrial 
 life if it was to be the most beneficial? (4) What did 
 he believe caused the depreciation of the paper money ? 
 (5) What kind of money did he advocate? (6) Were 
 the views expressed in his speeches of 1816 in harmony 
 with his later speeches? 
 
 (1) What view did he take on the right of petition? 
 
 (2) Compare his arguments with those of J. Q. Adani3. 
 
 (3) Summarize his arguments. (4) How did he regard 
 the abolitionists? (5) How did he hold that they vio- 
 lated the Constitution? -6 Could slavery and the right 
 of petition both exist at the same time? (7) What 
 rights had Congress over the subject of slavery accord- 
 
 9 
 
122 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ing to Calhoun ? (8) Compare his position with Clay'a 
 on this question; with Websters. (9) What was the 
 South 's Thermopylae? 
 
 (1) What was the relation between Calhoun and Jack- 
 sOnin 1837? (2) Find out the reason for this feeling. 
 (3) What charges had Calhoun made against Jackson's 
 order for the " removal of the deposits " ? (4) Find out 
 about the "removal of the deposits." (51 Did Calhoun 
 recede from his position ? (6) Compare his feeling for 
 Jackson with the feelings of Clay and Webster towards 
 him. (7) Explain so much ill-will among our great 
 fciexz. 
 
 (1*) What international rights did Calhoun claim for 
 slavery? (2) If his position was true what was the 
 legal difference between a slave and a bale of cotton ? 
 (3) Try to find out whether he was technically right or 
 not. (4) What view did Webster take of the question? 
 (5 1 Outline his arguments on the question. 
 
 (1) To what party did he belong in 1837? (2) What 
 danger did he think he saw that he was opposing? 
 
 (1) What did he affirm was the nature of the Consti- 
 tution? (2) Who was to be the final judge in cases of 
 infraction of the Constitution? (3) Compare his views 
 with Websters. (4) What did he hold in regard to the 
 right of one state to interfere or intermeddle in the 
 affairs of another? (5) What did he consider intermed- 
 dling? (6) Did he still love the Union? (7) Was there 
 anything of more importance? (8) To what did he 
 compare Abolitionism? (9) Hunt out his predictions. 
 (10) Were they fulfilled? (11) How did he define the 
 States Rights' view. (12) How did he feel in regard to 
 the non-extension of slavery into the territories? (13) 
 Trace the effect on the Union of an unequal number of 
 states — free and slave. (14) Give his argument in re- 
 gard to rights in the territory. (15) If you had lived 
 in the South at the time how would you probably have 
 felt? (16) What did he believe in regard to compro- 
 mise? 
 
 (1) What did he think about the results of the acqui- 
 sition of territory? (2) Compare his views with Clay's, 
 with Webster's on this subject. (3) What reasons does 
 he assign? (4) Are they applicable to-day? (5) Sum- 
 marize his arguments. (6) What answer call you give 
 to his arguments? (7) Make a diagram to show the 
 arguments of Clay, Webster, and Calhoun in regard to 
 the subject of expansion. 
 
 (1) Write a paper or a series of papers comparing 
 these three great men. (2) Which do you like best and 
 why? 
 
CHARLES SUMNER 
 
 A native of Massachusetts, 1811. Graduate of 
 Harvard. A lawyer. Visited Europe, 1836-1837. 
 Senator, 1851-1872. Great oration on " Peace," 
 1845. Speech on " The Crime against Kansas," 
 1856. Attacked by Brooks in Senate, 1856. An 
 invalid as result, 1856-1S60. Opposed San 
 Domingo treaty, 1870. Supported Greeley for 
 President, 1872. Died, 1872. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 CHARLES SUMNER 
 
 IN leaving Clay, Calhoun, and Webster, and 
 in taking up the life of Sumner we find 
 ourselves in a new environment, in a new 
 atmosphere. Clay and Webster had stood for 
 the Union above all things else. They were 
 ready to compromise when questions appeared 
 that seemed to endanger their beloved Union. 
 I believe it may also be said that the "Great 
 Nullifier" was such for the very reason that 
 he, too, loved the Union. Some interpretation 
 of the constitution must be found that would 
 make it possible for both slavery and the Union 
 to exist. He hoped he had found it in this doc- 
 trine. If this be a true interpretation of our 
 history, then Clay in his Compromises, Webster 
 in his Union speech of March 7th, and Calhoun 
 in his Nullification plans were all aiming at the 
 same goal — the preservation of the Union. 
 
 Now when we turn to the younger group of 
 statesmen of whom Sumner is one of the best 
 representatives from the North, we find them 
 more anxious about slavery than about the 
 Union. It may be that they loved the Union 
 no less, but at least they were concerned about 
 slavery more. Sumner was not, or professed 
 not to be, an abolitionist. Yet slavery was the 
 theme of nearly all his strongest thinking. It 
 would seem that his pen could hardly complete 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 125 
 
 a letter, or indite an address without discussing 
 
 that question in some way. 
 
 The few pages at command for this study 
 make it impossible to illustrate the later years 
 of his life. His voice and pen were busy till 
 the end, and the published volumes of his 
 speeches number fourteen, while his letters, if 
 all were gathered together, would make many 
 volumes more. Thus it will be seen that many 
 features of his life can not be touched. Enough 
 can only be hoped to be done to arouse the de- 
 sire to know more. In such a series of studies 
 as this the southern statesman also should ap- 
 pear; such men as Toombs, A. H. Stephens, 
 and Davis should speak for their cause. We 
 are now far enough away from the scenes of 
 1861 to be able to admit that honesty of con- 
 victions was found on both sides of Mason and 
 Dixon's line. No true picture of our country's 
 history can be had till we consider both sides, 
 and hear representative men of both sides 
 speak. At last it may be said that the Ameri- 
 can people are ready to listen, hence it may be 
 hoped that this study will be discussed no more 
 fairly in the North than in the South. As a 
 great, if an aggressive American, he has a 
 place in our life, and we must seek it, and 
 uialzye the problem. The latter can never be 
 solved, if such men as he be omitted from our 
 studies. Hoping, then, for as appreciative a 
 reception for this study, as for the earlier 
 ones, we will let Sumner tell us something of 
 his life. 
 
 Sumner's father wrote the following letter to 
 Mr. Partridge in 1826, when thinking of send- 
 
126 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ing Charles to Partridge's Military Academy 
 for a time: 
 
 . . . I have a son, named Charles Sumner, in his 
 fifteenth year, and large of his age, but not of so firm 
 and solid a constitution as I should wish to have him. 
 He has no immoral practices or propensities known to 
 me; he has acquired a pretty good knowledge of Latin 
 and Greek, understands the fundamental rules of arith- 
 metic, and has a superficial knowledge of the whole. 
 He is well acquainted with geography and history, both 
 ancient and modern; in fine, he has been four years at 
 the public Latin School in Boston, sustaining a good 
 standing in the class, which will be qualified for ad- 
 mission at Cambridge College in 182 , for which I do 
 not design him. The life of a scholar would be too sed- 
 entary and inactive for him. . . . Pierce, Life and 
 Letters of Sumner, Vol. 1, pp. 42, 43. 
 
 The following letter from Sumner, 1829, 
 while a student in Harvard College, lets us see 
 something of him and of college life of the lime: 
 
 . . . Have told you everything new in college 
 now. Everything here is always the same— the same 
 invariable round of bells and recitations, of diggings 
 and of deads! Mathematics piled on mathematics! 
 Metaphysics murdered and mangled! Prayer-bells after 
 prayer-beks! but, worse than all commons upon com- 
 mons! Clean, handsome plates, and poor food! By the 
 way, the commons bell rung fifteen minutes ago. If I 
 don't stop, I shall lose the invaluable meal. Accord- 
 ingly, adieu. 
 
 Charles Sumner. 
 
 N. B.— Spars m b! Oh, spare me! Eheu me miser urn! 
 
 . . . I arrived too late; lost my breakfast; got to 
 
 University, however, soon enough to be present at one 
 
 of Follen's lectures. ' This was the unkindest cut of 
 
 all.' Again, adieu. 
 
 C. S." 
 
 Ibid., pp. 51, 52. 
 
 To classmates, he wrote: 
 
 . . . You would have sooner thought, I suppose, 
 that fire and water would have embraced than mathe- 
 matics, and nrvself ; but, strange to tell, we are close 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 127 
 
 friends now. I really get geometry with some pleas- 
 ure. I usually devote four hours in the forenoon to it. 
 I have determined not to study any profession this 
 year, and I have marked out for myself a course which 
 will fully occupy my time,— namely, a course of mathe- 
 matics, Juvenal, Tacitus, a course of modern history, 
 Hallam's "Middle Ages" and "Constitutional His- 
 tory," and Roscoe's "Leo" and "Lorenzo," and Rob- 
 ertson's "Charles V.;" with indefinite quantities of 
 Shakespeare, Burton, British poets, etc., and writing 
 an indefinite number of long letters. . . . Ibid., 
 p. 81. 
 
 I think of hitching upon the law at Cambridge this 
 coming commencement. I am greatful for the encour- 
 aging word you give me. I am rather despondent and 
 I meet from none of my family those vivifying expres- 
 sions which a young mind always accepts. My father 
 says nought by way of encouragement. He seems de- 
 termined to let me shape my own course, so that if I 
 am wise, I shall be wise for myself, and if I am foolish, 
 I alone shall bear it. It may be well that this is so. 
 . . .—Memoirs I, p. 87. 
 
 His friend, W. W. Story, writes concerning 
 Sumner in these words: 
 
 He was then, as ever in after life, an indefatigable 
 and omnivorous student. He lived simply, was guilty 
 of no excesses of any kind, went very little into society, 
 and devoted his days and nights to books. Of all men 
 I knew at his age, he was the least susceptible to the 
 charms of women Men he liked best and with them he 
 preferred to talk. It was in vain that the lovliest and 
 livliest tried to absorb his attention. . . This was a 
 constant source of amusement to us, and we used to lay 
 wagers with the pretty girls, that with all their arts 
 they could not keep him at their side a quarter of an 
 hour. . . Though he was an interesting talker he 
 had no lightness of hand. . . He had no humor him- 
 self, and little sense of it in others; and his jests when 
 he tried to make one, were rather cumbrous. . . 
 Ibid., p. 107. 
 
 To his friend Charlemagne Tower, he wrote ? 
 
128 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 . Tower, we have struck the true profession*, 
 the cne in which the mind is the most sharpened and 
 quickened, and the duties of which properly discharged, 
 are the most vital to the interests of the country,— for 
 religion exists independent of its ministers; every 
 breast feels it: but the law lives only in the honesty and 
 earning of lawyers. . . — Ibid., p. 111. 
 
 Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote of Sumner 
 in these words: 
 
 . . . He had already a name for scholarship, es- 
 pecially for legal knowledge. He was an amiable, sim- 
 ple-hearted, blameless young man; pleasant, affcable, 
 cheerful, with little imagination, wit, or sense of 
 humor. I remember Park Benjamin said of him, in his 
 rather extravagant way, that, if one told Charles Sum- 
 ner that the moon was made of green cheese, he would 
 controvert the alleged fact in all sincerity, and give 
 good reason why it could not be so. . . . — Memoirs 
 1, p. 164. 
 
 . . . That is a glorious document [Jackson's Proc- 
 lamation] worthy of any President. Our part of the 
 country rejoices in it as a true exposition of the Consti- 
 tution, and a fervid address to those wayward men 
 who are now plunging us into disgrace abroad and 
 misery at home. . . . Memoirs I, p. 117. 
 
 In a letter to his parents, written from Wash- 
 ington in 1834, he spoke of his first view of 
 slavery as follows: 
 
 . . . For the first time I saw slaves, and my worst 
 preconception of their appearance and ignorance did 
 not fall as low as their actual stupidity. They appear 
 to be nothing more than moving masses of flesh, unen- 
 dowed with anything above the intelligence of the 
 brutes. I have now an idea of the blight upon that 
 part of our country in which they live. . . . 
 
 . . . Calhoan has given notice today that he will 
 speak tomorrow on Mr. Webster's bank-bill. I shall 
 probably hear him, and he will be the last man I shall 
 ever hear speak m Washington. I probably shall never 
 come here again. I have little or no desire ever to come 
 again in any capacity. Nothing that I have seen of 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 
 
 129 
 
 politics has made me look upon them with any feeling 
 other than loathing. . . . Ibid., pp. 134, U^ 
 To Francis Lieber, January 9, 1836: 
 . . . You are in the midst of slavery, seated among 
 its whirling eddies blown around as they are by the 
 blasts of Governor McDuffie, fiercer than any from the 
 old wind-bags of iEolus. What think you of it? 
 Should it longer exist? Is not emancipation practi- 
 cable? We are becoming Abolitionists at the North 
 fast; the riots, the attempts to abridge the freedom of 
 discussion, Governor McDuffie's message, and the con- 
 duct of the South generally have caused many to think 
 favorably of immediate emancipation who never before 
 inclined to it. . . . Memoirs I, p. 173. 
 
 He wrote on December 7, 1837, to W. F. 
 Frick, the following words concerning the study 
 of law. In part, he said: 
 
 . . . Pursue the law, then, as a science; study it 
 in books; and let the results of your studies ripen from 
 meditation and conversation in your own mind. Make 
 it a rule never to pass a sentence or phrase or proposi- 
 tion which you do not understand. . . . There are 
 few, I flatter myself, who are more disposed than I am 
 to view the law as a coherent collection of principles 
 rather than a bundle of cases. With me, cases are the 
 exponents of principles; and I would have you read them 
 in order to understand the principles of the law and the 
 grounds of them. The best way, therefore, of reading 
 them is in connection with some text-book, following 
 the different references in the margin to their sources, 
 and thus informing yourself of the reasons by which 
 the principles are supported. . . . 
 
 The most important cases, in which some principle 
 has first been evolved or first received a novel applica- 
 tion, are called '* leading cases," and all these should 
 be read with great attention. . . . 
 
 ... I need hardly add to these desultory recom- 
 mendations that you cannot read history too much, 
 particularly that of England and the United States. 
 History is the record of human conduct and experience, 
 and it is to this that jurisprudence is applied. More- 
 over, in the English history is to be found the grad-. 
 
130 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 ual development of that portion of the common law 
 which is called the Constitution — for the British Con- 
 stitution stands chiefly on the common law. Th« his- 
 tary of legislation in England contains the origin, 
 also, of portions of the Constitution. History is of 
 itself such a fascinating study that it can need to your 
 mind no such feeble recommendation as mine. . . 
 Memoirs I, pp. 207, 208. 
 
 December 25, 1837, he ended his journal of 
 that day, which he kept during his first visit to 
 Europe, in these words : 
 
 . . . May I return with an undiminished love for 
 my friends and country, with a heart and mind un- 
 tainted by the immoralities of the Old World, man- 
 ners untouched by its affectations, and a willingness to 
 resume my labors with an unabated determination to 
 devote myself faithfully to the duties of an American? 
 . . . 16 id, p. 214. 
 
 From Boston, a few months after his return 
 to America, he wrote to a London friend as 
 follows: 
 
 Our politics are shabby enough. The Whigs, consti- 
 tuting the opposition, have nominated for the Presi- 
 dency, the person whose head adorns a corner of this 
 sheet. He has in his favor his good conduct during 
 the war of 1812, and an alleged victory at Tippecanoe; 
 and the vulgar appeal is made, grounded on military 
 success. This has made him a more acceptable candi- 
 date than Clay or Webster, who have been serving the 
 State well for years. . . . 
 
 An Administration paper alluded to him as living in 
 a log-cabin and drinking hard-cider. The Whigs at 
 once adopted these words and placed them on their 
 f avora. They proclaimed Harrison the candidate of the 
 "logvaabin and hard cider" class. And this vulgar 
 appeal is made by the party professing the monopoly of 
 intelligence and education in the country! But it has 
 had its effect. The country seems revolutionized, and 
 the Whigs are confident. . . .—Pierce Memoirs* 
 Vol II, pp. 165, m, 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 131 
 
 A few months later he wrote: 
 I fear the coming six months will be a perfect Sat- 
 urnalia in our poor country; the Whigs, elated with 
 success, hungry by abstinence from office for twelve 
 years, and goaded by the recollection of ancient wrongs, 
 will push their victory to the utmost. Of course the 
 example set by Jackson will be followed; and perhaps 
 improved upon; there will be a geneial turnout of all 
 present office-holders at home and abroad; the war ot 
 parties will have new venom. . . . There is so 
 much passion, and so little principle so much devotion 
 to party, and so little to country in both parties; that 
 I think we have occasion for deep anxiety. . . . 
 The Whi-s have met with their present surprising and 
 most unexpected success by means of their low appeals 
 to hard-cider, log-cabins and the like. . . i J-Oid., 
 p. 168. 
 
 In this extract from a letter to Jacob Harvey, 
 we see something of the ideas that now begin 
 to ferment in Stunners' brain, 1842: 
 
 I agree with you entirely with regard to the ' ' Creole " 
 affair, except, perhaps, that I go farther than you do. 
 In the first place, England cannot deliver up the 
 slaves who are not implicated in the mutiny and mur- 
 der by which the government of the ship was over- 
 thrown. She laid down a rule not to recognize property 
 in human beings since the date of her great Emancipa- 
 tion Act. The principle of this is very clear, one will 
 not in any way lend her machinery of justice to exe- 
 cute foreign laws which she has pronounced immoral, 
 unchristian and unjust. She had not so pronounced 
 until her act of Emancipation. . . - 
 
 Slavery is not a national institution; nor is it one 
 recognized by the law of nations. It is peculiar to 
 certain states. It draws its vitality from the legisla- 
 tion of those States. Now, this legislation is of course 
 limited to those states. . . . Ibid., pp. 199, £00. 
 
 To his brother George he wrote, April 1, 
 
 1842: 
 
 Dr. Channing has put forth a glorious pamphlet on 
 the 'Creole,' in reply to Webster's sophistical despatch. 
 
132 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 One feels proud of being a countryman of Channing 
 His spirit is worthy of the Republic, and does us honor 
 abroad. He is a noble elevation, which makes the 
 pulses throb. The paltry uncertain, shifting princi- 
 ples of Webster's letter are unworthy of him. The 
 question of slavery is getting to be the absorbing one 
 among us; and growing out of this is that other of the 
 Union. People now talk about the value of the Union, 
 and the North has begun to return the taunts of the 
 South. . . . 
 
 The treaty is concluded, and peace now smiles over 
 the two countries. . . Webster, it is presumed, 
 will resign his office; but nobody can tell what he will 
 do. He is deeply in debt, and with habits that will 
 now render professional exertion irksome. From his 
 fate we may learn that office is not worth seeking. — 
 Memoirs II, %>. 205, 221. 
 
 To Dr. Samuel G. Howe, he wrote, May 31, 
 1844, in this language: 
 
 . . . The junction between Clay and Webster, 
 strengtheas the Whig cause. I can not doubt that Clay 
 will be elected. Tyler's weakness has become wicked- 
 ness. He is governed by prejudice, selfishness, and 
 vanity— playing with the great powers of the State, 
 confided to him in sacred trust for the good of all, with 
 a view only to what he supposes his individual interest, 
 and sacrificing men and measures as if they were 
 pawns. Oh! When will vulgar selfishness be cast 
 down and trodden under foot, and when shall we find 
 rulers whose eyes will be placed singly on the good of 
 humanity? The Texas treaty will be rejected by the 
 Senate. . . . 
 
 Let us put an iron heel upon the serpent of religious 
 bigotry, trying to hug our schools in its insidious coils. 
 
 . , Memoirs II, p. S07. 
 
 To Horace Mann, he wrote, in 1845: 
 
 ... We have learned from you the priceless 
 value of the common schools. You have taught us 
 most especially that the conservation of republican in- 
 stitutions depends on the knowledge and virtue />f the 
 people. You have taught us, by most interesting de- 
 tails and considerations, that the wealth of the country 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 133 
 
 is augmented, and that the arm of its industry is 
 nerved, in proportion to the diffusion of knowledge; so 
 that each humble schoolhouse is to be regarded, not 
 only as a nursery of souls, but a mine of riches. . . 
 . Memoirs , II, p. 325. 
 
 To his brother George, in November, 1845: 
 
 The spirit of Antislavery promises soon to absorb all 
 New England. Massachusetts will never give her 
 vote for another slaveholder. The cotton lords will 
 interfere, but they will at last be borne away by the 
 rising tide; but this cannot be immediately. You will 
 be at home, and an actor in the conflict that approaches 
 
 In the Free Soil Convention, in Massachu- 
 setts, in 1849, he said, in part: 
 
 The efforts to place the nat'onal government on the 
 side of freedom have received little sympathy from cor- 
 porations, or from persons largely interested in them, 
 but have rather encountered their opposition, some- 
 times concealed, sometimes open, often bitter and vin- 
 dictive. It :«3 easy to explain this. In corporations is 
 the money-power of the Commonwealth. Thus far the 
 instincts of property have proved stronger in Massachu- 
 setts than the instinct of freedom. The money-power 
 has joined hands with the slave-power. Selfish, grasp- 
 ing, subtile, tyrannical, like its ally, it will not brook 
 opposition. It claims the Commonwealth as its own, and 
 too successfully enlists in its support, that needy tal- 
 ent and easy virtue which are required to maintain its 
 sway.— Memoirs, Vol. HI, p. 187. 
 
 In 1850 he wrote: 
 
 The Slavery question has become paramount here at 
 last. The Slave states threaten to dissolve the Union 
 if Slavery is prohibited by Congress in the new terri- 
 tories or abolished in the District of Columbia. I trust 
 that Congress will do its duty, regardless of threats. 
 What the results may be it is impossible to determine. 
 . . . Memoirs III, p. 211. 
 
 To William Jay, March 23, 1S50: 
 
 I thank you very much for writing that letter on Mr. 
 Webster's speech. It will be read extensively, and 
 will do great good. You expose his inconsistency and 
 
134 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 turpitude in a manner that must sink into the soul of 
 the great apostate. Horace Mann writes that all of the 
 Northern Whigs out of the three great cities are 
 against that speech.— Ibi d., p. 213. 
 
 In his Faneuil Hall speech of 1850, he used 
 these words: 
 
 . . . We are told that the Slavery question is set- 
 tled. Yes, settled, settled,— that is the word. Nothing, 
 sir, can be settled which is not right. Nothing can be set- 
 tled which is against freedom. Nothing can be set- 
 tled which is against the divine law. God, nature, 
 and all the holy sentiments of the heart repudiate any 
 such false-seeming settlement. — Ibid., p. 229. 
 
 To John Bigelow, he wrote, January 21, 1851: 
 . . . The charge used with most effect against me 
 is that I am a "disunionist;" but the authors of this 
 know its falsehood— it is all a sham to influence voters. 
 My principles are, in the words of Franklin, ' to step 
 to the verge of the Constitution to discourage every 
 species of traffic in human flesh." I am a constitu- 
 tionalist and a unionist, and have always been.— Ibid., 
 pp. 239- k0. 
 
 To Geo. Sumner, 1851: 
 
 On the tariff I am absolutely uncommitted. Mr. 
 Henry Cabot, an old manufacturer, told me yesterday 
 that he and others were satisfied that 'protection was 
 a fallacy;' and that William Appleton had said that 
 his vote could not be had for a change in the present 
 tariff. Mr. Cabot thought the subject would not come 
 up in the next session.— Ibid., p. 254. 
 
 Concerning Kossuth, he wrote, in 18-52: 
 
 Kossuth produces a great impression by personal 
 presence and speech, but confesses that his mission has 
 failed. It failed under bad counsels, from his asking 
 too much. . . . When the time comes that we can 
 strike a blow for any good cause I shall be ready; but 
 meanwhile our true policy is s} T mpathy with the liberal 
 movement everywhere, and this declared without 
 mincing or reserve. . . . 
 
 My desire was to welcome him warmly and sympa- 
 thetically but at the same time to hold fast to the 
 pacific policy of our country. —Ibid. , p. 271. 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 135 
 
 After moving the following amendments to 
 the appropriation bill: 
 
 Provided that no such allowance shall be author- 
 ized for any expense incurred for executing the Act of 
 September 18, 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from 
 service or labor, which said Act is hereby repealed. 
 
 He began his first great speech in the Senate 
 in these words: 
 
 And now at last, among these final crowded days of 
 our duties here, but at this earliest opportunity I am to 
 be heard, — not as a favor, but as a. right. The grace- 
 ful usages of this body may be abandoned, but the 
 established privileges of debate cannot be abridged; par- 
 liamentary courtesy may be forgotten, but parliamen- 
 tary law must prevail. The subject is broadly before 
 the Senate; by the blessings of God it shall be dis- 
 cussed. . . . 
 
 And now, sir, let us interview the field over which 
 we have passed. We have seen that any compromise, 
 finally disclosing the discussion of slavery under the 
 Constitution, is tyrannical, absurd and impotent; that 
 as slavery can exist only by virtue of positive law, and 
 it has no such support in the Constitution, it cannot 
 exist within the national jurisdiction; that the Consti- 
 tution nowhere recognized property in man, and that, 
 according to its true interpretation, freedom and not 
 slavery is national, while slavery and not freedom is 
 sectional; that in this spirit the national government 
 was first organized under Washington, himself an abol 
 itionist, surrounded by abolitionists, while the whole 
 country, by its churches, its colleges, its literature, and 
 all its best voices, was united against slavery, and the 
 national flag at that time. . . . 
 
 The Slave Act violates the Constitution and shocks 
 the public conscience. With modesty, and yet with 
 firmness, let me add, sir, it offends against the divine 
 law. No such enactment is entitled to support. . .i 
 . Memoirs, 111, pp. 293, 297, 298. 
 
 In regard to secret sessions in the Senate, he 
 spoke as follows, 1S53 1 . 
 
 The limitation proposed seems adequate to all exi- 
 gencies, while the general rule will be publicity ^xe«- 
 
136 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 utive sessions with closed doors, shrouded from the 
 public gaze and public intrusion, constitute an excep- 
 tional part of our system, too much in harmony with 
 the proceedings of other governments less liberal in 
 character. The genius of our institutions requires 
 publicity. . . . Memoirs, III, p. 321. 
 
 In his Finger Point from Plymouth Rock, he 
 said: 
 
 Standing on Plymouth Rock, at their great anni- 
 versary, we cannot fail to be elevated by their exam- 
 ple. . . . Better the despised Pilgrim, a fugitive 
 for freedom, than the halting politician, forgetful of 
 principle, 'with a Senate at his heels.' — Memoirs, III, 
 p 333. 
 
 Concerning the Repeal of the Missouri Com- 
 promise he used the following language: 
 
 You observe that the Nebraska Bill opens anew the 
 whole slavery question. Cannot something be done to 
 arouse our legislature to resolutions affirming their 
 original position in 1819? Here all is uncertain. I 
 have a hope that it may be tabled at once. The threat 
 is to push it to a vote without delay. . . . 
 
 More clearly than ever before, I now penetrate that 
 great future when slavery must disappear. Proudly I 
 discern the flag of my country as it ripples in every 
 breeze,— at last in reality as in name, the flag of free- 
 dom, undoubted, pure and irresistible. . . . Mem- 
 oirs, III, pp. 361, 372. 
 
 Concerning foreign born citizens, he said: 
 With this simple explanation, I cannot place any 
 check upon the welcome to foreigners. . . . There 
 are our broad lands, stretching toward the setting sun; 
 let them come and take them. Ourselves children of 
 the Pilgrims of a former generation, let us not turn 
 from ,the Pilgrims of the present. Let the home 
 founded by our emigrant fathers continue open in its 
 many mansions to the emigrants of today. . . . 
 
 A party which, beginning in secrecy, interferes with 
 religious belief, and founds a discrimination on the 
 accident of birth, is not the party for tis. . . . 
 Memoirs, III, pp. k22, 423. 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 137 
 
 In 1856, he wrote to C. F. Adams: 
 
 . . . At last Banks is elected. I was present 
 when he was conducted to his chair. It was a proud 
 historic moment. For the first time during years there 
 seems to be a North. I fancied I saw the star glitter- 
 ing over his head. His appearance, voice, and man- 
 ner were in admirable harmony with the occasion. 
 Memoirs, III, p. 431. 
 
 In 1856 he wrote to Theodore Parker in these 
 despairing words: 
 
 I have read and admired your speech. It is a whole 
 sheaf of spears against slavery. Alas! the tyranny 
 over us is complete. When you read this, I shall be 
 saying to the Senate, ' They will notl ' Would that I 
 had your strength! But I shall pronounce the most 
 thorough phillipic ever uttered in a legislative body. 
 Memoirs, III, p. 439. 
 
 The following extracts relate to his speech 
 on Kansas, and its results: 
 
 The strife is no longer local, but national. Even now, 
 while I speak, portents lower in the horizon, threaten- 
 ing to darken the land, which already palpitates with 
 the mutterings of civil war. . ' . . 
 
 Thus was the crime consummated. Slavery stands 
 erect, clanking its chains on the Territory of Kansas, 
 surrounded by a code of death, and trampling upon all 
 cherished liberties, whether of speech, the press, the 
 bar, the trial by jury, or the electoral franchise. . . . 
 
 Even now the black flag of the land-pirates from 
 Missouri wave at the mast head; in their laws you hear 
 the pirate yell and seethe flash of the pirate knife; 
 while, incredible to relate, the President, gathering 
 the slave power at his back, testifies a pirate sympathy. 
 
 . . . I as an American citizen shall no longer be 
 impotent against outrage. In just regard for free la- 
 bor, which you would blast by deadly contact with 
 slave labor; in rescue of fellow-citizens now subjugated 
 to tyrannical usurpation; in dutiful respect for the 
 early fathers, these aspirations are ignobly thwarted; 
 in the name of the Constitution outraged, of the laws 
 trampled down, of justice banished, of humanity de- 
 10 
 
138 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 graded, of peace destroyed, of freedom crushed to the 
 the earth, and in the name of the Heavenly Father, 
 whose service is perfect freedom, — I make this last ap- 
 peal. — Memoirs, III, pp. 442, 443, 444, 452. 
 
 Mr. Chandler spoke of the effect of the at- 
 tack on Sumner in these words: 
 
 That gentleman in Washington, who now lies upon 
 a bed of pain, whose life maybe is hanging in the bal- 
 ance, needs no sympathy from us. Every drop of blood 
 shed by him in this disgraceful affair has raised 
 ten thousand armed men; every gash upon that fore- 
 head will be covered with a political crown; let it be 
 resisted as much as it may be resisted here or else- 
 where. This matter is raised far above and beyond all 
 personal considerations . It is a matter of trifling con- 
 sequence to Mr. Sumner; it makes those who love him 
 love him more, —and no man is more loved or more to 
 be considered, as far as the affections or friendships are 
 concerned. Yet personal feelings are of little or no 
 consequence in this outrage. It is a blow not merely 
 at Massachusetts, a blow not merely at the name and 
 fame of our common country ; it is a blow at constitu- 
 tional liberty all the world over,— it is a stab at the 
 cause of universal freedom. — Memoirs, III, p. 499. 
 
 Concerning the Cuban question as it ap- 
 peared in 1859 to Sumner, we have these words: 
 
 Everything tends to make the Cuban question the 
 pivot of the anti-slavery cause . If Cuba falls into the 
 hands of the American slave-masters, the whole sys- 
 tem of slavery will acquire a new lease of life and 
 power. . . . 
 
 All this can be arrested at once, and the slave trade 
 also, if Spain can in any way be induced to follow the 
 British example and to declare emancipation in this 
 island . That would be the greatest blow ever dealt at 
 slavery. Indeed, that blow would be mortal. I do not 
 think slavery could long survive in the United States. 
 . . « Memoirs, III, p. 568. 
 
 Sumner was recognized, for the first time, as 
 a great orator in his Fourth of July address of 
 1845. In part he said: 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 139 
 
 . . With this aim, and believing that I can in 
 no other way so fitly fulfill the trust reposed in me to- 
 day, I propose to consider what, in oar age, are the true 
 objects of national ambition,— what is truly National 
 Honor, National Glory,— WHAT IS THE TRUE 
 GRANDEUR OF NATIONS. I would not depart 
 from the modesty that becomes me, yet I am not with- 
 out hope that I may do something to rescue these terms, 
 now so powerful over the minds of men, from mistaken 
 objects, especially from deeds of war, and the exten- 
 sion of empire, that they may be applied to works of 
 justice and beneficence, which is better than war or 
 empire. . . . 
 
 Can there be in our age any peace that is not honor- 
 able, any war that is not dishonorable ? The true honor 
 of a nation is conspicuous only in deeds of justice and 
 beneficence, securing and advancing human happiness. 
 In the clear eye of that Christian judgment which 
 must yet prevail, vain are the victories of War, infa- 
 mous its spoils. He is the benefactor, and worthy of 
 honor, who carries comfort to wretchedness, dries the 
 tear of sorrow, relieves the unfortunate, feeds the hun- 
 gry, clothes the naked, does justice, enlightens the ig- 
 norant, unfastens the fetters of the slave, and finally, 
 by virtuous genius, in art, literature, science, enlivens 
 and exhalts the hours of life, or, by generous example, 
 inspires a love for God and man. . . . Sumner's 
 Works, Vol I, pp. 7, 9, 10. 
 
 Anti- slavery duties of the Whig Party, Sep- 
 tember 23, 1846: 
 
 . . . The time, I believe, has gone by, when the 
 question is asked, What has the North to do with Slav- 
 ery? It might almost be answered, that, politically, 
 it has little to do with anything else,— so are all the 
 acts of our Government, connected, directly or indi- 
 rectly, with this institution. Slavery is everywhere. 
 Appealing to the Constitution, it enters the Halls of 
 Congress, in the disproportionate representation of the 
 Slave States. It holds its disgusting mart at Washing- 
 ton, in the shadow of the Capitol, under the legisla- 
 tive jurisdiction of the Nation,— of the North as well 
 as the South. It sends its miserable victims over the 
 
140 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 high seas, from the ports of Virginia to the ports of 
 Louisiana, beneath the protecting flag of the Republic. 
 It presumes to follow into the free state those fugi- 
 tives who, filled with the inspiration of Freedom, seek 
 our alters for safety ; nay, more, with profane hands it 
 seizes those who have never known the name of slave, 
 freemen of the North, and dooms them to irredeemable 
 bondage. It insults and expels from its jurisdic- 
 tion honored representatives from Massachusetts, seek- 
 ing to secure for her colored citizens the peaceful safe- 
 guard of the Union. It assumes at pleasure to build 
 up new slaveholding states, striving perpetually to 
 widen its area, while professing to extend the area of 
 Freedom. It has brought upon the country war with 
 Mexico, with its enormous expenditures and more 
 enormous guilt. By the spirit of union among its sup- 
 porters, it controls the affairs of Government,— inter- 
 feres with the cherished interests of the North, 
 enforcing and then refusing protection to her manu- 
 factures, — makes and unmakes Presidents, — usurps to 
 itself the larger portion of all offices of honor and 
 profit, both in the army and navy, and also in the civil 
 department, — and stamps upon our whole country the 
 character, before the world, of that monstrous anom- 
 aly and mockery, a slaveholding republic, Avith the liv- 
 ing truths of Freedom on its lips and the dark mark of 
 Slavery on its brow. — Works, Vol. I, pp. 307, SOS. 
 
 Wrongful Declaration of War against Mexico: 
 . . . In the condition of things, the way of safety, 
 just and honorable, was by constant withdrawal from 
 the Rio Grande to the* Nueces. Congress should have 
 spoken like Washington, when General Braddock, 
 staggered by the peril of the moment, asked the youth- 
 ful soldier, "What shall I do, Colonel Washington?" 
 "RETREAT, Sir! RETREAT, Sir!" was the earnest 
 reply. The American forces should have been directed 
 to retreat, — not from any human force, but from wrong- 
 doing; and this would have been a true victory. — Works 
 I, p. 819. 
 
 In a later speech on the same subject, he 
 speaks in part as follows: 
 
 . . . But the war is not unconstitutional, it is un- 
 just, and it is vile in object and character. It had its 
 
CHARLE5 SUMNER. 141 
 
 origin in a well-known series of measures to extend 
 and perpetuate Slavery- It is a war which must ever 
 be odious in history, beyond the outrages of brutality 
 which disgrace other nations and times. It is a slave- 
 driving war. In principle it is only a little above those 
 miserable conflicts between barbarian chiefs of Cen- 
 tral Africa to obtain slaves for the inhuman markets 
 of Brazil. Such a war must be accursed in the sight of 
 God. Why is it not accursed in the sight of man? 
 
 We are told that the country is engaged in the war, 
 and therefore it must be maintained, or, as it is some- 
 times expressed, vigorously prosecuted. In other words, 
 the violation of the Constitution, and the outrage upon 
 justice sink out of sight, and we are urged to these 
 same acts again. By what necromancy do these pas's 
 from wrong to right? In what book of morals is it 
 written, that what is bad before it is undertaken be 
 comes righteous merely from the circumstances that it 
 is commenced. Who on earth is authorized to trans- 
 mute wrong into right? Who admits the unconstitu- 
 tionality and injustice of the war, and yet sanctions its 
 prosecution, must approve the Heaven-defying senti- 
 ment "Our country, right or wrong." Can this be 
 the sentiment of Boston? If so, in vain are her chil- 
 dren nurtured in the churches of the Pilgrims, in vain 
 fed from the common table of knowledge bountifully 
 supplied by our common schools. Who would profess 
 allegiance to wrong? Who would defy allegiance to 
 right' Right is one of the attributes of God, or rather 
 it is part of his Divinity immortal as himself. The 
 mortal can not be higher than the immortal. Had this 
 sentiment been received by our English defenders in 
 the war of the Revolution, no fiery tongues of Chatham, 
 Burke, Fox, or Camden would have been heard in our 
 behalf Their great testimony would have failed. All 
 would have been silenced, while crying that the coun- 
 try, right or wrong, must be carried through the war. 
 . Works I pp. 377, 378. 
 Necessity of political action against the slave 
 power and the extension of slavery, September 
 
 29, 1S47: 
 
 Mr President, -It is late, and I am sorry to trespass 
 on unwilling attention. The importance of the cause 
 
142 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 is my apology. The question is, How shall we express 
 our opposition to the Extension of Slavery? Here it is 
 satisfactory to know that there can be no embarrass- 
 ment from constitutional scruples. It is not proposed 
 to interfere with Slavery in any constitutional strong- 
 hold, or to touch any so-called compromise of the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 Is it not strange, Mr. President, that we, in this nine- 
 teenth century of the Christian era, in a country whose 
 heroic charter declares that "all men are created 
 equal," under whose Constitution one of whose express 
 objects is to "secure the blessings of liberty,"— is it not 
 passing strange that we should be occupied now in 
 considering how best to prevent the opening of new 
 markets for human flesh ? . . . The Missouri com- 
 promise, the annexation of Texas, the war with Mex- 
 ico, are only specimens of trouble from the Slave Power. 
 . . . The Slave Power is the Imprisoned Giant of 
 our Constitution. . . . 
 
 This brings me directly to the point, How shall we 
 make our opposition felt? How shall it become vital 
 and palpable? On the present occasion we can only 
 declare our course. . . . We must carry them to 
 the ballot box, and bring our candidates to their stan- 
 dard. . . . Our motto must be, "Principles, and 
 those only who will maintain them." . . . Works, 
 Vol II, pp. 56, 57, 59, 61. 
 
 Union against the extension of slavery: 
 By the Slave Power I understand that combination 
 of persons, or, perhaps, of politicians, whose animating 
 principal is the perpetuation and extension of Slavery, 
 with the advancement of Slaveholders. 
 
 I will not dwell upon the manner in which General 
 Taylor was forced upon the late Whig party. This 
 has been amply done by others. . . . Yes! it was 
 brought about by an unhallowed union— conspiracy let 
 it be called^ between two remote sections; between 
 the politicians of the Southwest and the politicians of 
 the Northeast, — between the cotton-planters and flesh- 
 mongers of Louisiana and Mississippi and the eotton- 
 spinners and traflikers of New England,— between the 
 lords of the lash and the lords of the loom . . „ To 
 my mind the way is plain. The lovers of Freedom 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 
 
 143 
 
 from both parties, and irrespective of all party associa- 
 tions, must unite, and by a new combination, congenial 
 to the Constitution, oppose both candidates. This will 
 be the FREEDOM POWER, whose single object will 
 be to resist the SLAVE POWER. We will put them 
 face to face, and let them grapple. Who can doubt 
 the result. . . . It is clear that the only question 
 of present practical interest arises from the usurpations 
 of the Slave Power and the efforts to extend Slavery. 
 This is the vital question at this time. It is the ques- 
 tion of questions. . . . Works, II, pp. 77, 81, 82, 85. 
 
 The party of freedom: 
 
 It is said that we have but one idea. This I 
 deny. But admitting that it is so, are we not, with our 
 one idea, better than a party with no ideas at all? And 
 what is our one idea? It is the idea which combined 
 our fathers on the heights of Bunker Hill,— which in 
 spired Lafayette,— which carried Washington through 
 a seven years' war,— which with coals of fire touched 
 the lips of Adams, Otis, and Patrick Henry. Ours is 
 an idea at least noble and elevating; it is an idea which 
 draws in its trairj, virtue, goodness, and all the chari- 
 ties of life, all that makes a home of improvement and 
 happiness. . . . 
 
 We found now a new party. Its comer-stone is 
 Freedom. Its broad, all-sustaining arches are Truth, 
 Justice, and Humanity. Like the ancient Roman 
 Capitol, at once Temple and Citadel, it shall be the fit 
 shrine for the genius of American institutions.— Works 
 II, pp. U5, U6. 
 
 Importance of a free-soil organization: 
 
 . This is the case now. The principles of Wash- 
 ington, Jefferso n> and Franklin, the security of our Con- 
 stitution, the true fame of our country, the interests of 
 labor, the cause of Freedom, Humanity, Right, Morals, 
 Religion, God, all these are now at stake. Holier 
 cause has never appeared in history. To it I offer not 
 vows only, but my best efforts, wherever they can be 
 effectual. . . Works, II, pp. 150, 151. 
 
 War system of the commonwealth of nations, 
 May 28, 1849; 
 
144 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Only when we contemplate war in this light can wa 
 fully perceive its combined folly and wickedness. Let 
 me bring this home to your minds. Boston and Cam- 
 bridge are adjoining towns, separated by the river 
 Charles. In the event of controversy between these 
 different jurisdictions, the Municipal Law established 
 a judicial tribunal, and not War, as Arbiter. Ascend- 
 ing even higher, in the event of controversy between 
 two different counties, as between Essex and Middle- 
 sex, and same Municipal Law establishes a judicial tri- 
 bunal, and not War, as arbiter. Ascending yet higher, 
 in the event of controversy between two different States 
 in the Union, the Constitution established a judicial 
 tribunal, the Supreme Court of the United States, and 
 not War, as arbiter. But now mark : at the next stage 
 there is a change of arbiter. In the event of contro- 
 versy between two different States in the Common- 
 wealth of Nations, the Supreme law establishes, not a 
 judicial tribunal, but War, as arbiter. War is the in- 
 stitution established for the determination of justice be- 
 tween two nations. . . . 
 
 Recognizing the irrational and unchristian character 
 of War as established arbiter between towns, counties 
 and states, we learn to condemn it as established arbiter 
 between nations. If wrong in one case, it must be 
 wrong in the other. — Works II, pp. 189, 190, 191. 
 
 Where liberty is, there is my party: 
 . . . It was the sentiment of Benjamin Franklin^ 
 that apostle of Freedom uttered during the trials of 
 the Revolution, "Where liberty is, there is my 
 country." I doubt not that each of you will be ready 
 to respond, in similar strain, ' ' Where liberty is, there 
 is my party." , . .—Works, II, p. 281. 
 
 A congress of nations, with disarmament: 
 
 "PETITION FOR PEACE. 
 
 "To the Honorable Senate (or H. of B.) of the United 
 States: 
 "The undersigned, inhabitants (or citizens, or legal 
 
 voters) of in the State of , deploring 
 
 the manifold evils of war, and believing it possible to 
 supersede its alleged necessity, as an Arbiter of Jus- 
 tice among the nations, by the timely adoption of wise 
 
CHARLES SUMNER. 145 
 
 and feasible substitutes, respectfully request your hon- 
 orable body to take such action as you may deem best 
 in favor of Stipulated Arbitration, or a Congress of 
 Nations, for the accomplishment of this most desira- 
 ble end" ... Works, II, p. 396. 
 
 Our immediate anti-slavery duties, Novem- 
 ber 6, 1850: 
 
 . . . It is a mistake to say, as is often charged, 
 that we seek to interfere, through Congress, with 
 Slavery in the States, or in any way to direct the legis- 
 lation of Congress upon subjects not within its juris- 
 diction. Our political aims, as well as our political 
 duties, are coextensive with our political responsibili- 
 ties. And since we at the North are responsible for 
 Slavery, wherever it exists under the jurisdiction of 
 Congress, it is unpardonable in us not to exert every 
 power we possess to enlist Congress against it. 
 
 Looking at details:— 
 
 We demand, first and foremost, the instant Repeal 
 of the Fugitive Slave Bill. (Cheers.) 
 
 We demand the Abolition of Slavery in the District 
 of Columbia. (Cheers.) We demand of Congress the 
 exercise of its time-honored power to prohibit Slavery 
 in the Territories. (Cheers. ) 
 
 We demand of Congress that it shall refuse to receive 
 any new Slave State into the Union. (Cheers, repeated. ) 
 
 We demand the Abolition of the Domestic Slave 
 Trade, so far as it can be constitutionally reached, but 
 particularly on the high seas under the National Flag. 
 
 And, generally, we demand from the National Gov- 
 ernment, the exercise of all constitutional power to re- 
 lieve itself from responsibility of Slavery. And yet one 
 thing further must be done. The Slave Power must be 
 overturned, — so that the National Government may be 
 put openly, actively, and perpetually on the side of 
 Freedom. (Prolonged applause. ) . .. . Works, Vol. 
 II, pp. 415, 416. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 1. To what generation of American statesmen does 
 Sumner belong? 2. How can you determine? 
 
 1. What kind of a student was Sumner? 2. What 
 studies did he like best? 3. What was his scholarship 
 at fifteen? 4. Discuss his personal appearance, o. 
 
146 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 What can you learn of him from his letter while at 
 college? 6. What do you learn of Harvard customs? 
 7. Discuss his moral qualities. 8. His social. 9. Was 
 he a thorough student? 10. What did he think of 
 method in study? 11. What occupation did he be- 
 lieve was the noblest? 
 
 1. What was his first impression of Washington pol- 
 itics? 2. What of Slavery? 3. What reasons does he 
 give to account for the growing Abolitionism of the 
 North? 4. What was his impression of the Campaign 
 of 1840? 5. Did he find country or party first thought 
 of? 6. Find out what the "Creole" affair was. 7. 
 Give his argument on the case. 8. Make a list of the 
 evils he thinks he sees in American political life. 9 
 What was the great work of Horace Mann? 10. What 
 did he think of Webster's speech of 1850? 11. When 
 is a question settled? Was his answer always correct? 
 12. What did he think of the tariff? 
 
 1. Make a list of all the points he makes against 
 slavery. 2. Make a list of the means he would use to 
 destroy slavery. 3. Were his attacks on slavery of 
 such a nature as to anger those attacked? 4. What 
 was the result of the speech on Kansas? 5. How 
 would he use Cuba if possible? Why? 
 
 1. What did Sumner think constituted the "True 
 Grandeur of Nations " ? 2. Summarize his arguments 
 for peace. 3. What can be said on the other side? 4. 
 Trace his views in regard to Mexican War. 5. Have 
 his predictions been fulfilled? 
 
 1. Estimate Sumner's character from his speeches 
 2. Estimate his oratorical power from them also. 3. 
 Was he a narrow, or broad minded man ? 4. Compare 
 him with either Adams, Webster, Clay, or Calhoun. 
 
STEPHEN ARNOLD DOUGLAS 
 
 Born in Vermont, 1813. Went to Illinois, 1834. 
 Member of the Illinois legislature, 1836-1838. 
 Judge of the supreme court of Illinois, 1841-1843. 
 Member of House of Representatives, 1843-1846. 
 Senator, 1846-1861. Candidate for nomination 
 for President, 1852, 1856. Candidate for Presi- 
 dent, 1860. Strongest supporter of the doctrine 
 of "Popular Sovereignty." Author of the 
 Kansas-Nebraska Bill, 1854. Opponent of ad- 
 mission of Kansas under the Lecompton con- 
 stitution, 1858. Series of debates with Lincoln, 
 1858. Died, 1860. 
 
CHAPTEK VII 
 
 STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS 
 
 DOUGLAS belonged to the same genera- 
 tion as Sumner, Seward, Chase, and 
 Lincoln. Like them he is best known 
 by the part he took in the great slavery strug- 
 gle; but, unlike them, he was an opponent of 
 the agitation of the subject, and bitterly op- 
 posed to the abolitionists. Douglas was born 
 in New England, and educated in its limits. 
 At the age of twenty he gave up h^s ambition 
 for a college course, although he was well pre- 
 pared in the classics and mathematics, and 
 turned to the study of law. He, like nearly all 
 this group of great men, came from the ranks 
 of the middle class, and from the farm. 
 
 Before he was twenty-one he started west, 
 and at length arrived in Illinois with less than 
 one dollar in his pocket. However, in less 
 than ten years he was one of the leaders of the 
 Democratic party in the state, with a reputa- 
 tion that already extended beyond its borders. 
 
 The following, extracts illustrate some phases 
 of his life; but, as in the cases of the other men 
 of whom we have studied, the picture is too 
 brief to give more than an outline of his career 
 and labors. 
 
 Douglas defends the act of Jackson in sus- 
 pending the writ of Habeas Corpus, at New Or- 
 leans, ii* the war of 1812, in these words: 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 149 
 
 They have been pleased to stigmatize this act of jus- 
 tice to the distinguished patriot and hero as a humbug 
 — a party trick — a political movement, intended to oper- 
 ate upon the next Presidential election. These imputa- 
 tions are as unfounded as they are uncourteous, and 
 I hurl them back . , . upon any man who is capa- 
 ble of harboring, . . . such a sentiment. . . . 
 A question involving the right of a country to use the 
 means necessary to its defense ... is too vitally 
 important to be yielded without an inquiry into the 
 nature and source of the fatal restriction which is to 
 deprive a nation of the power of self-preservation. The 
 proposition contended for by the Opposition is, that the 
 general in command, to whose protection are com- 
 mitted the country, and the lives, property and liber- 
 ties of the citizens within his district, may not declare 
 martial law when it is ascertained that its exercise, and 
 it alone, can save all from total destruction. . . . 
 For one, I maintain that in the exercise of this power, 
 General Jackson did not violate the Constitution, nor 
 assume to himself any authority which was not fully 
 authorized and legalized by his position, his duty and 
 the unavoidable necessity of the case ... He had 
 a right to declare martial law when it was ascertained 
 and acknowledged that nothing but martial law would 
 enable him to defend the city and the country. . . . 
 It does not imply the right to suspend the laws and 
 civil tribunals at pleasure. The right grows out o. f the 
 necessity; and when the necessity fails, the right ceases. 
 . . There are exigencies in the history of nations 
 
 as well as individuals when necessity becomes the par- 
 amount law to which all other considerations must 
 yield. It is that first great law of nature, which au- 
 thorizes a man to defend his life, . . . by every means 
 in his power. . . . Does the man live who will have 
 the hardihood to question his patriotism, his honesty, 
 the purity of his motives in every act he performed, 
 and every power he exercised on that trying occasion? 
 While none dare impeach his motives, they tell us he 
 assumed almost unlimited power. 
 
 I commend him for it; the exigency required it. I 
 admire that elevation of soul which rises above all per- 
 sonal consideration, and, regardless of consequences, 
 
150 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 stakes life, and honor, and glory upon the issne, when 
 the salvation of the country depends upon the result. — 
 Speech of Douglas, Jan. 7, 18M> Cong. Globe, Cited in 
 Sheahan's Life of Douglas, pp. 61, 62, 63, 69. 
 
 The Mexican War: 
 
 My object (said he) is to vindicate our government 
 and country from the aspersions and calumnies which 
 have been cast upon them ... in connection with 
 the causes which have led to the existing war with 
 Mexico. I prefer to meet and repel those charges at 
 once, . . . and to demonstrate, so far as my feeble 
 abilities will enable me to do so, that our government 
 has not been in the wrong, and Mexico in the right, in 
 the origin and progress of the pending controversy. . 
 . . . They profess great anxiety for the triumph of 
 our arms, but they denounce the war— the cause in 
 which our country is engaged— as ' ' unholy, unright- 
 eous, and damnable". . . . 
 
 Not only have we never done an act of an unfriendly 
 character toward Mexico, but I confidently assert that, 
 from the very moment of the existence of the republic, 
 we have allowed to pass unimproved no opportunity of 
 doing Mexico an act of kindness. I will not now 
 enumerate the acts of that character. ... If this 
 government choose to forget them, I will not recall 
 them. While such has been our course to Mexico, it is 
 with pain I am forced to say that the open violation 
 of the rights of American citizens by the authorities 
 of Mexico have been greater for the last fifteen years 
 than those of all the governments of Christendom 
 united; and yet we have left the redress of all these 
 multiplied and accumulated wrongs to friendly nego- 
 tiations, without having ever intimated a disposition 
 to resort to force. . . . 
 
 They express great sympathy for Mexico; profess 
 to regard her an injured and persecuted nation — 
 the victim of American injustice and aggression. 
 They have no sympathy for the widows and orphans 
 whose husbands and fathers have been robbed and 
 murdered by the Mexican authorities; no sympathy 
 with our countrymen who have dragged out miserable 
 lives within the walls of her dungeons, without crime 
 and without trial; no indignation at the outrages upom 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 151 
 
 ©ur commerce and shipping, and the insults to our 
 national flag; no resentment at the violation of 
 treaties and the invasion of our territory. ... I 
 wil" now proceed to examine the arguments by wkich 
 the gentleman from Ohio, . . . pretends to justify 
 their foreign sympathies. They assume that the Rio 
 del Norte was not the boundary line between Texas 
 and Mexico. . . . 
 
 I must, therefore, be permitted to adhere to my 
 original position that the treaty of peace and the 
 boundaries [agreed upon] between Santa Ana and the 
 Texan government in May, 1836, was binding on the 
 Mexican nation, it having been executed by the gov- 
 ernment de facto for the time being. 
 
 Mr. Adams. Has not the treaty with Santa Ana 
 been since discarded by the Mexican government? 
 
 Mr. Douglas. I presume it has, for I am not aware 
 of any treaty or compact which that government ever 
 entered into that she did not afterwards either violate 
 or repudiate. . . . 
 
 I am not now to be diverted from the real point in 
 controversy by a discussion of the question whether the 
 Rio del Norte was the boundary to its source. My 
 present object is to repel the calumnies which have 
 been urged against our government, to place our coun- 
 try in the right and the enemy in the wrong, before 
 the civilized world, according to the truth and justice 
 of the case. I have exposed these calumnies by refer- 
 ence to the acts and admissions of our accusers. . . 
 I have shown that Texas always claimed the Rio del 
 Norte as her boundary during the existence of the re- 
 public, and that Mexico on several occasions recog- 
 nized it as such in the most solemn and direct manner. 
 
 All is wrong in their eyes. Their country Is always 
 wrong, and its enemies right. It has ever been so. It 
 was so in the last war with Great Britain. Then it 
 was unbecoming a moral and religious people to re- 
 joice at the success of American arms. We were 
 wrong, in their estimation, in the French Indemnity 
 case, in the Iiorida war, in all the Indian wars, and 
 now in the Mexican war. I despair of ever seeing my 
 country a-^in in the right, if they [the Whigs] are to 
 
152 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 be the oracles.— Cited in Sheahan, pp. 75, 78, 80, 81, 84, 
 89, 90. 
 
 The Oregon Boundary: 
 
 It therefore becomes us to put this nation in a state 
 of defense; and when we are told that this will lead to 
 war, all I have to say is this, violate no treaty stipula- 
 tions, nor any principal of the law of nations; preserve 
 the honor and integrity of the country, but, at the same 
 time, assert our right to the last inch and then, if war 
 comes, let it come. ... I would blot out the lines on 
 the map which now mark our national boundaries on 
 this continent, and make the area of liberty as broad as 
 the continent itself. I would not suffer petty rival re- 
 publics to grow up here, engendering jealousy of each 
 other, ... I do not wish to go beyond the great 
 ocean — beyond those boundaries which the God of 
 nature has marked out, I would limit myself only by 
 that boundary which is so clearly defined by nature. 
 
 Our federal system is admirably adapted to the 
 whole continent; and while I would not violate the 
 laws of nations, nor treaty stipulations, nor in any 
 manner tarnish the national honor, I would exert all 
 legal and honorable means to drive Great Britain . 
 . from the continent of North America and extend 
 the limits of the republic from ocean to ocean. I 
 wonld make this an ocean bound republic and have no 
 more disputes about boundaries, or "red lines" upon 
 the maps. — Cited in Sheahan, pp. 92, 93. 
 
 Territorial Expansion; The Clayton- Bui wer 
 Treaty; February 14, 1853: 
 
 With an avowed policy, of thirty years standing, 
 that no future European Colonization is to be per- 
 mitted in America — affirmed when there was no oppor- 
 tunity for enforcing it and abandoned whenever a case 
 was presented for carrying it into practical effect — it is 
 now proposed to beat another retreat under cover of 
 terrible threats of awful consequences when the offence 
 shall be repeated. . . . 
 
 That we would resist any attempt to transfer ft*e island 
 of Cuba to any European power, either with or without 
 the consent of Spain, there is, I trust no question in 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 153 
 
 the mind of any American. . . . That the United 
 States do not meditate any designs upon the island . . . 
 has been demonstrated to the world in a manner that 
 forbids the necessity for a disclaimer of unworthy and 
 perfidious purposes on our part. . . . The whole 
 system of European colonization rests upon seizure, 
 violence and fraud. European powers hold nearly all 
 their colonies by the one or the other of these tenures. 
 . . . Now sir a few words with regard to the 
 island of Cuba. ... I have often said, and now 
 repeat that, so long as the island of Cuba is content to 
 remain loyal to the crown of Spain, be it so. I have no 
 desire, no wish to disturb that relation. I have always 
 said, and now repeat that, whenever the people of the 
 island of Cuba shall show themselves worthy of free- 
 dom by asserting and maintaining their independence 
 and establishing republican institutions, my heart, my 
 sympathies, my prayers are with them for the ac- 
 complishment of that object. I have often said, and 
 now repeat that, when that independence shall have 
 been established, if it shall be necessary to their in- 
 terest or safety to apply as Texas did for annexation, I 
 shall be ready to do by them as we did by Texas, and 
 receive them into the Union.— Cited in Sheahan, pp. 
 101, 109, 110. 
 
 The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, March 10, 1853: 
 You may make as many treaties as you please to fet- 
 ter the limbs of this giant republic, and she will burst 
 them all from her, . . . What is the use of your 
 guarantee that you will never erect any fortifications 
 in Central America; never annex, occupy or colonize 
 any portion of that country? How do you know that 
 you can avoid doing it? If you make the canal, I ask 
 you if American citizens will not settle along its line; 
 whether they will not build up towns at each terminus; 
 . . . whether American principles and American in- 
 stitutions will not be firmly planted there? . . . But, 
 so certain as this republic exists, so certain as we re- 
 main a united people, so certain as the laws of progress 
 which have raised us from a mere handful to a mighty 
 nation shall continue to govern our action, just so cer- 
 tain are these events to be worked out, and you will be 
 compelled to extend your protection in that direction. 
 
 11 
 
154 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES, 
 
 Sir, I am not desirous of hastening the day. I am 
 not impatient of the time when it shall be realized. I 
 do not wish to give any additional impulse to our prog- 
 ress. We are going fast enough. But I wish our pol- 
 icy, our laws, our institutions, should keep up with the 
 advance in science, in the mechanical arts, in agricul- 
 ture and in everything that tends to make us a great 
 and powerful nation. Let us look the future in the 
 face and let us prepare to meet that which can not he 
 avoided.— Cited in Sheahan, pp. 112 113. 
 
 Filibustering, 1858: 
 
 Sir, I have no fancy for this system of filibustering. 
 I believe its tendency is to defeat the very object they 
 have in view, ... I would like to see the bound- 
 aries of this republic extended gradually and steadily, 
 as fast as we can Americanize the countries we can ac- 
 quire and make their inhabitants loyal American citi- 
 zens when we get them. Faster than that I would not 
 desire to go. . . . I believe the interests of com- 
 merce, of civilization, every interest which civilized 
 nations hold dear, would be benefited by expansion; 
 but still I desire to see it done regularly and lawfully, 
 and I apprehend that these expeditions have a tendency 
 to check it. . . . —Cited in Sheahan, p. 120. 
 
 Closing words of his speech at New Orleans, 
 December, 1858: 
 
 It is our destiny to have Cuba, and it is folly to de- 
 bate the question. It naturally belongs to the Ameri- 
 can continent. It guards the mouth of the Mississippi 
 river, which is the heart of the American continent, 
 and the body of the American nation. Its acquisition 
 is a matter of time only. Our government should 
 adopt the policy of receiving Cuba as soon as a fair and 
 just opportunity shall be presented. Whether that op- 
 portunity occur next year or the year after, whenever 
 the occasion arises and the opportunity presents itself, 
 it should be embraced. 
 
 The same is true of Central America and Mexico. It 
 will not do to say we have territory enough. . . . 
 We acquired Louisiana and Florida, Texas and Cali- 
 fornia, just as the increase in our population and our 
 interests demanded. 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 155 
 
 I do not want territory any faster than we can oc- 
 cupy, Americanize and civilize it. I am no fili- 
 bnsterer. . . . 
 
 I am in favor of expansion, . . . but I am not 
 in favor of that policy unless the great principle of 
 non-intervention and the right of the people to decide 
 the question of slavery and all other domestic ques- 
 tions for themselves shall be maintained. If that prin- 
 ciple prevail, we have a future before us more glorious 
 than that of any other people that ever existed. . . . 
 It will gain new strength with every state brought 
 into the confederacy. Then there will be peace and 
 harmony between the free states and the s'ave states. 
 The more degrees of latitude and longitude embraced 
 beneath our Constitution, the better. The greater the 
 variety of productions, the better; for then we shall 
 have the principles of free trade apply to the important 
 staples of the world, making us the greatest planting 
 as well as the greatest manufacturing, the greatest 
 commercial as well as the greatest agricultural power 
 on the globe. . . . Cited in Sheahan, pp. 122, 123. 
 
 The Compromise of 1850: speech in the 
 Senate: 
 
 I believe the people have a right to do as they please 
 when they form their Constitution, and, no matter 
 what domestic regulations they may make, they have 
 a right to come into the Union, provided there is 
 nothing in their Constitution which violates the Con- 
 stitution of the United States. ... I have always 
 held that the people have a right to settle these ques- 
 tions as they choose, not only when they come into the 
 Union as a state, but that they should be permittee! to 
 do so while a territory. 
 
 The Senator from Mississippi puts a question to me 
 as to what number of people there must be in a terri- 
 tory before this right to govern themselves accrues. 
 Without determining the precise number, I will as- 
 sume that the right ought to accrue to the people at the 
 moment they have enough to constitute a government; 
 . If, sir, there are enough to require a govern- 
 ment, and to authorize you to allow them to govern 
 themselves, there are enough to govern themselves 
 upon the subject of negroes as well as concerning other 
 
156 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 species of property and Other descriptions of institu- 
 tions. . . . — Cited in Sheahan, pp. 137, U2, US. 
 
 Speech in Senate, December 23, 1851, on 
 the Foot Resolutions. Explains why he did 
 not vote for the Fugitive Slave Act: 
 
 Whatever political sins I may at any time have com- 
 mitted, I think I may safely assert that no senator ever 
 doubted my willingness to assume the full measure of 
 responsibility resulting from my official position, The 
 dodging of votes— the attempt to avoid responsibility- 
 is no part of my system of political tactics. And yet, 
 sir, the special organ of the administration has on 
 several occasions accused me, . . . with having 
 dodged the vote on this bill. ... I have always 
 opposed the introduction of the subject of slavery into 
 the halls of Congress for any purpose— either for dis- 
 cussion or action— except in the cases specified and en- 
 joined by the Constitution of the United States, as in 
 the case of the reclamation of fugitives from labor. . 
 . My action here since I have been a member of 
 the Senate has been governed by the same principle. 
 Whenever the slavery agitation has been forced upon 
 us, I have always met it fairly, directly and fearlessly 
 and endeavored to apply the proper remedy. Whether 
 the remedy proposed by me has always been the wisest 
 and most appropriate is a fair subject of discussion, 
 and will doubtless give rise to a wide diversity of 
 opinion. ... It should be borne in mind that the 
 Wilmot Proviso not only proposed to prohibit slavery 
 in the territories while they remained territories, but 
 also went farther, and proposed to insert a stipulation 
 in the treaty with a foreign power pledging the faith 
 of thp nation that slavery should never exist in the 
 country acquired, either while it remained in the con- 
 dition of Territories, or after it should have been ad- 
 mitted into the Union as states on an * equal footing 
 witn rne original states. ... I was reluctant to 
 give up the Missouri Compromise. . . . But public 
 duty aemanded that all considerations of pride, of 
 character, and of opinion should be made subservient 
 to the public peace and tranquillity. I gave it up— re- 
 luctantly, to "be sure— and conceived the idea of a bill 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 157 
 
 to admit California as a state, leaving the people to 
 form a constitution and settle the question of slavery 
 afterward to suit themselves. . . . Cited in Slieahan, 
 
 pp. 161, 163, 164, 165. 
 
 Principles of the Compromise of 1850, asset 
 forth by Douglas in 1854: 
 
 From these provisions it is apparent that the com- 
 promise measures of 1850 affirm and rest upon the fol- 
 lowing propositions: 
 
 First— That all questions pertaining to slavery in the 
 territories, and in the new states to be formed there- 
 from, are to be left to the decision of the people resid- 
 ing therein, . . . 
 
 Second— That "all cases involving title to slaves" 
 and ' ' questions of personal freedom " are referred to 
 the adjudication of the local tribunals, with the right 
 of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. 
 
 Third— That the provisions of the Constitution of the 
 United States, in respect to fugitives from service, is 
 to be carried into faithful execution in all the "organ- 
 ized territories" the same as in the states.— Cited in 
 Sheahan, p. 189. 
 
 The Kansas-Nebraska Act: 
 
 . . . Upon the other point— that pertaining to the 
 question of slavery in the territories — it was the inten- 
 tion of the committee to be equally explicit. We took 
 the principles established by the compromise acts of 
 1850 as orzr guide. . . . These measures are estab- 
 lished and rest upon the great principles of self-gov- 
 ernment—that the people should be allowed to decide 
 the questions of their domestic institutions for them- 
 selves, subject only to such limitations and restrictions 
 as are imposed by the Constitution of the United 
 States, instead of having them determined by an ar- 
 bitrary or geographical line. . . .—Cited in Sheahan, 
 pp. 193, 194, 195. 
 
 Concerning the Chase Amendment to the Kan- 
 sas-Nebraska Bill: 
 
 Now, sir, the true, direct and manly course tc meet 
 this question is that suggested by my honorable rriend 
 from Illinois— (Mr, Shields). Put in your amendment 
 
168 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 that the people of the territories shall be at liberty to 
 exclude or introduce, and if there is anything in the 
 Constitution ©f the United States which disables a ter- 
 ritorial government from introducing slavery, if the 
 honorable senator believes that, if he is sincere in that 
 opinion, there sits a tribunal below us who will pass 
 upon the validity and constitutionality of any act that 
 we may pass.— Cited in Sheahan, p. 201f. 
 
 Extracts from Douglas' great speech of 
 March 3, 1854, a speech which brought from 
 Seward the words, "I have never had so much 
 respect for him (Douglas) as to-night." 
 
 The statement to which they seem to attach the most 
 importance, ... is that, pending the Compromise 
 measures, of 1850, no man in or out of Congress ever 
 dreamed of abrogating the Missouri Compromise; that 
 from that period down to the present session nobody 
 supposed that its validity had been impaired ; . . . 
 that at the time of submitting the report and bill to 
 the Senate, on the 1th of January last, neither I nor any 
 member of the Committee ever thought of such a thing; 
 and that we could never be brought up to the point of 
 abrogating the eighth section of the Missouri act until 
 after the senator from Kentucky introduced his amend- 
 ment to my bill. . . . Will any one of my accusers 
 dare to make this issue and let it be tried by the record? 
 
 These measures are predicated on the great fundamen- 
 tal principle that every people ought to possess the 
 light of forming and regulating their own internal con- 
 cerns and domestic institutions in their own way. . . 
 . [therefore the doctrine of the committee is] 
 
 First. That the whole question of slavery should be 
 withdrawn from the halls of Congress, and the politi- 
 cal arena, and committed to the arbitrament of those 
 who are immediately interested in and alone respon- 
 sible for its existence. 
 
 Second. The applying this principle to territories and 
 the new states to be formed therefrom, all questions 
 pertaining to slavery were to be referred to the people 
 residing therein. 
 
 Third. That the committee proposed to carry these 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 159 
 
 propositions and principles into effect in the precise 
 language of the Compromise measures of 1850. . . . 
 Mr. President, the Senators from Ohio and Massachu- 
 setts (Mr. Chase and Mr. Sumner) have taken the liberty 
 to impeach my motives in bringing forward this meas- 
 ure. I desire to know by what right they arraign me, 
 or by what authority they impute to me other and dif- 
 ferent motives than those which I have assigned. I 
 have shown from the record that I advocated and voted 
 for the same principles and provisions in the compro- 
 mise acts of 1850, which are embraced in this bill. I 
 have proven that I put the same construction upon 
 those measures immediately after their adoption that 
 is given in the report which I submitted this session 
 from the Committee on Territories. I have shown that 
 the Legislature of Illinois at its first session, after those 
 measures were enacted, passed resolutions approving 
 them, and declaring that the same great principles of 
 self-government should be incorporated into all terri- 
 torial organizations. Yet, sir, in the face of these facts, 
 these senators have the hardihood to declare that this 
 was all an " after- thought " on my part, conceived for 
 the first time during the present session; and that the 
 measure is offered as a bid for presidential votes! Are 
 they incapable of conceiving that an honest man can 
 do a right thing from worthy motives? I must be per- 
 mitted to tell those senators that their experience in 
 seeking political preferment does not furnish a safe rule 
 by which to judge the character and principles of other 
 senators. ... If, in the language of the report of 
 the Committee, you withdraw the slavery question 
 from the halls of Congress and the political arena, and 
 commit it to the arbitrament of those who are imme- 
 diately interested in and alone responsible for its conse- 
 quences, there is nothing left out of which sectional 
 parties can be organized. . . . When the people of 
 the North shall all be rallied under one banner, and 
 the whole South marshalled under another banner, and 
 each section excited to frenzy and madness by hostility 
 to the institutions of the other, then the patriot may 
 well tremble for the perpetuity of the Union. With- 
 draw the slavery question from the political arena, and 
 remove it to the states and territories each to decide 
 
160 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 for itself, such a catastrophe can never happen. Then 
 you will never be able to tell, by any senator's vote for 
 or against any measure, from what state or section of 
 the Union he comes. . . . Mr. President, I have not 
 brought this question forward as a northern man or as 
 a southern man. I am unwilling to recognize such divi- 
 sions and distinctions. . . . 
 
 I have nothing to say about northern rights or south- 
 ern rights. I know of no such divisions or distinctions 
 under the Constitution. — Cited in Sheahan, pp. 223, 22!*, 
 225, 227, 253, 260. 
 
 In a speech July 4, 1854, at Philadelphia, he 
 used this language in regard to the Know- 
 Nothing Party and its doctrines: 
 
 No principle of political action could have been de- 
 vised more hostile to the genius of our institutions, more 
 repugnant to the Constitution than those which are said 
 to form the test of membership in this Society of "Know- 
 nothings. " To proscribe a man in this country on ac- 
 count of his birthplace or religious faith is subversive 
 of all our ideas and principles of civil and religious free- 
 dom. It isrevolting to our sense of justice and right. 
 It is derogatory to the character of our forefathers, who 
 were all immigrants from the Old World, some at a 
 earlier and some at a later period. . . , And if, after 
 struggling as our forefathers struggled for centuries in 
 their native land against civil and religious persecution, 
 we and our children shall be finally borne down and 
 trampled under the heel of despotism, we can still fol- 
 low their example— flee to the wilderness and find an 
 asylum in Nebraska, where the principles of self-gov- 
 ernment have been firmly established in the organic 
 act which recently passed Congress.— Cited in Sheahan, 
 pp. 269, 271. 
 
 The Government of Kansas: 
 
 Hence no state has a right to pass any law or do or 
 authorize any act, with the view to influence or change 
 the domestic policy of any other state or Territory of 
 the Union, more than it would with reference to 
 France or England, or any other foreign state with 
 which we are at peace, 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 16l 
 
 Indeed, every state of this Union, is under higher 
 obligations to observe a friendly forbearance and gen- 
 erous comity toward each other .nember of the confed- 
 eracy than the laws of nations can impose on foreign 
 states. While foreign states are restrained from all 
 acts of aggression and unkindness only by the spirit of 
 comity which the laws of nations enjoin upon all 
 friendly powers, we have assumed the additional obli - 
 gation to obey the Constitution which secures to every 
 state the right to control its own internal affairs. . . 
 —Cited in Sheahan, p. 290. 
 
 The Lecompton Constitution; Douglas breaks 
 with the President; December 9, 1857: 
 
 Sir, my honor is pledged: and before it shall be tar- 
 nished I will take whatever consequences personal to 
 myself may come. ... I will go as far as any of 
 you to save the party. I have as much heart in the 
 great cause that binds us together as any man living. 
 I will sacrifice anything short of principle and honor 
 for the peace of the party; but if the party will not 
 stand by its privileges, its faith, its pledges, I will 
 stand there and abide whatever consequences may 
 result from the position. . . . But, I am told on all 
 sides, "Oh, just wait; the pro-slavery clause will be 
 voted down." That does not obviate any of my objec- 
 tions; it does not diminish any of them. You have no 
 more right to force a free-state Constitution on Kansas 
 than a slave-state Constitution. If Kansas wants a 
 slave-state constitution, she has a right to it; if she 
 wants a free-state Constitution, she has a right to it. 
 It is none of my business which way the Slavery clause 
 is decided. I care not whether it is voted down or 
 voted up. . . . Ignore Lecompton, ignore Topeka; 
 treat both those party movements as irregular and void ; 
 pass a fair bill — the one that we framed ourselves 
 when we were acting as a unit; have a fair election — 
 and you will have peace in the Democratic party, and 
 peace throughout the country, in ninety days. ... 
 Mr. President, I come back to the question, ought we 
 to receive Kansas into the Union with the Lecompton 
 Constitution? Is there satisfactory evidence that it is 
 the act and deed of that people— that it embodies their 
 
162 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 will? Is the evidence satisfactory that the people of 
 that Territory have been left perfectly free to form and 
 regulate their domestic institutions in their own way? 
 I think not. . . . Article 7, Section 1, of its Con- 
 stitution, reads: " The right of property is before and 
 higher than any constitutional sanction ; and the right 
 of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase 
 is the same and as inviolable as the right of the owner 
 of any property whatever. "... The proposition is. 
 that a citizen of Virginia has rights in a free state 
 which a citizen of a free state cannot himself have- 
 . . . If that proposition is true, the creed of the 
 Democratic party is false. The principle of the Kan- 
 sas-Nebraska Bill is, that "each state and each Terri- 
 tory shall be left perfectly free to form and regu- 
 late its domestic institutions in its own way, 
 subject only to the Constitution of the United 
 States." I claim that Illinois has the sovereign 
 right to prohibit slavery, a right as undeniable as 
 that the sovereignty of Virginia may authorize its ex- 
 istence. We have the same right to prohibit it that 
 you have to recognize and protect it. ... I do not 
 recognize the right of the President or his cabinet, no 
 matter what my respect may be for them, to tell me 
 nay duty in the Senate Chamber. The President has 
 his duties to perform under the Constitution, and he is 
 responsible to his constituency. A senator has his 
 duties to perform here under the Constitution and ac- 
 cording to his oath, and he is responsible to the 
 sovereign state which he represents as his constituency. 
 . . . For my own part, Mr. President, come what 
 may, I intend to vote, speak, and act according to my 
 own sense of duty so long a3 1 hold a seat in this cham- 
 ber. I have no defense of my Democracy. I have no 
 professions to make of my fidelity. I have no vindica- 
 tion to make of my course. Let it speak for itself. 
 ... I have no professions to make upon any of 
 these points. I intend to perforin my duty in accord- 
 ance with my own convictions. Neither the frowns of 
 power nor the influence of patronage will change my 
 action, or drive me from my principles. I stand 
 firmly, immovably upon those great principles of self- 
 government and state sovereignty, upon which the 
 
STEPHEN A, DOUGLAS. 163 
 
 campaign was fought and the election won. . . . 
 I will stand by the Constitution of the United States, 
 with all its compromises, and perform all my obliga- 
 tions under it. I will stand by the American Union as 
 it exists under the Constitution. — Cited in Sheahau,pp. 
 318, 319, 3k0, 347, 351, 352, 353. 
 
 The Pacific Railroad Bill: April 17, 1858; 
 Internal Improvements: 
 
 Mr. President, — I have witnessed with deep regret 
 the indications that this measure is to be defeated at 
 the present session of Congress. I had hoped that this 
 Congress would signalize itself by inaugurating the 
 great measure of connecting the Mississipi Valley with 
 the Pacific Ocean by a railroad. I had supposed 
 that the people of the United States had decided the 
 question at the last Presidential election in a manner 
 so emphatic as to leave no doubt that their will was to 
 be carried into effect. I believe that all the presiden- 
 tial candidates at the last election were committed to 
 the measure. . . . 
 
 I have sometimes thought that the extreme northern 
 route, known as the Stevens' route, was the best, as 
 furnishing better grass, more timber, more water, 
 more of those elements necessary in constructing, re- 
 pairing, operating, and maintaining a road, than any 
 other. ". . . 
 
 But, sir, I am unwilling to lose this great" measure 
 merely because of a difference of* opinion as to what 
 shall be the pass selected in the Rocky Mountains 
 through which the road shall run. I believe it is a 
 great national measure. I believe it is the greatest 
 practical measure now pending before the country. . 
 
 I have regretted to see the question of sectional ad- 
 vantages brought into this discussion. If you are to 
 have but one road, fairness and j astice would plainly 
 indicate that that one should be located as near the 
 centre as practicable. The Missouri River is as near 
 the centre and the line of this road is as near 
 as it can be made; and if there is but one to be made, 
 the route now indicated, in my opinion, is fair, is just, 
 and ought to be taken. I have heretofore been of the 
 opinion that we ought to have three roads: one in the 
 
16i AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 centre, one in the extreme south, and one in the ex-- 
 treme north.— Cited in Sheahan, pp. 372, 374, 375. 
 
 Extract from a campaign speech made at 
 Chicago, 1S58; Lincoln had already made his 
 Divided-House doctrine speech: 
 
 It is an expression of your devotion to that great/ 
 principle of self-government (cries of "Hear," "hear") 
 to v hich my life for many years past has been, and in 
 the whole future will be devoted. (Immense cheering) 
 If there is any one principle dearer and more sacred 
 than all others in free governments, it is that which 
 asserts the exclusive right of a free people to form and 
 adopt their own fundamental law, and to manage and 
 regulate their own internal affairs and domestic insti- 
 tutions. (Applause)— Cited in Sheahan, p. 406. 
 
 The " Freeport Doctrine" of "unfriendly 
 legislation." The Lincoln-Douglas debate at 
 Freeport, 111., 1858: 
 
 The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln 
 is, "Can the people of a territory in any lawful way, 
 against the wishes of any citizen of the United States, 
 exclude slavery from their limits prior to the forma- 
 tion of a state Constitution. " I answer emphatically, 
 as Mr. Lincoln has heard me answer a hundred times 
 from every stump in Illinois, that in my opinion the 
 people of a territory can, by lawful means, exclude 
 slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a 
 state Constitution. Mr. Lincoln knew that I had an- 
 swered that question over and over again. It matters 
 not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide 
 as to the abstract question whether slavery may or may 
 not go into a territory under the Constitution, the peo- 
 ple have the lawful means to introduce it or exclude it 
 as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist 
 a «ay or an hour anywhere unless it is supported by 
 local police regulations. Those police regulations can 
 only be established by the local legislature, and if the 
 people are opposed to slavery they will elect represent- 
 atives to that body who will, by unfriendly legislation, 
 effectually prevent the introduction of it into their 
 midst. If, on the contrary, they are for it, tjkeir legis* 
 
Stephen a. douglas. 165 
 
 lation will favor its extension. Hence, no matter what 
 the decision of the Supreme Court may be on that ab- 
 stract question, still the right of the people to make a 
 slave territory or a free territory is perfect and com- 
 plete under the Nebraska Bill. I hope Mr. Lincoln deems 
 my answer satisfactory on that point. . . . The 
 fourth question of Mr. Lincoln is, "Are you in favor of 
 acquiring additional territory in disregard as to how 
 such acquisition may affect the Union on the slavery 
 question?" This question is very ingeniously and 
 cunningly put. ... I answer that whenever it be- 
 comes necessary, in our growth and progress, to acquire 
 more territory, that I am in favor of it, without refer- 
 ence to the question of slavery, and when we have ac- 
 quired it, I will leave the people free to do as they 
 please, either to make it slave or free territory, as they 
 prefer.— Cited in Sheahan, pp. 427, 428, 429. 
 
 The Mormons; a speech at Springfield, 1857: 
 If, upon a full investigation, these representations 
 shall prove true, they will establish the fact that the 
 inhabitants of Utah, as a community, are outlaws and 
 alien enemies, unfit to exercise the right of self-govern- 
 ment under the organic act, and unworthy to be ad- 
 mitted into the Union as a state, when their only object 
 in seeking admission is to interpose the sovereignty of 
 the state as an invincible shield to protect them in 
 their treason and crime, debauchery and infamy. (Ap- 
 plause.) . . . Some other and more effectual remedy 
 must be devised and applied. In my opinion the first 
 step should be the absolute and unconditional repeal of 
 the organic act— blotting the territorial government 
 out of existence --upon the ground that they are alien 
 enemies and outlaws, denying their allegiance and de- 
 fying the authority of the United States. (Immense 
 applause.) The territorial government once abolished, 
 the country would revert to its primitive condition, 
 prior to the act of 1850, "under the sole and exclusive 
 jurisdiction of the United States" and should be placed 
 under the operation of the act of Congress of the 30th 
 of April. 1790, and the various acts supplemental 
 thereto alid amendatory thereof, "providing for the 
 punishment of crimes against the United States within 
 any fort, arsenal, dock-yard, magazine, or any other 
 
i66 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 place or district of country, under the sole and exclu- 
 sive jurisdiction of the United States." — Cited in Shea- 
 han, pp. 461, .'/'.v. 
 
 Reopening of the African Slave Trade: a 
 letter to John L. Peyton, Stanton, Va., 
 
 1859: 
 
 Neither have you misapprehended my opinions in re- 
 spect to the African slave trade. That question seri- 
 ously disturbed the harmony of the convention which 
 framed the federal Constitution. . . 
 
 I stand firmly by this compromise and by all the 
 other compromises of the Constitution, and shall use 
 my best efforts to carry each and all of them into 
 faithful execution, in the sense and with the under- 
 standing in which they were originally adopted. In 
 accordance with this compromise, I am irreconcilablj- 
 opposed to the revival of the African slave trade, in 
 any form and under any circumstances.— Cited in 
 Sheahan, p. 4GG. 
 
 Senate Chamber, January 23, 1860, Douglas 
 speaks for a law against invasions of the states, 
 such as that by John Brown, and speaks in 
 these words concerning- the results of Lincoln's 
 doctrine, as stated in the first sentence: 
 
 "A house divided against itself cannot stand. I 
 believe this government cannot endure permanently, 
 half slave and half free." . . . 
 
 The declaration is that the North must combine as a 
 sectional party and carry on the agitation so fiercely, 
 up to the very borders of the slaveholding states, that 
 the master dare not sleep at night for fear that the 
 robbers, the John Browns, will come and set his house 
 on fire, and murder the women and children before 
 morning. It is to surround the slaveholding states by 
 a cordon of free states, to use the language of the sen- 
 ator; to hem them in, in order that you may smother 
 them out. The Senator avowed, in his speech to-day, 
 their object to be to hem in the slave states, in order 
 that slavery may die out. . . . Cited in Sheahan, 
 p. 5U. 
 
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS. 167 
 
 QUESTIONS. 
 
 (1) Position of Douglas regarding Jackson's suspen- 
 sion of the right of habeas corpus. (2) Meaning of 
 habeas corpus. (3) What the essential point in his 
 argument? (4) Is the argument good? (5) To what 
 result would such a doctrine lead? 
 
 (1) What view did Douglas take in regard to the 
 justice of the Mexican War? (2) Compare his position 
 with that of Webster; with that of Calhoun. (3) What 
 reasons does he give for his position? (4) Who was 
 Santa Anna? (5) What treaty is here discussed? (6) 
 What charge does he make against the Federalists and 
 the Whigs? 
 
 (1) Was Douglas an expansionist? (2) Bring to- 
 gether all his arguments for or against. (3) What 
 territory did he favor annexing? (4) What conditions 
 did he lay down to be applied to annexed territory? 
 (5) Compare his arguments on this point with Web- 
 ster's, Clay's and Calhoun's. (6) Are their arguments 
 applicable to-day? (7) Are all of Douglas's arguments 
 consistent with each other? (8) Why did he oppose 
 filibustering? (9) How fast did he want territory? 
 (10) How do you think he would wish to treat the 
 Philippines to-day? 
 
 (1) What was Douglas's theory in regard to the con- 
 trol or government of the Territories? (2) Bring to- 
 gether the passages that bear on this subject. (3) 
 What leading principle did he claim was established 
 by the compromise of 1850? (4) How did he propose 
 to apply the principle in 1854? (5) Was Douglas a 
 compromiser? (6) Was he a man of courage? (7) 
 Find out what the Chase Amendment was. (8) How 
 did he propose to amend it? (9) How did Douglas ex- 
 pect to remove the slavery question from American 
 politics? (10) How did he feel towards Chase and 
 Sumner ? 
 
 (1) What were his views in regard to the rights of 
 foreigners? (2) What did he think about religious pro- 
 scription? (3) What party did he oppose on account 
 of these principles? (4) How did he stand in regard to 
 admitting Kansas as a state under the Lecompton con- 
 stitution? (5) Why his position? (6) What article in 
 the constitution did he especially condemn? Why? 
 (7) How did he feel toward President Buchanan on this 
 subject? (8) Did he propose to be dictated to? (9) 
 What feeling had he about the Pacific railroads? 
 (10 What did he think of the effects of Lincoln's Di- 
 vided House doctrine? HI) What is the "Freeport 
 Doctrine"? (12) Were his views in regard to the power 
 of the Mormons in harmony with his other doctrines? 
 (13) How did he regard the African Slave Trade? (14) 
 Compare his views on slavery w T ith those of Sumner. 
 (15) Compare them with Clay's; with Calhoun's. 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD 
 
 Born in New Jersey, 1801. Graduate of Union 
 College. Settled at Auburn, N. Y. Member of 
 the New York legislature, 1830-1832. Governor 
 of New York, 1838-1842. Senator, 1851-1861. 
 Secretary of state, 1861-1869. "Higher Law" 
 doctrine speech, 1850. "Irrepressible Conflict" 
 speech, 1858. Candidate for nomination for 
 President, 1856, 1860. Trip around the world, 
 1870-1871. Died, 1872. 
 
 12 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 WILLIAM H. SEWARD 
 
 PERHAPS William H. Seward was the 
 greatest among the political opponents 
 of slavery. He ranks with Chase and 
 Douglas. In general, he agreed with the for- 
 mer, and during most of his career he was a 
 strenuous opponent of the latter. 
 
 Seward was born in New Jersey, and edu- 
 cated in its academies and at Union College, 
 New York. He graduated at the latter in 
 1821, ranking as one of its most distinguished 
 scholars. He had been ready to enter the 
 Junior class when he was only fifteen, but on 
 account of his extreme youth he was prevailed 
 upon to enter the Sophomore. He withdrew 
 to teach when nineteen, hence did not gradu- 
 ate till he had reached his twenty-first year. 
 
 He was married in 1824, and settled down at 
 Auburn, where he continued to live till his 
 death. 
 
 Election of mayors of cities by the people. 
 One of the earliest speeches of Seward, April 
 22, 1831, was in favor of this democratic prin- 
 ciple. In part, he said: 
 
 What is the state of the question before the Senate? 
 The provision required by the city of New York is, 
 that the mayor of that city shall be elected by the 
 people. . . . 
 
 It is admitted that the office of mayor is one of local 
 interests, duties and responsibilities, and that it is, in 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 173 
 
 the abstract, right and proper that the mayor should 
 be elected by the people in that city. Why, then, 
 should not this provision, conceded to be abstractly 
 right and proper, be adopted? Is it to be rejected on 
 the ground of distrust of the people? No such distrust 
 is avowed, and I am therefore bound to believe none is 
 indulged. . . . 
 
 Again, sir, the tendency of all our principles of gov- 
 ernment is to democracy; the new Constitution took 
 the appointment from the council of appointment, and 
 conferred it upon the immediate representatives of 
 the people. There is but one more change before you 
 reach absolute democracy; that is the one now pre 
 posed, and conceded to be proper. Are gentlemen 
 afraid that the people, once invested with this power, 
 will come back again and sue us to relieve them from 
 its responsibilities? Such an instance would be anom- 
 alous in the history of government.— Seward, Works, 
 Vol. I, pp. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 January 10, 1831:, he opposed the passage by 
 the legislature of New York of a resolution ap- 
 proving the removal of the deposits from the 
 National Bank, by Jackson, in this language: 
 
 The usurpation of the secretary's powers is not the 
 moet alarming feature in this unprecedented transac- 
 tion. It is the defiance of the supervisory power of 
 Congress uttered by the President of the United 
 States. Yes, sir, in this very document, under the 
 President's own hand, we are told that the power of 
 the secretary over these deposits is unqualified, and as 
 the secretary is in all things responsible to the execu- 
 tive., it follows that the power of the President over 
 them is also unqualified. . . . 
 
 The first of these offences is, that two years ago, in a 
 debate similar to this, I defended the principles of 
 anti-masonry in this house. Now, sir, with all my so- 
 licitude to secure the unreserved esteem of my honor- 
 able friend, the act of which he complains is precisely 
 that one for which, of all others, I cannot admit his 
 censure to be just. Sir, my honorable friend will rec- 
 ollect that I was then, as I am now, an anti-mason. I 
 was sent here by anti-masons. I am not, as the gentle- 
 
174 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 man well knows, the man to profess principles in one 
 place I am afraid or ashamed to avow in another. I 
 am not the man, when sent here because I am known 
 to entertain political principles approved by my con- 
 stituents, to abandon those principles for any which 
 shall be more popular in this place. Under such cir- 
 cumstances, when " the blessed spirit" of anti-masonry 
 was traduced in the Senate, I could not sit by in 
 silence. Nor should I now. . . . 
 
 . . . It is my principle that it is the business of 
 the legislature to confine themselves within the sphere 
 of duties prescribed by the Constitution. It is his that 
 the legislature may safely transcend that sphere to as- 
 sume the duties and responsibilities of Congress. It is 
 my principle that it is the duty of the legislature to 
 resist usurpation of legislative powers by the execu- 
 tive. It is his that it is safer to trust to executive dis- 
 cretion than to legislative wisdom. It is mine that 
 the governing and sole motive in all legislation ought 
 to be the security of the government and the good of 
 the people. It is his that the powers of government 
 ought to be so wielded as to subserve the ambition of 
 him who happens to be the favorite of the predominant 
 party of the day.— Works, Vol. I., pp. 2k, 33-34-, 35. 
 
 In his annual message of 1839 we find this 
 language: 
 
 All institutions of government are imperfect, and 
 subject to the law of improvement. Despotism denies 
 this. It holds that institutions are complete, and that 
 laws are wise, because they are old. It maintains that 
 error is sanctified by prescription, and compels the sub- 
 mission which renders it invulnerable. A different 
 principle prevails in America. Antiquity has a shrine 
 and worship in all lands but this. We have learned, 
 that as the intelligence of people increases, the power of 
 the government may safely be abridged; that error must 
 be separated from our institutions before it becomes in- 
 separable; and that the best laws, unless modified ac- 
 cording to the ever- varying conditions of society, oper- 
 ate injuriously or fall into disuse. . . . 
 
 Every other vice of government is more endurable 
 than delay in the administration of justice. Yet 
 this is the vice that most easily besets republican 
 institutions. . . . 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 175 
 
 The public service is not to be regarded as a profes- 
 sion. The healthful action of our whole system de- 
 pends upon the responsibility and the frequent change 
 of agents. He is as much a pensioner who receives a 
 compensation exceeding the value of his services, as 
 one who receives allowance from the public treasury. 
 Of pensioners, this country ought to know only those 
 whose reward is a stinted requittal for perils, priva- 
 tions, and sufferings, in the achievement and defense of 
 our liberties. . . . Conscientiously holding the 
 principle of universal suffrage, and indulging no ap- 
 prehension of evil from its practical operation, if 
 fairly carried out, with proper safeguards against its 
 abuse, I am yet free to confess my fears, that it will 
 prove a fatal franchise, unless such safeguards be 
 applied. . . . 
 
 Thirteen years' experience has proved the inadequacy 
 of all our thoroughfares for the transportation of per- 
 sons and property between the frontier and tide- waters. 
 It is submitted whether sound policy does not require 
 that the enlargement of the Erie canal be completed as 
 speedily as may be consistent with the public con- 
 venience. This generation may as well participate in 
 its manifold advantages as resign them. — Works, Vol 
 II, pp. 190, 191, 193, 194, 197, 199. 
 
 We find this discussion in his message as 
 governor of New York, 1840: 
 
 . . . The advantages of education ought to be se- 
 cured to many, especially in our large cities, whom 
 orphanage, the depravity of parents, or other forms of 
 accident or misfortune seem to have doomed to hope- 
 less poverty and ignorance. Their intellects are as sus- 
 ceptible of expansion, of improvement, or refinement, 
 of elevation, and of direction, as those minds which, 
 through the favor of Providence are permitted to de- 
 velop themselves under the influence of better for- 
 tunes; they inherit the common lot to struggle against 
 temptations, necessities and vices; they are to assume 
 the same domestic, social and political relations; and 
 they are born to the same ultimate destiny. . . . 
 Since we have opened our country and all its fullness 
 to the oppressed of every nation, we should evince wis- 
 dom equal to such generosity by qualifying their chil- 
 dren for the high responsibilities of citizenship. . . . 
 
176 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 A requisition was made upon me in July last, by the 
 executive of Virginia, for the delivery of three person- 
 as fugitives from justice, charged with having felo- 
 niously stolen a negro slave in that state. I declined to 
 comply with the requisition, upon the grounds that the 
 right to demand, and the reciprocal obligation to sur- 
 render, fugitives from justice, between sovereign and 
 independent nations, as defined by the law of nations, 
 included only those cases in which the acts constitut- 
 ing the offence charged were recognized as crimes by 
 the universal laws of all civilized countries; that the 
 object of the provision contained in the constitution of 
 the United States, authorizing the demand and sur- 
 render of fugitives charged with treason, felony, or 
 other crime, was to recognize and establish this princi- 
 ple of the law of nations in the mutual relations of the 
 states as independent, equal and sovereign communi- 
 ties; that the acts charged upon the persons demanded, 
 were not recognized as criminal by the laws of this 
 state, or by the universal law of all civilized countries; 
 and that consequently the case did not fall within the 
 provision of the constitution of the United States.— 
 Works, Vol II, pp. 215, 216, 221-222. 
 
 From message of 1842: 
 
 A governmental management of railroads would be 
 an experiment here, and it is supposed to have been 
 unsuccessful elsewhere; although it is not obvious why, 
 with diligence, skill, and experience, equal to what are 
 employed in managing the canals, a system of super- 
 vision of railroads could not be adopted. There is 
 much force in the argument, that it would increase 
 central influence; yet, it is not clear that the influence 
 of corporations would be more harmless, and there is 
 much reason to believe that the more speedy diffusion 
 of intelligence will neutralize such influence in either 
 form. . . . —Works, Vol. II, p. 317. 
 
 Extracts from a speech at a Whig mass meet- 
 ing, in Yates county, New York, October 29, 
 1844: 
 
 Universal political equality among all the subjects 
 of the government was proclaimed in the very outset 
 of the Revolution as an element of this democracy. 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 177 
 
 The principle was asserted, but it was only partially 
 established. . . . Slavery is the bane of our social 
 condition. It divides the empire into two portions, 
 between whom it perpetually prevents any harmony of 
 fiscal economy. It arrays the south against the north. 
 It exposes us to danger from abroad, and has once 
 brought the country to the verge of disunion. All 
 these evils happen because slavery is an aristocratic in- 
 stitution compared with our democracy. . . . The 
 conscience of the people is aroused. The laws of po- 
 litical economy, combining with the inevitable tend- 
 encies of population, are hastening emancipation, and 
 all the labors of statesmen and politicians to prevent it 
 are ineffectual. . . . Heretofore they told us that 
 we had nothing to do with slavery ; that it was no con- 
 cern of ours. But now the slaveholder has brought it 
 home to us. It is our concern now, God be praised! It 
 is a national concern. The annexation of Texas to en- 
 large and fortify the slave trade, is forsooth "a great 
 democratic measure. " Out upon such democracy! . . 
 . True democracy is equality and liberty. The democ- 
 racy of the Texas party is aristocracy for the white 
 race, and bondage for the black. . . . — Works, Vol. 
 Ill, pp. 269, 270, 271, 272. 
 
 Front a speech at Cleveland, O., October 26, 
 
 1848: 
 
 The first principle of our duty as Americans is to 
 preserve the integrity of the Union. . . . 
 
 The second principle of American citizenship is, 
 that our democratic system must be preserved and 
 perfected. That system is founded in the natural 
 equality of all men — not alone all American men, nor 
 alone all white men, but all men of every country, 
 clime and complexion, are equal— not made equal by 
 human laws, but born equal. . . . 
 
 A third principle of American citizenship is, that 
 knowledge ought to be diffused, as well for the safety 
 of the state, as to promote the happiness of society. 
 
 A fourth principle is, that our national resources, 
 physical, moral, and intellectual, ought to be devel- 
 oped and applied to increase the public wealth, and 
 enhance the convenience and comfort of the people. 
 
178 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 A fifth principle is, that peace and moderation are 
 indispensable to the preservation of republican institu- 
 tions. 
 
 A sixth principle is, that slavery must be abolished. 
 * * * 
 
 "What, then!" you say, "can nothing be done for 
 freedom because the public conscience is inert? " Yes, 
 much can be done— everything can be done. Slavery 
 can be limited to its present bounds, it can be amelio- 
 rated, it can be and must be abolished, and you and I 
 can and must do it. . . . 
 
 Wherein do the strength and security of slavery lie? 
 You answer that they lie in the Constitution of the 
 United States, and the constitution and laws of all 
 slaveholding states. Not at all. They lie in the erro- 
 neous sentiment of the American people. Constitutions 
 and laws can no more rise above the virtue of the peo- 
 ple than the limpid stream can climb above its native 
 spring. Inculcate then, the love of freedom and the 
 er-"il rights of man, under the paternal roof; see to it 
 L..J they are taught in the schools and in the 
 churches; reform 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 goda. — Works, Vol III, pp. 293, 301. 
 
 From a private letter to H. C. W r ., of New- 
 York, 1840: 
 
 . . . You remark that, " even to a partial observer, 
 it cannot be disguised, that we, as a party, have been 
 practicing efforts to secure the votes of the Irish," and 
 your subsequent explanations show that I am supposed 
 to be concerned in these ' ' practices. "... 
 
 After what I have said you will naturally expect that 
 I shall differ from you, in regard to the opinions you 
 give concerning this class of adopted citizens. I do 
 not agree, " that the lower order of Irish are incapable 
 of being persuaded by reason." I do not think that 
 " they have been placed by the Divine Omnipotent in 
 the lowest scale of creation. "... 
 
 I think that the Irish population to whom you al- 
 lude, are useful, well-meaning, and as a mass, inoffen- 
 sive, and religiously-disposed citizens. . . . 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 179 
 
 . . . I think them more generous, liberal and 
 disinterested, than most other classes of the commu- 
 nity, reposing more than others upon the consolation of 
 their religion, and less disposed to force its tenets upon 
 others. . . . 
 
 If this confession of faith seems strange to you, you 
 will permit me to explain, that I could not believe 
 otherwise, without doing dishonor to a mother, emi- 
 nent for many virtues, and to the memories of humble 
 ancestors, whose names will not be saved from obscu- 
 rity by the record of any extraordinary vices. . . . 
 
 . . . Why should an American hate foreigners? 
 It is to hate such as his forefathers were. Why should 
 a foreigner be taught to hate Americans? It is to hate 
 what he is most anxious his children shall become. 
 For myself, so far from hating any of my fellow-citi- 
 zens, I should shrink from myself, if I did not recog- 
 nize them all as worthy of my constant solicitude to 
 promote their welfare, and entitled of right, by the 
 constitution and. laws, and by the higher laws of God 
 himself, to equal rights, equal privileges, and equal 
 political favor, as citizens of the state, with myself. 
 . . . Works, Vol. Ill, pp. 378, 379, 380. 
 
 From a letter to W. B. S., New York, 1840: 
 
 I have not time to pursue this subject as I wish. But 
 I desire to be distinctly understood, that while I dictate 
 to no one, and shall cheerfully yield my place to others 
 whose principles may suit the whig party better, I dis- 
 avow, and altogether reject the counsel of proscription 
 of immigrants. This right hand drops off before I do 
 one act with" the whig or any other party in opposition 
 to any portion of my fellow-citizens, on the ground of 
 the difference of their nativity or of their religion. No 
 pretence of policy, no sense of injury, shall induce me 
 to join, aid or abet such miserable efforts. — Works, 
 Vol III, p. 388. 
 
 To the Chautauqua convention, 1846: 
 
 We have reached a new stage in our national career. 
 It is that of territorial aggrandizement. Extended 
 jurisdiction is an element of national strength, if the 
 moral condition of the people be sound; of national 
 weakness, if that condition be unsound. ... I 
 
180 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 want no war. I want no enlargement of territory 
 sooner than it would come if we were contented with 
 "a masterly inactivity." I abhor war, as I detest 
 slavery. I would not give one human life for all the 
 continent that remains to be annexed. But I cannot 
 exclude the conviction, that the popular passion for ter- 
 ritorial aggrandizement is irresistible. Prudence, jus- 
 tice, cowardice, may check it for a season, but it 
 will gain strength by its subjugation. . . . Our 
 population is destined to roll its resistless waves to the 
 icy barriers of the north, and to encounter oriental civ- 
 ilization on the shores of the Pacific. ... It be- 
 hooves us then, to qualify ourselves for our mission. 
 We must dare our destiny. We can do this, and can 
 only do it by early measures which shall effect the abo- 
 lition of slavery, without precipitancy, without oppres- 
 sion, without injustice to slaveholders, without civil 
 war, with the consent of mankind and the approbation 
 of Heaven. ... — Works, Vol III, pp. 408, 409. 
 
 From Seward's great and famous speech of 
 March 11, 1850, in the senate of the United 
 States: 
 
 But it is insisted that the admission of California 
 shall be attended by a compromise of questions which 
 have arisen out of slavery! 
 
 I AM OPPOSED TO ANY SUCH COMPROMISE, IN ANY 
 AND ALL THE FORMS IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN PRO- 
 POSED; because, while admitting the purity and the 
 patriotism of all from whom it is my misfortune to dif- 
 fer, I think all legislative compromises, which are not 
 absolutely necessary, radically wrong and essentially 
 vicious. They involve the surrender of the exercise of 
 judgment and conscience on distinct and separate 
 questions, . . . We deem the principle of the law 
 for the recapture of fugitives, as thus expounded, there- 
 fore, unjust, unconstitutional, and immoral; and thus, 
 while patriot sm withholds its approbation, the con- 
 sciences of our people condemn it. 
 
 You will say that these convictions of ours are dis- 
 loyal. Grant it for the sake of argu ment. They are 
 nevertheless, honest; and the law is to be executed^ 
 among us, not among you; not by us, but by the federal 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 181 
 
 authority. . . . It is true, indeed, that the national 
 domain is ours. It is true it was acquired by the valor 
 and with the wealth of the whole nation. But we hold, 
 nevertheless, no arbitrary power over it. We hold no 
 arbitrary authority over anything, whether acquired 
 lawfully or seized by usurpation. The Constitution 
 regulates our stewardship; the Constitution devotes the 
 domain to union, to justice, to defence, to welfare and 
 to liberty. 
 
 But there is a higher law than the Constitution, 
 which regulates our authority over the domain and de- 
 votes it to the same noble purposes. ... 1 feel as« 
 sured that slavery must give way, and will give way, 
 to the salutary instructions of economy, and to the 
 ripening influences of humanity; that emancipation is 
 inevitable and is near; that it may be hastened or hin- 
 dered; and that whether it shall be peaceful or violent, 
 depends upon the question whether it be hastened or 
 hindered ; that all measures which fortify slavery or ex- 
 tend it, tend to the consummation of violence; all that 
 check its extension and abate its strength, tend to its 
 peaceful extirpation. . . . —Works, Vol. I, pp. 60, 
 65, 74, 87. 
 
 Words of " welcome to Kossuth," in the sen- 
 ate, December 12, 1851, and " Freedom in 
 Europe," March 9, 1852: 
 
 Again, sir, you may reject Kossuth; you may, if you 
 please, propitiate despotic favor by trampling the ex- 
 iles of all Europe under your feet. But what will you 
 have gained? This republic is, and forever must be, 
 a living offence to Russia and to Austria, and to des- 
 potic powers everywhere. You will never, by what- 
 ever humiliations, gain one friend or secure one ally 
 in Europe or America that wears a crown. It is clear 
 that the days of despotism are numbered. We do not 
 know whether its end is to come this year, or next 
 year, or the year after; in this quarter of a century, or 
 in this half of a century. But there is to come sooner 
 or later, a struggle between the representative and the 
 arbitrary systems of government. ... It has 
 already come to this— that whenever in any country 
 an advocate of freedom, by the changes of fortune, is 
 
1S2 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 driven into exile, he hastens to seek an asylum here; 
 that whenever a hero falls in the cause of freedom on 
 any of her battle-fields, his eyes involuntarily turn 
 toward us, and he commits that cause with a confiding 
 trust to our sympathy and our care. Never, sir, as we 
 value the security of our own freedom, or the welfare 
 and happiness of mankind, or the favor of heaven, that 
 has enabled us to protect both, let that exile be inhos- 
 pitably repulsed. Never let the prayer of that dying 
 hero fall on ears unused to hear, or spend itself upon 
 hearts that refuse to be moved. — Works, Vol. I, pp. 1S4, 
 221. 
 
 Speech in the Senate, January 26, 1853, on 
 "Coutinen'al Rights and Relations:" 
 
 While I do not desire the immediate or early annexa- 
 tion of Cuba, nor see how I could vote for it at all 
 until slavery shall have ceased to counteract the work- 
 ings of nature in that beautiful island, nor even then, 
 unless it could come into the Union without injustice 
 to Spain, without aggressive war, and without pro- 
 ducing internal dissensions among ourselves, I never- 
 theless yield up my full assent to the convictions ex- 
 pressed by John Quincy Adams, that this nation can 
 never safely allow the island of Cuba to pass under the 
 dominion of any power that is already, or can become 
 a formidable rival or enemy. . . . And I shall vote 
 . for reaffirming and maintaining the principles of John 
 Quincy Adams, as defined in the Monroe doctrine, and 
 in his policy in regard to Cuba, at all times, and under 
 all circumstances whatsoever. . . . The senator 
 tells us that the question of the acquisition of Cuba 
 may be upon us to-morrow, and may not be upon us for 
 twenty-five years. That is to say, it stands now, so far 
 as we can see, where it has stood for twenty-five years 
 past. But he advises us to be ready. That is just 
 what I propose to do. And the way to keep ready is to 
 keep cool. — Works, Vol. Ill, pp. 610, 61 J, 616. 
 
 Oration, September 14, 1853, on "The Des- 
 tiny of America:" 
 
 If the future which you seek consists in this: that 
 these thirty-one states shall continue to exist for a 
 period as long as human foresight is allowed to antici- 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 183 
 
 pate after coming events; that they shall be all the 
 while free; that they shall remain distinct and inde- 
 pendent in domestic economy, and nevertheless be only 
 one in commerce and foreign affairs; that there shall 
 arise from among them and within their common do- 
 main even more than thirty-one other equal states 
 alike free, independent, and united; that the borders 
 of the federal republic, so peculiarly constituted, shall 
 be extended so that it shall greet the sun when he 
 touches the tropic, and when he sends his glancing rays 
 toward the polar circle, and shall include even distant 
 islands in either ocean; that our population now 
 counted by tens of millions shall ultimately be reck- 
 oned by hundreds of millions; that our wealth shall in- 
 crease a thousand fold, and our commercial connec- 
 tions shall be multiplied and our political influence be 
 enhanced in proportion with this wide development, 
 and that mankind shall come to recognize in us a suc- 
 cessor of the few great states which have alternately 
 borne commanding sway in the world— if this, and 
 only this, is desired, then I am free to say that if, as 
 you will readily promise, our public and private vir- 
 tues shall be preserved, nothing seems to me more cer- 
 tain than the attainment of this future, so surpass- 
 ingly comprehensive and magnificent. 
 
 Indeed, such a future seems to be only a natural 
 consequence of what has already been secured. Why, 
 then, shall it not be attained? Is not the field as free 
 for the expansion indicated as it was for that which 
 has occurred? . . . 
 
 Certainly no one expects the nations of Asia to be 
 awakened by any other influences than our own from 
 the lethargy into which they sunk nearly three thou- 
 sand years ago, under the spells of superstition and 
 cagte. If they could be roused and invigorated now, 
 would they spare their European oppressors and smite 
 their American benefactors? . . . 
 
 I do not seek to disguise from myself, nor from you, 
 the existence of a growing passion for territorial ag- 
 grandizement, which often exhibits a gross disregard 
 of justice and humanity. . . . Works, Vol. IV, pp. 
 122, 125, 137. 
 
184 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 On "The Advent of the Republican Party," 
 October 12, 1855, at Albany, N. Y. : 
 
 So long as the republican party shall be true and 
 faithful to the constitution, the Union and the rights 
 of men, I shall serve it with the reservation of that per- 
 sonal independence which is my birthright, but, at the 
 same time, with the zeal and devotion that patriotism 
 allows and enjoins. I do not know, and personally I 
 do not greatly care, that it shall work out its great 
 ends this year, or the next, or in my lifetime ; because 
 I know that those ends are ultimately sure, and that 
 time and trial are the elements which make all great 
 reformations sure and lasting. I have not thus far 
 lived for personal ends or temporary fame, and 1 shall 
 not begin so late to live or labor for them. I have hoped 
 that I might leave my country somewhat worthier of a 
 lofty destiny, and the rights of human nature somewhat 
 safer. A reasonable ambition must always be satisfied 
 with sincere and practical endeavors. If, among those 
 who shall come after us, there shall be any curious 
 inquirer who shall fall upon a name so obscure as 
 mine, he shall be obliged to confess that, however un- 
 successfully I labored for generous ends, yet that I 
 nevertheless was ever faithful, ever hopeful. — Works, 
 Vol IV, p. 21+0. 
 
 "The Contest and the Crisis," Buffalo, Octo- 
 ber 19, 1855: 
 
 The opposition tell us, that if congress could prohibit 
 slavery in territories, then they might establish it 
 there; and hence they argue against the power to pro- 
 hibit. No! Congress can establish slavery nowhere. 
 Slavery was never established rightfully anywhere. 
 Nor was it ever established by law. It is in violation 
 of every line of the Declaration of Independence, and 
 of the whole summary of personal rights contained in 
 the Constitution. It is derogatory from the absolute 
 rights of human nature, and no human power can sub- 
 vert those rights. . . . The apologists of slavery, 
 thus met, change front suddenly, and ask us whether 
 it is safe to brave these menaces of disunion. I answer 
 — Yes, yes! . . . Three millions of slaves are a 
 hostile force constantly in their presence, in their very 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 185 
 
 midst. The servile war is almost the most fearful 
 form of war. The world without sympathizes with 
 the servile enemy. Against that war, the American 
 Union is the only defense of the slaveholders— their 
 only protection. If ever they shall, in a season of mad- 
 ness, secede from that Union and provoke that war, 
 they will— soon come back again. — Works, Vol. IV, 
 pp. U7, 248. 
 
 "The Irrepressible Conflict" speech, Roch- 
 ester, October 25, 1858: 
 
 Russia yet maintains slavery, and is a despotism. 
 
 Most of the other European states have abolished 
 slavery, and adopted the system of free labor. . . . 
 The two systems are at once perceived to be incongru- 
 ous. But they are more than incongruous— they are 
 incompatible. They never have permanently existed 
 together in one country, and they never can. . . . 
 
 Hitherto, the two systems have existed in different 
 itates, but side by side within the American Union. 
 This has happened because the Union is a confederacy 
 of states. But in another aspect the United States con- 
 stitute only one nation. Increase of population, which 
 is filling the states out to their very borders, together 
 with a new and extended net-work of railroads and other 
 avenues, and an internal commerce which daily becomes 
 more intimate, is rapidly bringing the states into a 
 higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation. 
 Thus, these antagonistic systems are continually com- 
 ing into closer contact, and collision results. 
 
 Shall I tell you what this collision means ? They 
 who think that it is accidental, unnecessary, the work of 
 interested or fanatical agitators, and therefore ephem- 
 eral, mistake the case altogether. It is an irrepressi- 
 ble conflict between opposing and enduring forces and 
 it means that the United States must and will, sooner 
 or later, become either entirely a slaveholding nation, 
 or entirely a free labor nation. Either the cotton and 
 rice fields of South Carolina and the sugar plantations 
 of Louisiana will ultimately be tilled by free labor, 
 and Charleston and New Orleans become marts for 
 legitimate merchandise alone, or else the rye-fields and 
 wheat-fields of Massachusetts and New York must again 
 
186 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 be surrendered by their farmers to slave culture and 
 to the production of slaves, and Boston and New York 
 become once more markets for trade in the bodies and 
 souls of men. It is the failure to apprehend this great 
 truth that induces so many unsuccessful attempts at 
 final compromise between the slave and free states. 
 and it is the existence of this great fact that renders 
 all such pretended compromises, when made, vain 
 and ephemeral. . . . 
 
 . . . Having seen the society around me univer- 
 sally engaged in agriculture, manufacture and trade, 
 which were innocent and beneficent, I shall never be 
 a denizen of a state where men and women are reared 
 as cattle, and bought and sold as merchandise. When 
 that evil day shall come, and all further effort at 
 resistance shall be impossible, then, jf there shall be no 
 better hope for redemption than I can now foresee, I 
 shall say with Franklin, while looking abroad over the 
 whole earth for a new and more congenial home, 
 " Where liberty dwells, there is my country." 
 
 You will tell me that these fears are extravagant 
 and chimerical. I answer, they are so; but they are 
 so only because the designs of the slaveholders must 
 and can be defeated. . . . Works, Vol. IV, pp. 
 291, 292, 295. 
 
 From a speech at Detroit, September 4, 
 
 1860: 
 
 My humble advice, then, fellow citizens, is, that we 
 return and reestablish the original policy of the na- 
 tion, and henceforth hold, as we did in the beginning, 
 that slavery is and must be only a purely local, tempo- 
 rary and exceptional institution, confined within the 
 slave states where it already exists^ while freedom is 
 tLe general, normal, enduring and permanent condi- 
 tion of society within the jurisdiction, and under the 
 authority of the constitution of the United States.— 
 Works, Vol IV, p. 314. 
 
 From a speech at St. Paul, September 18, 
 1860: 
 
 I have been asked by many of you what I think of 
 Minnesota. I will not enlarge further than to say, 
 that Minnesota must be either a great state or a mean 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 187 
 
 one, just as her people shall have wisdom and virtue to 
 decide. That some great states are to be built up in 
 the Mississippi Valley, I know. You will not longer 
 hereafter hear of the ' ' Old Dominion " state. Dominion 
 has been passing away from Virginia long ago. Penn- 
 sylvania is no longer the "Keystone" of the American 
 Union, for the arch has been extended from the At- 
 lantic Coast to the Pacific Ocean, and the center of the 
 arch is moved westward also; a new keystone is to be 
 inserted in that arch. New York will cease to be tho 
 "Empire State," and a new Empire State will grow up 
 in a northern latitude, where the lands are rich, and 
 where the people who cultivate them are all free and 
 all equal; where the wealth of the continent is made, 
 not where it is exchanged. That state which shall be 
 truest to the great fundamental principle of the gov- 
 ernment, the principle of equality, that state which 
 shall be most faithful, most vigorous in developing and 
 perfecting society on this principle, will be at once the 
 New Dominion State, the new Keystone State, the new 
 Empire State. . . . Works, Vol. IV, p. 347. 
 
 Extracts from his speech at Chicago, Oc- 
 tober 3, 1860: 
 
 When slavery became identical in the public mind 
 with the Union, how natural it was, even for patriotic 
 men, to approve of, or to at least excuse and tolerate 
 slavery. How odious did it become for men to be free- 
 soldiers, and to be regarded as abolitionists, when to 
 be an abolitionist was, in the estimation of mankind, 
 to be a traitor to one's country, and to such a country 
 as this is. How natural was it then to believe that 
 slavery after all might not be so very bad, and to be- 
 lieve that it might be necessary and might be right at 
 some times, or on some occasions, which times and oc- 
 casions were always a good ways off from themselves; 
 especially how natural was it, when the whole Chris- 
 tian church, with all its sects, bent itself to the support 
 of the Union, mistaking the claim of slavery for the 
 cause of the Union . . . 
 
 People of Illinois! People of the great westl You 
 
 are all youthful, vigorous, generous. Your states are 
 
 youthful, vigorous, and virtuous. The destinies of 
 
 our country, the hopes of mankind, the hopes of hu- 
 
 13 
 
188 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 manity rest upon you. Ascend, I pray, I conjure you, 
 to the dignity of that high responsibility! Thus act- 
 ing, you will have peace and harmony and happiness 
 in your future years. The world, looking on, will ap- 
 plaud you, and future generations in all ages and in 
 all regions will rise up and call you blessed. — Works, 
 Vol. IV pp. 357, 367. 
 
 From Seward's second speech on the Kansas- 
 Nebraska bill, May 25, 1854, and other later 
 speeches on the same subject: 
 
 All the immigrants, under this bill as the house of 
 representatives overruling you have ordered, will be 
 good, loyal, liberty-loving, slavery-fearing citizens. 
 Come on, then, gentlemen of the slave states. Since 
 there is no escaping your challenge, I accept it in be- 
 half of the cause of freedom. We will engage in com- 
 petition for the virgin soil of Kansas, and God give the 
 victory to the side which is stronger in numbers as it is 
 in right. ... In doing this, I do no more than 
 those who believe the slave power is rightest, wisest, 
 and best, are doing, and will continue to do, with my free 
 consent, to establish its complete supremacy. If they 
 shall succeed, I still shall be, as I have been, a loj-al 
 citizen. If we succeed, I know they will be loyal also, 
 because it will be safest, wisest, and best, for them to 
 be so. The question is one, not of a day, or of a year, 
 but of many years, and for aught I know, many gener- 
 ations. Like all other great political questions, it will 
 be attended sometimes by excitement, sometimes by 
 passion, and sometimes, perhaps, even by faction ; but 
 it is sure to be settled in a constitutional way, without 
 any violent shock to society, or to any of its great 
 interests. ... 
 
 My position concerning legislative compromises is 
 this, namely: personal, partisan, temporary and su- 
 bordinate questions, may lawfully be compromised; 
 but principles can never be justly or wisely made the 
 subjects of compromise. By principles I mean the ele- 
 ments in public questions, of moral rights, political 
 justice, and high national expediency. . . There 
 
 is no peace in this world for compromisers ; there is no 
 peace for those who practice evasion; there is no peace 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 1S9 
 
 in a republican land for any statesmen but those who act 
 directly, and boldly abide the popular judgment when- 
 ever it may be fairly and clearly and fully ascertained, 
 without attempting to falsify the issue submitted, or 
 to corrupt the tribunal. . — Works, Vol. IV, 
 
 pp. 471, 476-77, 517, 611-12. 
 
 Taken from Seward's Diary and Notes on the 
 War: 
 
 April 1, 1862. — Earl Russell, in the house of Lords, 
 expressed the belief that this country is large enough 
 for two independent nations, and the hope that this 
 government will assent to a peaceful separation from 
 the insurrectionary States. A very brief sojourn among 
 ns, with an observation of our mountains, rivers, and 
 coasts, and some study of our social condition and 
 habits, would be sufficient to satisfy him, on the con- 
 trary, that the country is not too large for one such 
 people as this, and that it is, and must always be, too 
 mall for two distinct nations, until the people shall 
 have become so demoralized by faction that they are 
 ready to enter the course which leads through con- 
 tinued subdivision to continued anarchy. All the 
 British speculations assume that the political elements 
 which have been brought into antagonism here are 
 equal in vigor and endurance. Nothing, however, is 
 more certain than that freedom and slavery are very un- 
 equal in these qualities, and that when these diverse 
 elements are eliminated, the former from the cause of 
 sedition, and the latter from the cause of the govern- 
 ment, then the government must prevail, sustained as 
 it is by the co-operating sentiments of loyalty, of na- 
 tional pride, interest, ambition, and the permanent 
 love of peace. — Works, Vol. V, p. 51. 
 
 Extract from a speech to his neighbors, 
 October 3, 1S68, entitled "The Situation and 
 the Duty:" 
 
 No one state in the Union, nor any fraction of a 
 state, was, by any action or word of mine, driven or 
 allowed to separate itself from the Union. On the 
 contrary, every act or word that I could lawfully per- 
 form or speak to prevent that wild treason or madnes3 
 
190 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 was spoken with all the decision, and yet with all the 
 moderation, that such counsels required. When that 
 frightful rebellion ceased, no one state of the Union, 
 or fraction of a state, was, by any action or word of 
 mine, repelled from returning to his allegiance. On 
 the contrary, every act or word of mine that was use- 
 ful, or that promised to be useful, in bringing those 
 revolutionary states back to reinforce and reinvigorate 
 the Union which they had so rashly attempted to de- 
 stroy, was seasonably performed and spoken. — Works, 
 Vol V, p. 557. 
 
 In 1861 Mr. Seward was accused of lacking 
 
 in patriotism on account of a speech he made 
 
 in the senate. He wrote the following letter 
 
 concerning the charge. The letter explains 
 
 itself: 
 
 Washington, February 23, 1861. 
 
 My Dear Sir: The American people in our day 
 have two great interests. One, the ascendancy of free- 
 dom over slavery; the other, the integrity of the Union! 
 The slavery interest has derived its whole political 
 power from bringing the latter object into antagonism 
 with the former. Twelve years ago freedom was in 
 danger and the Union was not. I spoke then so singly 
 for freedom that short-sighted men inferred that I was 
 disloyal to the Union. I endured the reproach with- 
 out complaining, and now I have my vindication. To- 
 day, practically, freedom is not in danger, and Union 
 fe. With the loss of Union, all would be lost. With 
 the attempt to maintain Union by civil war wantonly 
 brought on there would be danger of reaction against 
 the administration charged with the preservation of 
 both freedom and the Union. Now, therefore, I speak 
 singly for Union, striving, if possible, to save it peace- 
 ably; if not possible, then to cast the responsibility 
 upon the party of slavery. For this singleness of 
 speech I am now suspected of infidelity to freedom. 
 In this case, as in the other, I refer myself not to the 
 men of any time, but to the judgment of history. I 
 thank you, my dear Sir, for having anticipated what I 
 think history will pronounce. 
 
 But do not publish or show this letter. Leave me to 
 
WILLIAM H. SEWAKD. 191 
 
 be misunderstood. I am not impatient. I write to 
 to you only because I would not be nor seem to be im« 
 grateful. Faithfully yonr friend, 
 
 William H. Seward. 
 — Works, Vol V, pp. 613-6U. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 (1) What change in the manner of selecting mayors 
 of cities did Seward advocate? (2) What reason did 
 he give? (3) Was he right? (4) Was Seward a demo- 
 crat or an aristocrat? (5) Bring together as many 
 proofs as you can find in these extracts to sustain your 
 position. (0) Was he a hopeful man? (7) Give all 
 the proof s you can find for your opinion. 
 
 (1) How did Seward regard secret societies? (2) 
 What views did he hold regarding the national bank ? 
 (3) What view did he take of Jackson's course in caus- 
 ing the removal of the "Deposits"? (4) Was he a 
 friend of change— of progress? (5) All the proofs you 
 can find. (6) What different tendency did he find in 
 democratic and monarchic governments? (7) Did he 
 believe in universal suffrage? (8) Was he a friend to a 
 system of internal improvements? (9; How did he 
 view the state's duty towards education? (10) Who 
 especially should the state educate? 
 
 (1) What view did Seward take in regard to his duty 
 as governor; to deliver men to the state of Virginia who 
 had aided negroes in escaping? (2) Was he right? (3) 
 Did he believe the people of the North were inteirested 
 in southern slavery? (4) Find as many passages to 
 illustrate as you can. (5) What were the great duties 
 of true American citizens? (6) What constituted the 
 strength of slavery in his mind? (7; Did he sympa- 
 thize with opposition to foreigners? (8) Was he favor- 
 able to. or opposed to, the Know-Nothings ? (9) How 
 did he and Douglas agree on this question? (10) Sum- 
 marize his arguments on this question. 
 
 (1 ) Was he favorable to territorial expansion ? (2) How 
 did he look on the Cuban question? (3) Compare his 
 views with those of Douglas. (4) State his views in re- 
 gard to compromise. (5) Compare his views with the 
 views of Webster. (6) What two celebrated phrases 
 can you find in these extracts? (7) What did he mean 
 by each ? (8 ) How did Lincoln express the same thought 
 as is found in one of them? (9) Was he brave in ex- 
 pressing opinions? (10) Was he a radical or a conser- 
 vative? ~ Ul ) Why was he so friendly to Kossuth ? '12) 
 Who was Kossuth ? 
 
 (1) What destiny did he see for the United States? 
 (2) Under what conditions? (3) Outline the ideas he 
 set forth in his campaign speeches of 1860. (4) Did he 
 hejieye tbe nation large enough to make two of? (^ 
 
102 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Why his answer? (6) Which principle, slavery or free- 
 dom, did he hold was bound tu triumph? (7) Give his 
 arguments. <«. What view did he take in regard to 
 "reconstruction," judged by his speech of 1868? (9) 
 Object of his so-called compromise speech of 1800. 
 U0; Write a "life " of Seward. 
 
SALMON PORTLAND CHASE 
 
 Born in New Hampshire, 1808. Graduate of 
 Dartmouth. Taught in Washington, 1826-1829. 
 Settled in Cincinnati, 1830. Senator, 1849-1855. 
 Candidate for nomination for President, 1856, 
 
 1860. Governor of Ohio, 1855-1859. Secretary 
 of the treasury, 1861-1864. Chief Justice, 1864- 
 1873. Suggested for President, 1868, 1872. 
 Leader of the anti-slavery party in Ohio, 1842- 
 
 1861. Died, 1873. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 SALMON PORTLAND CHASE 
 
 CHASE had been considered the chief rival 
 of Seward for leadership in the new Re- 
 publican party to the time of Lincoln's 
 nomination for president in 1860. He was a 
 man of large mould both in mind and body. Of 
 New England ancestry he e^rly came to Ohio, 
 and became identified with the West. His ed- 
 ucation was broad and general rather than deep. 
 In some respects it was perhaps superficial, if we 
 may judge from his own statements in regard 
 to his college course, and his previous prepara- 
 tion. In the main his preparation was received 
 from private instructors. His college course 
 was taken partly at Cincinnati, and finished 
 at Dartmouth. After his graduation, at the 
 age of twenty, he went to Washington and be- 
 came a tutor in private families, and especially 
 in that of Mr. Wirt. He pursued his law stud- 
 ies at the same time, and after admission to 
 the bar he returned to Ohio, and located at 
 Cincinnati, where he soon became one of its 
 recognized leaders. 
 
 Chase was not a party man in the usual 
 sense of the term; at least he was always very 
 independent, and either voted independently, 
 or changed his party ties frequently. He began 
 life as a Whig; later he became an Independ- 
 ent Democrat; a Liberty party man; a. Free- 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 195 
 
 Soiler; a Republican; and ended his life as a 
 Democrat, if he could be said to have any party 
 ties after he became Chief Justice. 
 
 He was accused of inordinate ambition to be- 
 come president. That he would have accepted 
 the place is undoubted; however, if his private 
 letters are to be the standard from which we 
 may judge his aspirations, the charge is not 
 sustained. 
 
 Chase was a man of deep convictions, pro- 
 found views, and solid judgment rather than of 
 brilliant parts. He was not as quick as Doug- 
 las; not as keen a politician as Seward; and had 
 not the self-restraint and self-command of 
 Lincoln. 
 
 The following quotations are made in the 
 hope that the student may work out from them 
 something of an independent judgment in regard 
 to the character and work of one of our great 
 statesmen. 
 
 The following brief extracts give us some- 
 thing of an insight into the early life of Chase, 
 and the forces which were tending to form his 
 character. 
 
 One day I and two or three more were rolling nine 
 pins. There was an alley on our premises. My father 
 came and said: 'Salmon, come and go with me to the 
 field.' I lingered, hating to leave the game. 'Won't 
 you come and help your father?' Only a look with 
 that. All my reluctance vanished, and I went with a 
 right good will. He ruled by kind words and kind 
 looks. . . . 
 
 For several months— at least weeks— before going, I 
 knew that my uncle had proposed to take me and that 
 I was to go to him in Ohio. I tried to find out where I 
 was going and got some queer information, "The 
 Ohio," as the country was then called, was a great way 
 oftWt was very fertile.— cucumbers grew on trees— 
 
190 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES, 
 
 there were wonderful springs whose waters were like 
 New England rum— deer and wolves were plenty— peo- 
 ple few. A copy of Morse's Gazetteer gave me some- 
 what better but still scanty information. . . . 
 
 I entered college at Cincinnati, Ohio, as a freshman, 
 but soon conceived the idea, that, by extra study, I 
 could be advanced to the next higher class, and, having 
 obtained the consent of Mr. Sparrow, then in college 
 as Junior or Senior, to hear my lessons, began to read 
 up with that view. It was not very difficult to accom- 
 plish the object; for the requirements of scholarship 
 were by no means exacting. In a short time, I offered 
 myself to be examined for advanced standing, and was 
 advanced to be sophomore. . . . 
 
 " Salmon " said he, "I once obtained an office for a 
 nephew of mine, and he was ruined by it. I then de- 
 termined never to ask one for another. I will give you 
 fifty cents to buy a spade with, but I will not help to 
 get you a clerkship. . . . 
 
 Mr. Clay gave a party this evening, and I attended, 
 as I had neglected several previous evenings. When I 
 arrived I found that the company had not yet assembled, 
 and, after paying my respects to Mr. and Mrs. Clay, I 
 took my station near the door to observe the various 
 manners of the entering visitants. I soon tired of this 
 employment and went into the next room and looked 
 at the clock and the company alternately until half an 
 hour had elapsed, when I took my leave, glad to escape 
 from the scene of ceremonious frivolity. . . . 
 
 Dec. 14, 1830. Attended the Court, and, with sev- 
 eral others, was examined for admission to the bar. 
 One was rejected, two were deferred; three, of whom 
 I was one, were admitted. So I am now an attorney-at- 
 law. I have a profession. Let me not dishonor it. . . 
 
 After breakfast, we went to the hotel, where I ob- 
 tained a room much larger than I needed, indeed, for I 
 am but six feet \>y one or two, and the chamber was at 
 least ten by six ^At Cincinnati, his future kt«ne]. — 
 Cited in Warden's Life of Chase, pp. 25, 65, 93, 121, 
 153, 175, 187. 
 
 In 1845 he writes the following in his diary: 
 Have not attended church to-day, chiefly because of in- 
 convenience of getting to town, having no place there 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 197 
 
 for my horses; but partly, also, because I feel doubtful 
 as to my duty arising from the relation of the church to 
 slavery. On one side, I cannot doubt that it is wrong for 
 the church to maintain an indifferent if not an hostile at- 
 titude to the cause of the enslaved; on the other, I feel 
 quite sure that other members of the church, who do not 
 feel as I do in reference to the slaves, are far more zealous 
 in other good works, and live much nearer to Christ. I 
 am anxious to see the path of duty in reference to the sub- 
 ject of church connection more clearly than I do. — 
 Warden, p. — 
 
 In 1S41, when a member of the city council, 
 he took a stand which he records in the follow- 
 ing words in his diary: 
 
 On Wednesday evening, at the Council, I openly de- 
 clared my resolution to vote for no more licenses to sell 
 intoxicating drinks, whether to taverns or other houses, 
 and I took some pains to prevent the grant of a license 
 to a new house proposed to be established on Main 
 Street, in which I succeeded. I don't know what the 
 effect may be on me personally, but I believe that I 
 have done right. . . . 
 
 The following extracts are made from three 
 political addresses prepared by Chase during 
 the years 1843, 1811, and 1815: 
 
 I have only to say, I never proposed the resolution ; I 
 never would propose or vote for such a resolution. I 
 hold no doctrine of mental reservation . Every man, 
 in my judgment, should say precisely what he means- 
 keeping nothing back, here or elsewhere. . . . 
 
 What, then, is the position of the political parties of 
 the country in relation to this subject? One of these 
 parties professes to be guided by the most liberal prin- 
 ciples. " Equal and exact justice to all men;" " equal 
 rights for all men;" "inflexible opposition to oppres- 
 sion," are its favorite mottoes. It claims to be the true 
 friend of popular government, and assumes the name 
 of Democratic. . . . 
 
 They declaim loudly against all monopolies, all spe- 
 cial privileges, all encroachments on personal rights, 
 all distinctions founded upon birth; and compensate 
 
198 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 themselves for these efforts of virtue, by practicing 
 the vilest oppression upon all their countrymen, in 
 whose complexion the slightest trace of African 
 derivation can be detected. . . . 
 
 There is another party which boasts that it is con- 
 servative in its character. Its watchwords are, "a 
 tariff," "a banking system," "the Union as it is." 
 Among its members, also, are many sincere opponents 
 of slavery. . . . Like the Democratic party, how- 
 ever, the Whig party maintains alliances with the 
 slaveholder. It proposes, in its national conventions, 
 no action against slavery. It has no anti-slavery arti- 
 cle in its national creed. . . . 
 
 No question half so important as that of slavery en- 
 gages the attention of the American people. All 
 others, in fact, dwindle into insignificance in com- 
 parison with it. The question of slavery is, and until 
 t shall be settled, must be, the paramount moral and 
 political question of the day. We, at least, so regard 
 it, and, so regarding it, must subordinate every other 
 question to it. 
 
 It follows, as a necessary consequence, that we can 
 not yield our political support to any party which does 
 not take our ground upon the question. — Warden, pp. 
 300, 804, 305, 308. 
 
 August 6,. 1849, he wrote to Lyman W. Hall 
 as follows: 
 
 I am sure I had no idea that I was so bad a man as I 
 have discovered myself to be since my election to the 
 Senate. I always tried to pursue a straight-forward, 
 frank course, conciliating always wheresoever concili- 
 ation did not involve a sacrifice of principle; but al- 
 ways ready to avow and maintain whatever principles 
 I really held and to abide by them no matter how 
 small the minority. 
 
 I was educated in the Whig school, and as a lawyer 
 rather than as a politician. In my latter capacity I was 
 always tolerably independent; but I held in the main the 
 views which are now generally denominated Whig {though 
 at the time, they were almost equally shared by both par- 
 ties) up till 1840. In that year I supported Harrison, 
 though an advocate myself of the mk-treawry system? . , 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 
 
 199 
 
 . Convinced note that the question of slavery was the 
 paramount one, and satisfied that the great principle of 
 equal rights was correct, I began to test opinions by this 
 standard. Iioasthusled to quite different views on the 
 questions of bank, tariff and (government, from those I 
 hadtakenup, in trust without examination, and became 
 unreservedly a Democrat- with Democratic principles too 
 strong to allow of any compromise with slavery. Hold- 
 ing these principles, 1 was content to go into the minority 
 of the liberty party and labor in it, when men counted me 
 mad for so doing. 
 
 These principles, however, led the Democrats to consent 
 to my support last winter, and I now hold them as unre- 
 servedly, and as absolutely, without compromise, as ever. 
 All I desire is to see the old Democracy follow out tin ir 
 principles to the same conclusions. Then ice can all 
 stand together. — Warden, p. 831. 
 
 August 7, 184:9, he wrote: 
 
 For myself, I have no love for political life; I am in it 
 from necessity, not choice or advantage. Cheerfully 
 woxdd I resign my position to any man who would do my 
 work in it. I am not insensible to its honors or advan- 
 tages, but in my judgment, they are more than counter- 
 balanced by its responsibilities and. its discomforts. But 
 I won't bore you with this, but, finding myself at the 
 bottom of the second page, bid you farewell.— Warden, 
 p. 334- 
 
 Letter to Lincoln after his nomination in 1860: 
 
 My Dear Sir:— I congratulate you, most heartily, on 
 your nomination; and shall support you, in 1860, as 
 cordially and earnestly as I did in 1858. 
 
 The excellent platform adopted, and the selection of 
 that true and able man, Hannibal Hamlin, as your as- 
 sociate on the ticket, completes my satisfaction with 
 the results of the convention. They will prove, I am 
 confident, as auspicious to the country as tliey are hon- 
 orable to the nominees. 
 
 Mr. Seward has much reason to be gratified by the 
 large and cordial support which he received, and espe- 
 cially by the generous, unanimous, and constant ad- 
 hesion, without regard to personal preferences, of the 
 
200 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 entire delegation from his own great state. Doubtless, 
 the similar adhesion of the Illinois delegation affords a 
 higher gratification to you than the nomination itself. 
 The only regret I feel connected with the convention 
 is excited by the failure of the delegation from Ohio to 
 evince the same generous spirit. In this regret I am 
 quite sure you must participate; for I err greatly in my 
 estimate of your magnanimity if you do not condemn, 
 as I do, the conduct of delegates from whatever state, 
 who disregard, while acting as such, the clearly ex- 
 pressed preferences of their own state convention. — 
 Warden, p. 363. 
 
 Chase writes to Trowbridge concerning his 
 relations to Lincoln, and to the conference of 
 states in 1861, in these words: 
 
 After his election, he invited me to Springfield to 
 confer with me as to the selection of his Cabinet. He 
 said that he had felt bound to offer the position of Sec- 
 retary of State to Mr. Seward as the generally recog 
 nized leader of the Republican party, intending, if h% 
 should decline it, to offer it to me. He did not wish 
 that Mr. Seward should decline it and was glad that he 
 had accepted, and now desired to have me take the 
 place of Secretary of the Treasury. ... I replied 
 that I did not wish and was not prepared to say that I 
 would accept that place if offered. ... In Febru 
 ary, Virginia invited a conference of the States at 
 Washington, and appointed commissioners on her part. 
 This conference, doubtless, was intended as a means of 
 extorting new concessions to the slave interest from 
 Congress. To prevent injurious results, it seemed nec- 
 essary that there should be a general representation 
 from all the states— from free as well as from the slave 
 states which had become involved in secession. I was 
 one of the commissioners selected by the governor to 
 represent Ohio. Unfortunately I was the only one who 
 was prepared Co resist the purchase of peace by undue 
 concessions. I was quite willing to give to the slavr^ 
 states the strongest assurances that no aggressions upon 
 their rights or real interests were meditated, but I was 
 not at all willing to disguise from them the fact that 
 the further extension of slavery could not be allowed. — 
 Warden, pp. 364, 365. 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 201 
 
 To his sister, Mr?. Hunt, living at New 
 Orleans, Chase writes, November 30, 1860: 
 
 I abhor the very idea of a dissolution of the Union. If 
 
 I were President I would, indeed, exhaust every expedient 
 of forbearance, consistent trill, safi ty. But, at all hazards, 
 and against all opposition, the laics of the Union should 
 be enforced, through the judiciary whenever practicable, 
 but against rebellion by all necessary means. The ques- 
 tion of slavery should not be permitted to influence my ac- 
 tion, one way or the other. 
 
 But, while I would thus act when circumstances 
 should demand action, I would not shut my eyes to the 
 fact, manifest to everybody, that it is from the slavery 
 question that our chief dangers arise, and I should di- 
 rect whatever influence I might possess to an adjust- 
 ment of it, not by any new compromise -for new com- 
 promises only breed new dangers— but honest provision 
 for the honest fulfillment of all constitutional obliga- 
 tions connected with it. Nothing seems to me clearer 
 than that, under the constitution [Slavery is a] State 
 institution, and that much embarrassment would have 
 been avoided had this principle never been lost [sight 
 of J. It would have assured peace to the states in which 
 slavery exists, by uniting nearly all men of all opinions 
 against any aggression upon them. Let this principle 
 be now once more fully recognized and it will redress 
 much of our trouble. The slave states can lose noth- 
 ing, for few of their statesmen expect any farther ex- 
 tension of slavery. Disunion certainly is not extension. 
 Disunion rather is abolition, and abolition through 
 civil and servile war— which God forbid! It is pre- 
 cisely because they anticipate abolition as the result 
 that the Garrison abolitionists desired disunion. . . . 
 
 Besides this question of extension there seems to be 
 but one other which need occasion any anxiety. I re- 
 fer of course to the extradition of escaping slaves. I 
 have no doubt that the Constitution stipulates for such 
 extradition; but I can not help seeing the natural 
 sentiment and conscientious convictions make the exe- 
 cution of this stipulation everywhere difficult and, in 
 the free States, well nigh impracticable; and I would 
 not delude, or attempt to delude, anybody with the 
 
202 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES, 
 
 notion of its execution under what some people call a 
 "fair law," for all such propositions mean evasion, 
 and I would evade nothing. It is high time to have 
 done with evasions. Let us recognize facts as they are, 
 frankly and boldly, and not try to creep away f i-orn 
 them. In this spirit I would recognize the fact of the 
 constitutional obligation and the fact that it cannot b® 
 fulfilled with any thing like completeness; and then I 
 would see what could be done instead of literal fulfill- 
 ment. It seems to me that compensation and provision 
 for sending the fugitives out of the country would be 
 better than any thing else that is practicable. It 
 would be better for the Slave states, because the return 
 of the fugitives is not in itself a desirable thing either 
 from the individual from whom or the State from 
 which he flies. It would be better for the free States, 
 because it would involve nothing repugnant to the sent- 
 iments and convictions of the people. It would be bet- 
 ter, infinitely better, for all than disunion. With 
 these questions thus adjusted, peace would return, and 
 harmony, and prosperity. Is there any better way? I 
 see none. It is useless to attempt impossibilities.— 
 Warden, pp. 366, 367. 
 
 A letter to General Scott, December 29, 
 1860: 
 
 . . . Imbecility, or treason, or both, mark all the 
 action of the existing administration. Yesterday, 
 while the armed bands of a State in open hostility 
 against the National Government, were sizing Federal 
 forts at Charleston, the so-called President and his 
 Cabinet were in shameful conference with the commis- 
 sioners of rebellion. And rebellion is treason until 
 successful— which God forbid ! for successful rebellion 
 must needs be followed, and followed with swift steps, 
 by civil and servile war. . , . 
 
 Take, then, the responsibility. In virtue of a com- 
 mission which no other American, save Washington, 
 ever held, j 7 ou command the army of the United 
 States. Preserve the Union which he established. . 
 
 In a few weeks, Mr. Lincoln, in obedience to the will 
 of the country, will organize a new administration of 
 the General Government, faithful to every constitu- 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 9Q3 
 
 tional obligation and just to every State. Then, we 
 may hope, disunion will hide its hateful head. . ' .— 
 Warden, pp. 367, 368. 
 
 A letter to A. Taft, April 28, 1861: 
 As a positive policy, two alternatives were plainly 
 before us. (1) That of enforcing the laws by its whole 
 power and through its whole extent; or (2) that of rec 
 ognizing the organization of actual government by the 
 seven seceded States as an accomplished revolution- 
 accomplished through the complicity of the late ad- 
 ministration, and letting that Confederacy try its ex- 
 periment of separation; but maintaining the authority 
 of the Union and treating secession as treason every- 
 where else. 
 
 Knowing that the former of these alternatives in- 
 volved destructive war, and vast expenditure, and op- 
 pressive debt, and thinking it possible, that through 
 the latter these great evils might be avoided, the Union 
 of the other States preserved unbroken, the return 
 even of the seceded States, after an unsatisfactory ex- 
 periment of separation, secured, and the great cause of 
 freedom and constitutional government peacefully vin- 
 dicated—thinking, I say, these things possible, I pre- 
 ferred the latter alternative. 
 
 The attack on Fort Sumter, however, and the precip- 
 itation of Virginia into hostility to the National Gov- 
 ernment, made this latter alternative impracticable, 
 and I had then no hesitation about recurring to the 
 former.— Warden, p. 371. 
 
 The following extracts are taken from the 
 Appeal of the Independent Democrats, of 
 January 23, 1854: 
 
 _ We arraign this bill [Kansas-Nebraska] as a gross 
 violation of a sacred pledge; as a criminal betrayal of 
 precious rights; as part and parcel of an atrocious plot 
 to exclude from a vast unoccupied region immigrants 
 from the Old World and free laborers from our own 
 states, and convert it into a dreary region of despotism, 
 inhabited by masters and slaves. 
 
 Take your maps, fellow-citizens, we entreat you, and 
 see what country it is which this bill gratuitously and 
 recklessly proposes to open to slavery. . 
 
 14 
 
£04 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES, 
 
 This immense region, occupying the very heart of the 
 North American Continent, and larger, by thirty-three 
 thousand square miles, than all the existing free states 
 — including California; this immense region, well 
 watered and fertile, . . . and now for more tlr>i 
 thirty years regarded by the common consent of the 
 American people as consecrated to freedom by statute 
 and by compact— this immense region the bill now be- 
 fore the Senate, without reason and without excuse, 
 but in flagrant disregard of sound policy and sacred 
 faith, purposes to open to slavery. . . . 
 
 We confess our total inability properly to delineate 
 the character or describe the consequences of this 
 measure. Language fails to express sentiments of in- 
 dignation and abhorrence which it inspires: and no 
 vision less penetrating and comprehensive than that of 
 the All-Seeing can reach its evil issues. 
 
 We appeal to the people. We warn you that the 
 dearest interests of freedom and the Union are in im- 
 minent peril. Demagogues may tell you that the 
 Union can be maintained only by submitting to the 
 demands of slavery. We tell you that the Union can 
 only be maintained by the full recognition of the just 
 claims of freedom and man. The Union was formed 
 to establish justice and secure the blessings of liberty- 
 When it fails to accomplish these ends it will be worth- 
 less, and when it becomes worthless it cannot long 
 endure. 
 
 We entreat you to be mindful of that fundamental 
 maxim of Democracy— Equal Rights and Exact Justice 
 for all Men. Do not submit to become agents in ex- 
 tending legalized oppression and systematized injus- 
 tice over a vast territory yet exempt from these terri- 
 ble evils. 
 
 Whatever apologies may be offered for the toleration 
 of slavery in the States, none can be offered for its ex- 
 tension into Territories where it does not exist. . . . 
 
 For ourselves, we shall resist it by speech and vote. 
 and with all the abilities which God has given us. 
 Even if overcome in the impending struggle, we shall 
 not submit. We shall go home to our constituents, 
 erect anew the standard of freedom, and call on the 
 people to come to the rescue of the country from the 
 domination of slavery. We will not despair; for the 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 20") 
 
 cause of human freedom is the cause of God. — Schucker's 
 Life of Chase, pp. 141, 142, 146, 147. 
 
 Chase to Seward, January 11, 1861: 
 
 My dear Sir: You are to be Secretary of State. The 
 post is yours by right and you, will have the post. My 
 best wishes go with you. Permit me a few words about 
 matters in which we have a deep common interest. 
 
 The telegraph reports that you are to speak on Satur- 
 day. Let me urge j to to give countenance to no scheme 
 of compromise. Mr. Lincoln will be inaugurated in a 
 few days. Then the Republicans will be charged with 
 the responsibility of administration. Then, too, they 
 will control one branch of the Government. 
 
 To me it seems all-important that no compromise be 
 now made, and no concession involving any surrender 
 of principles; but that the people of the Slave States, 
 and of all the states, be plainly told that the Republi- 
 cans have no proposition to make at present; that when 
 they have the power they will be ready to offer an ad- 
 justment, fair and beneficial to all sections of the 
 country. . . . Schucker's, p. 202. 
 
 In a communication to the Committee of 
 Ways and Means, we find this language: 
 
 The provision making the United States notes a legal 
 tender has doubtless been well considered by the com- 
 mittee, and their conclusion needs no support from any 
 observation of mine. I think it my duty to say, how- 
 ever, that in respect to this provision my reflections 
 have conducted me to the same conclusions they have 
 reached. It is not unknown to them that I have felt, 
 nor do I wish to conceal that I now feel, a great aver- 
 sion to making anything but coin a legal tender in pay- 
 ment of debts. It has been my anxious wish to avoid 
 the necessity of such legislation. It is at present, im- 
 possible, however, in consequence of the large expendi- 
 tures entailed by the war and the suspension of the 
 banks, to procure sufficient coin for current disburse- 
 ments; and it has therefore become indispensably nec- 
 essary that we should resort to the issue of United 
 States notes. The making them a legal tender might 
 still be avoided if the willingness manifested by the 
 people generally, by railroad companies and by many 
 
206 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 of the banking institutions, to receive and pay them as 
 money in all transactions were absolutely or practically 
 universal. . . . Schiickcr's, p. 244- 
 
 From Hepburn vs. Griswold, 1868. 
 
 IV. There is in the Constitution no express grant of 
 legislative power to make any description of credit cur- 
 rency a legal tender in payment of debts. VII. The 
 making of notes or bills of credit a legal tender in pay- 
 ment of pre-existing debts is not a means appropriate, 
 plainly adapted, or really calculated to carry into effect 
 any express power vested in Congress; is inconsistent 
 with the spirit of the Constitution; and is prohibited 
 by the Constitution. — Schucker's, p. 260. 
 
 A letter to John Roberts, May 21, 1861: 
 In making appointments, my rule always has been to 
 give the preference to political friends, except in cases 
 where peculiar fitness and talents made the preference 
 of a political opponent a public duty. In selecting 
 among political friends, I have ever aimed to get the 
 right man in the right place, without much reference 
 to personal consequences to myself. Of course, I like 
 as much as any man to favor personal friends, but I 
 have never thought it right to appoint a man to office 
 merely because he was such, without a careful con- 
 sideration of his qualifications for the place. I have 
 ever held my country as my best friend, and value those 
 friends most who serve her most faithfully. Is there 
 anything blameworthy in all this? . . . 
 
 You know my views — the public first, our friends 
 next. So far as preferences can be legitimately given 
 so as to aid those who, at considerable sacrifice of time, 
 labor, and money, are engaged in upholding the prin- 
 ciples we all deem vitally important to the welfare of 
 the country, I think it a clear political duty that they 
 should be given. But no public interest should be sac- 
 rificed, no public duty should be neglected, for any 
 personal or party consideration. — Schuckers, pp. 274, 
 275. 
 
 To Wm. P. Mellen, March 26, 1862: 
 
 . . . I am not fond of political metaphysics. The 
 article in the Evening Post, which you send me, suits 
 me well enough While I think that ihe Government 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 207 
 
 in suppression of the rebellion, and in view of the de- 
 struction by suicide of the rebel State governments 
 with the actual or strongly implied consent of a major- 
 ity of their citizens, may regard those States as having 
 so far forfeited their rights that they may justly be 
 treated as Territories, I have never proposed to make 
 this opinion the basis of political measures. I much 
 prefer to regard each State as still existing intact, and 
 to be subject to no change of boundaries except such 
 as may be freely consented to by its people. I want to 
 keep all the stars, and all the stripes; and to keep all 
 the States with their old names and ensigns. South 
 Carolina should be South Carolina still; but reformed, 
 I hope. I would preserve, not destroy, and I prefer 
 civil provisional government, authorized by Congress, 
 to military government instituted by the President.— 
 Schuckers, p. 364. 
 
 To B. R Wood, Copenhagen, Denmark, 
 April 2, 1862: 
 
 There have been other occasions in the course of the 
 struggle in which it seemed to me that a different 
 course from that actually adopted would have been 
 better. This is especially true in relation to slavery. 
 It has seemed to me from the early' days of the conflict 
 that it was bad policy as well as bad principle to give 
 any support to the institution. . 
 
 My idea was -not to declare emancipation— but sim- 
 ply to treat the population just as we found it, loyal 
 or disloyal; and the blask loyalist better than a white 
 rebel, and the same as a white loyalist. And I could 
 see no <*alid objection to enlisting acclimated blacks, 
 loyal and willing to serve, any more than enlisting 
 white ones. But I have not been able to make our 
 friends in the administration see as I have seen: and I 
 certainly do not claim to be more wise than they. 
 When therefore, I am overfilled, I have quietly sub. 
 mitted -loing all I could to carry forward the cause 
 ana tne wotk, it not in my preferred way, yet it. the 
 best way possible for me.— Schuckers, p. 366. 
 
 June 24, 1862, to Major General Butler, New 
 Orleans: 
 
20S AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 . . . In my judgment, it is indispensable to fix 
 upon some principle of action and abide by it. Until 
 long after the fall of Sumter, J clung to my old ider.s 
 of non-interference with Slavery within State limits 
 by the Federal Government. It was my hope and lie- 
 lief that the rebellion might be suppressed, and slavery 
 left to the free disposition of the States within which 
 the institution existed. By them, I thought it certain 
 that the removal of the institution would be gradually 
 effected without shock or disturbance or injury, but 
 peaceably and beneficially. But the war has been 
 protracted far beyond my anticipations, and with the 
 nostponement of decisive results came increased bitter- 
 ness and intensified alienation of nearly the entire 
 white population of the slave States. With this state 
 of facts came the conviction to iny mind that the res- 
 toration of the old TJnion with slavery untouched ex- 
 cept by the mere weakening effects of the war, was 
 impossible. Looking attentively at the new state of 
 things, I became satisfied that a great majority of the 
 people of the United States had made up their minds 
 that the constitutional supremacy of the nat : onal 
 Government should be vindicated, and the territorial 
 integrity of the country maintained, come or go what 
 might. I became satisfied also that to secure the ac- 
 complishment of these great objects, slavery must go. 
 
 I begin with the proposition that we must either 
 abandon the attempt to retain the Gulf States, or that 
 we must give freedom to every slave within their 
 limits. We cannot maintain the contest with the dis- 
 advantages of unacclimated troops and distant supplies 
 against an enemy able to bring one-half the population 
 under arms, with the other half held to labor, at no 
 cost except that of bare subsistence, for the armed 
 moiety. . . . 
 
 As to the border states, even including Arkansas, a 
 different rule may be adopted. In these states the 
 President's plan of compensated emancipation may be 
 adequate to a solution of the slavery question ; though 
 I confess my apprehensions that the slaveholders of 
 these States will delay acceptance of the proposition 
 until it will become impossible to induce Congress to 
 vote the compensation. . . Schuckers, pp. 37b, 377. 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 209 
 
 To Major General John Pope. August 1, 
 1862: 
 
 Allow me to express a hope that you will deal gen- 
 erously and kindly with the blacks, who are almost all 
 loyal. They have rendered great services in many 
 cases, and have then been given up to slavery. This is 
 too bad. If I were in the field, I would let every man 
 understand that no man loyal to the Union can be a 
 slave. We must come to this. The public sentiment 
 of the world, common -sense, and common justice, de- 
 mand it. The sooner we respect the demand., the bet- 
 ter for us and for our cause. — Schuckers, pp. 378, 379. 
 
 To Sena or John Sherman, September 20, 
 1862: 
 
 Since General Halleck has been here the conduct of 
 the war has been abandoned to him by the President 
 almost absolutely. We who are called members of the 
 Cabinet, but are in reality only separate heads of De- 
 partments, meeting now and then for talk on what- 
 ever happens to come uppermost — not for grave consul- 
 tation on matters ccncerning the salvation of the 
 country— we have as little to do with it as if we were 
 heads of factories supplying shoes or clothing. No 
 regular and systematic reports of what is done are 
 made, I believe, even to the President; certainly none 
 are made to the Cabinet. — Schuckers, p. 379. 
 
 To Horace Greeley, January 28, 1863: 
 
 . . . Why don't you— who can so well point out 
 the path which others ought to walk — do your part 
 toward the great and indispensable work of establish- 
 ing a uniform national currency. . . . 
 
 But this is apart from the great question— which is 
 not second to any connected with the war itself *u this 
 time. W T hat financial measures can take us back to 
 the firm ground from which the legislation of last ses- 
 sion freed us? . . . The main point is the banking 
 bill. A circulation issued directly by the Government 
 cannot be made <* good currency. The difficulty is 
 partly in the nature of the thing and partly in the na 
 ture of men. The total difficulty is unsurmoun table, 
 and so says all experience. — Schuckers, pp. 386, 387, 
 
210 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES- 
 
 Concerning the arrest of Val'andigham, he 
 writes, June 15, 1863: 
 
 . . . If Vallandigham violated any law, he should 
 have been arrested, tried, and convicted. . . . 
 
 I have never myself been much afraid of words ; and 
 when men (Vallandigham among themi have sought to 
 cripple the financial administration by misrepresen- 
 tation and villification, I have preferred to reply by 
 augmented efforts in the service of the country rather 
 than by arrest and imprisonment. — Schuekers, p. 391. 
 
 To Ex-Governor William Sprague, Novem- 
 ber 26, 1863; to Jacob Heaton, January 28, 
 1864; and to Seward, May 30, 1864: 
 
 . . . If I were controlled by merely personal sen- 
 timents, I should prefer the reelection of Mr. Lincoln 
 to that of any other man. But I doubt the expediency 
 of re-electing anybody, and I think a man of different 
 qualities from those the President has will be needed 
 for the next four years. I am not anxious to be re- 
 garded as that man; and I am quite willing to leave 
 that question to the decision of those who agree in 
 thinking that some such man should be chosen. . . . 
 
 I can never permit myself to be driven into any hos- 
 tile or unfriendly position as to Mr. Lincoln. His 
 course toward me has always been so fair and kind: 
 his progress toward entire agreement with me on the 
 great question of slavery has been so constant, though 
 rather slower than I wished for, and his general char- 
 acter is so marked by traits which command respect 
 and affection, that I can never consent to anything 
 which he himself could or would consider as incompat- 
 ible with perfect honor and good faith, if I were 
 capable— which I hope I am not— of a departure from 
 either, even where an enemy might be concerned. . . 
 . I should despise myself if I felt capable of appoint- 
 ing or removing a man for the sake of the presidency. 
 
 I have never sought to manage newspapers. If they 
 have supported me I have been glad of it and grateful. 
 If they have opposed, it has been their own matter, and 
 I have let them take their course. I have never under- 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 211 
 
 taken and never shall undertake to manipulate the 
 press. . . . 
 
 So far as the presidency is concerned, I must leave 
 that wholly to the people. . . . 
 
 So far as ils all jgntion concerns me personally, they 
 are utterly witho it warrant. In the sense intended by 
 the words, I havo never been a presidential aspirant. 
 Since my letter to Senator Hall, or rather, through him 
 to my friends in Ohio, I have avoided all thought and 
 talk about the presidential nomination, and have cer- 
 tainly neither asked nor sought nor expected it myself. 
 
 The patronage of this department is not and never 
 has been used with reference to that nomination. — 
 Schuckers, pp, 494, 495, 497, 505. 
 
 From Mr. Chase's journal July 13, 1864: 
 . . . 1 have seen the President twice since I have 
 been here. Both times third persons were present, and 
 there was nothing like private conversation. His man- 
 ner was cordial and so were his words; and I hear of 
 nothing but good-wi;l from him. But he is not at all 
 demonstrative, either in speech or manner. I feel that 
 I do not know him, and I found no action on what he 
 says or does. ... It is my conviction that the 
 cause I love and the general interests of the country 
 will be best promoted by his re-election, and I have re- 
 solved to join my efforts to those of almost the whole 
 body of my friends in securing it. ... I have been 
 told that the President said he and I could not get 
 along together in the Cabinet. Doubtless there was a 
 difference of temperament, and on some points, of judg- 
 ment. I may have been too earnest and eager, while I 
 thought him not earnest enough and too slow. On 
 some occasions, indeed, I found that it was so. But I 
 never desired anything else than his complete success, 
 and never indulged a personal feeling incompatible with 
 absolute fidelity to his administration. To assure that 
 success" T labored incessantly in the Treasure Depart- 
 ment, with what resmlts the world knows. ... It 
 is now certain that Mr. Lincoln will be reelected. 
 May his name go down to posterity with the two 
 noblest additions historians ever recorded — Restorer 
 and Liberator.— Schuckers, pp. 511, 512. 
 
212 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Extracts from letters to various persons from 
 April 12, 1865, to March 16, 1868, concerning 
 Reconstruction: 
 
 Once I should have been, if not satisfied, partially, 
 at least, contented with suffrage for the intelligent and 
 for those who have been soldiers; now I am convinced 
 that universal suffrage is demanded by sound policy 
 and impartial justice. . . . 
 
 I observe that you say that the attempt to carry on 
 the Government with the privilege of universal suf- 
 frage incorporated as one of its elements is full of 
 danger. Danger is the condition of all governments; 
 because no form of government insures wise and 
 beneficent administration. But I beg you to consider, 
 is there not a greater danger without than with uni- 
 versal suffrage? You cannot make suffrage less than 
 universal for the whites, and will not the attempt to 
 discriminate excite such jealousies and illfeeling as 
 will postpone to a distant future what seems so essen- 
 tial, namely, the restoration of general good will and 
 bringing into lead the educated men and the men of 
 property, and so securing the best and most beneficial 
 administration of affairs for all classes? Take uni- 
 versal suffrage and universal amnesty, and all will be 
 well. Can you, my dear sir, devote your fine powers 
 to a better work than complete restoration on this 
 basis? . . . 
 
 1 have no sympathy with the spirit which refuses to 
 strew flowers upon the graves of the dead soldiers who 
 fought against the side I took; and I am glad to know 
 that there was no such spirit among those who joined 
 in decorating the graves of the soldiers of the Union 
 who lie buried in Magnolia Cemetery. . . . 
 
 I notice that you more than intimate that my letter 
 was prompted by ambition. It certainly was not. I 
 do not think that I ever was so ambitious as some un- 
 ambitious people have represented me. At any rate, I 
 am how unconscious of any other ambition than that 
 of doing as much good and as little harm as possible. 
 ... I never favored interference by Congress with 
 slavery in the states; but, as a war measure, Mr. Lin- 
 coln's proclamation of emancipation had my hearty 
 
SALMON P. CHASE. 213, 
 
 assent. and I united, as a member of his Administra- 
 tion, in the pledge it made to maintain the freedom of 
 the enfranchised people. This pledge has been partly 
 redeemed by the constitutional amendment prohibit 
 ing slavery throughout the United States; but its per 
 feet fulfillment requires, in my judgment, the assur- 
 ance of the right of suffrage to those whom the 
 Constitution ha? made freemen and citizens. Hence, I 
 have been and am in favor of so much of the recon- 
 struction policy of Congress as bases the reorganiza- 
 :ion of the State governments in the South upon uni- 
 versal suffrage. ... I have been a steady friend 
 to the congressional policy of reconstruction so far a? 
 it has contemplate! equal rights for all, secured by 
 aqual constitutions and laws. But I do not believe in 
 military domination any more than I do in a slave- 
 holding oligarchy; nor do I believe that anything has 
 been accomplished by military supremacy in the rebel 
 States that could not have been as well, if not better, 
 accomplished by civil supremacy, authorized and regu- 
 lated by Congress, with military subordination. But 
 I prefer even military domination for a time, itself 
 controlled and directed by Congress, with an honest 
 reference to restoration of the States to full participa- 
 tion in the government, with suffrage secured to all 
 who will not seek to withhold it from others, to any 
 auch plan as that proposed by the President. — Schuek- 
 ZT'S, pp. 517, 529, 530, 563, 575. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 (1) What characteristic do you find manifested iu 
 Chase's early training? (2 What conceptions in Massa- 
 chusetts of Ohio in early day3? (3) What die? his uncle 
 think about government clerkships? (4 Did he care 
 for society? (5i When admitted to the law? 
 
 (1) How did Chase regard slavery? (2 Bring all the 
 proofs you can find to prove your position. (3)' What 
 parties can you find proof for his having belonged to? 
 (4) How true to their professions does he find political 
 parties? (5) Did he love political life? (6 Proofs to 
 sustain your answer. (7. How did he regard Lincoln? 
 
 1 8) Was he favorable or not to compromise in 1800-61 1 
 
 1 9) Find all passages bearing on the subject. (10) How 
 did he regard Buchanan's policy of 1861? (11) Wha* 
 would have been his plan? (12) What is the main 
 thought yon get from his letter to his sister? (13; Does 
 his letter to Taft agree with his other writings? 
 
#14 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 (1) What was his opinion of the Kansas-Nebraska 
 bill? (2) What danger did he see in it? (3) Compare 
 his letter to Seward with his letter to Taft. (4) Was 
 he a believer in making United States notes [green- 
 backs] legal tender? (5) Compare his positions on the 
 subject in 1862 and 1868. (6) What relation did he be- 
 lieve the southern seceded states bore to the Union? 
 
 (1) How would he treat the negroes? (2) Collect the 
 proofs for your answer. (3) Was he a believer in the 
 arrest of Vallandigham? (4) Was he favorable to Lin- 
 coln's re-election in 18(54? i5) What view did he take 
 of the plan adopted in regard to the reconstruction of 
 the southern states? i6i Write a life of S. P. Chase 
 basud on these documents. 
 
JAMES GILLESPIE BLAINE 
 
 Born in Pennsylvania, 1830. Graduate of 
 Washington and Jefferson College. Taught 
 school in Kentucky, 1847-50. Citizen of Maine, 
 1S54. Member of Maine legislature, 1858-1862. 
 Member of House of Representatives, 1862-1876. 
 Speaker, 1869-1876. Candidate for nomination 
 for President, 1876, 1S80, 1892. Candidate, 1884. 
 Senator, 1876-1881. Secretary of state, 1881, 
 1889-1892. Died, 1893. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 JAMES GILLESPIE BLAINE 
 
 WE 1 egan this series of studies with Al- 
 bert Gallatin. It is now brought to 
 a close with the death of Blaine in 
 1893. Practically one hundred years of Amer- 
 ican history have been covered, as Gallatin may 
 be said to have come into prominence as a na- 
 tional statesman about 1793. 
 
 Four generations of American legisla' ors may 
 be said to have passed across the political stage. 
 Of these Gallatin only, of those we have studied, 
 belonged to the earliest period. Jefferson, 
 Madison, Hamilton, and Monroe also come be- 
 fore us asdistinguished men who might well 
 have had a place in our list. However, most 
 of them would more properly, perhaps, be 
 classed with Washington as great administra- 
 tors rather than with Gallatin as legislators. 
 In the second period we have studied J. Q. 
 Adams, Clay, Webster, and Calhoun, four men 
 who stand out pre-eminent among the statesmen 
 of their time. In the main we have considered 
 these men from the standpoint of legislators. 
 Each of them, however, was great also as an 
 administrator, and some of them achieved fame 
 in diplomacy as well. Lincoln's name is the 
 only one in the third quarter of our century 
 that may be said to tower above those that we 
 have studied, and his name is distinguished in 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 217 
 
 other fields than that of legislation. Seward, 
 Sumner, Chase, and Douglas were dominant 
 forces in American politics in the years just be- 
 fore and during the Civil War. Of those who 
 have struggled primarily with the problem of 
 reconstruction and other post-bellum questions 
 only one name has been considered— the name 
 of Blaine; perhaps not the most constructive 
 statesman of this fourth period, but the one 
 who had on the whole the greatest popular 
 following. 
 
 The extracts made bring out, it is hoped, the 
 main points in Blaine's early life, as well as the 
 principles for which he stood in his more ma- 
 ture years There is no adequate collection of 
 his letters and speeches as yet made, so it be- 
 comes much more difficult than in the cases of 
 the other men we have studied to make the best 
 selections. Perhaps also we are yet too near 
 his period to appreciate fully the strong and 
 the weak points in his career. Time only can 
 tell what his ultimate place in American history 
 will be. 
 
 Blaine's father was quite a skillful politician. 
 Once he was charged with being a Catholic, as 
 his wife was. He asked the Catholic priest 
 for a statement to the contrary and received 
 the following. He was equal to the emergency, 
 however, and succeeded in winning the election: 
 
 This is to certify that Ephraim L. Blaine is not now 
 and never was a member of the Catholic chnrch; and 
 furthermore, in my opinion, he is not fit to be a mem- 
 ber of any church. . . . — Gail Hamilton's Life of 
 Blaine, p. 73. 
 
 A note from an early friend: 
 
 You know, and r ^rhaps he knew, what my feeling 
 toward him was, always has been, with no weakening 
 
218 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 or shadow of turning. He buckled one's heart to him 
 with ''hooks of steel." I so well remember when and 
 where I saw him first. It was when he was in college, in 
 Washington, at a gay little picnic He was the life 
 and the light of the fete, so joyous were his spirits, so 
 incessant the play of his wit. . . . — Life of Blaine, 
 p. 78. 
 
 Recommendations from Blaine's Professors, 
 October 1, 1847: 
 
 Mr. James G. Blaine having gone through a regular 
 and full course in Washington College Penn. was grad- 
 uated Sept. 29. 1847. During the whole period of his 
 connection with College he maintained the character 
 of a very punctual, orderly, diligent and successful 
 student. His demeanor was always respectful, and 
 becoming a gentleman. When graduated, to him with 
 two others, was awarded the first Honor of a large, & 
 respectable class of thirty-three. He is of one of the 
 most respectable families of Washington County; & bt 
 propriety of conduct, polite and pleasing manners will 
 entitle himself to a place in the best society. If he 
 should become an Instructor in a High School, Acad- 
 emy, or College, his talents, literary acquirements, 
 dignity, decision, fidelity, & prudence will not fail to 
 merit the confidence, & approbation of those who may 
 obtain his services. 
 
 Of your qualifications for teaching, so far as these 
 depend upon character and scholarship, I may speak 
 with the highest confidence. Your knowledge of the 
 languages especially, being critical beyond what is 
 often attained at college, fits you in a special manner 
 for the office of instructor in this department. 
 
 In a word, sir, I feel assured that those who may be 
 so fortunate as to secure your services in this capacity 
 V^ill, when you become known to them as you are 
 known to us, be satisfied that no recommendation of 
 ours has been in the least exaggerated. 
 
 The professor of mathematics thought it "but jus- 
 tice to him to say that in my department Mr. Blaine 
 specially excels. From the commencement of his 
 course in mathematical studies he manifested a pecu- 
 liar fondness for them; his recitations gave evidence 
 of thorough investigation, and his demonstrations were 
 
JAMES G- BLAINE. 219 
 
 characterized by clearness, accuracy, and precision. "-- 
 TAfi of Blaine, pp. 80, 81. 
 
 Blaine writes of himself to a friend in these 
 words, in 1869: 
 
 . . . From Lexington he went to Louisville, thence 
 to Maysville, thence to Cincinnati, and the morning he 
 left the last-named place, December 4, [1837] he heard 
 that Robert C. Winthrop was just elected speaker of 
 the United States House of Representatives. He im- 
 mediately notified his friends that he was a candidate 
 for the succession, and in the incredibly brief space of 
 twenty-two years he attained the place— a remarkable 
 instance of faith, patience, and despatch harmoniously 
 combined. But I do not mean to imply that there is 
 any immediate, or palpable, or recognizable connection 
 between the rainy Sunday of Lexington in November, 
 1*47. and my election to the speakership in 18G9.— Life 
 of Blaine, p. S3. 
 
 In a letter of December 2, 1847, to his friend 
 J. M. Clark, he says: 
 
 I have procured a situation as assistant teacher of 
 languages in the Western Military Institute located 
 at Georgetown. ... I will have to teach the pre- 
 paratory course in Latin and Greek, and have a class 
 in Davis's Elementary Algebra, so you see my situation 
 will be a very pleasant one as regards the branches I 
 have to teach. ... I have no doubt now but that 
 he will be the Whig candidate; even if he is not he can 
 run as an Independent, and such is the wild enthusiasm 
 of the American people for a military h?ro that he 
 will run ahead of anything that either party can bring 
 out. . . . For my part, I would rather see James 
 Buchanan president than General Taylor, if he had not 
 had so large a fist in the affairs of the present adminis- 
 tration. That will ruin him. ... In conclusion, I 
 would just say that I would like to see both candidates 
 selected from among the citizens. I don't like these 
 military presidents that "go in" on account of their 
 "gunpowder popularity."— Life, pp. 86, 89. 
 
 His political tendencies may be seen in these 
 extracts from a letter to T. B. Searight April 8, 
 1849: 
 15 
 
220 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 Although there have been few removals made, yon 
 Democrats need not flatter yourselves that this admin- 
 istration is going to play the "betwixt and betwyn" 
 — pursue a temporizing policy. You will find that 
 about June and July and along there the heads will 
 begin to come off pretty rapidly. I am looking for and 
 hoping for a General Bee > pita Hon. I have had some 
 advices from headquarters, and this opinion is formed 
 from them. . . . You have no doubt seen Mr. Clay's 
 letter. lie is strong for emancipation and colonization, 
 but he has many bitter and able opponents to en- 
 counter, and the day has long since gone by when 
 Henry Clay's will was law in Kentucky. — L>fe, p. 95. 
 
 His next moves are seen in these extracts: 
 My address after first September will be Pennsylva- 
 nia Institute for the Blind. . . . November 10, 
 1854, the Kennebec Journal announced that the estab- 
 lishment had been "sold to Messrs. Joseph Baker and 
 J. G. Blaine, who would thereafter conduct its edito- 
 rial and business affairs.— Life, pp. 97, 100. 
 
 In the midst of politics as this extract shows: 
 I think the nomination the very best that could have 
 been made in every way, and I have no more doubt of 
 the election of the ticket than I have that Maine will 
 be carried by the Republicans. Governor Morrill and 
 myself worked hard for Lincoln from the time we 
 reached Chicago, and you may depend we feel no little 
 gratification at the result. . . .—Life, p. 129. 
 
 In 1860 he writes to Geo. H. Andrews as fol- 
 lows, declining to stand as a candidate for Con- 
 gress; in 1862, however, he was nominated, and 
 he accepts, in the words quoted below: 
 
 My dear Sir:— Your kind and friendly favor of the 
 2?>d is before me. The tender of your support for the 
 honorable post of representative in Congress is exceed- 
 ingly gratifying and flattering to me, and proves that 
 I have not reckoned amiss in counting you among my 
 mo3t earnest friends. It is proper, however, to advise 
 vou that I am not a candidate for that position. It 
 may possibly be known to you that Ex-Governor Morrill 
 desires the nomination, and I should consider it both 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 221 
 
 ungenerous and unjust for me to allow my name to be 
 used against him. He has done much and sacrificed 
 much for the Republican party in the day of its trial 
 and its need, and the opportunity seems now to be pre- 
 sented for suitably and cordially recognizing his worth 
 and his services. You can readily see how unbecoming 
 it would be in a man of my years to contest the nomi- 
 nation with him, even if I personally desired to do so. 
 Its effect could only be to divide the hitherto harmon- 
 ious ranks of the Republicans of Kennebec. 
 
 I shall therefore most cheerfully support Governor 
 Morrill for the nomination, and shall urge all my 
 friends to do the same. . . . 
 
 In this accepting speech [1862] he announced as his 
 platform — Abraham Lincoln. " If I am called to a seat 
 in Congress, I shall go there with a determination to 
 stand heartily and unreservedly by the administration 
 of Abraham Lincoln. In the success of that adminis- 
 tration, under the good providence of God, rests, I sol- 
 emnly believe, the fate of the American Union. If we 
 cannot subdue the rebellion through the Agency of the 
 administration, there is no other power given under 
 Heaven among men to which w r e can appeal. Hence 
 I repeat that I shall conceive it to be my duty, as your 
 representative, to be the unswerving adherent of the 
 Policy and measures which the President in his wisdom 
 may adopt. The case is one, in the present exigency, 
 where men loyal to the Union cannot divide. The 
 President is Commander-in-Chief of our land and naval 
 forces, and while he may be counselled he must not be 
 opposed." 
 
 On the great question which had already become not 
 slavery, but emancipation, he spoke w T ith veiled, but 
 not vague voice: "The great object with us all is tv 
 subdue the rebellion speedily, effectually, finally. In 
 our march to that end we must crush all intervening 
 obstacles. If slavery, or any other "institution," 
 stands in the waj~, it must be removed. Perish all 
 things else, the national life must be saved. My indi- 
 vidual convictions of what may be needful are perhaps 
 in advance of those entertained by some, and less rad- 
 ical than those conscientiously held by others. Whether 
 they are the one or the other, however, I do not wish 
 
222 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 to see an attempt made to carry them out until it can 
 be done by an administration sustained by the resistless 
 energy of the loyal masses. I think, myself, those 
 masses are rapidly adopting the idea that to smite the 
 rebellion its malignant cause must be smitten." — Life, 
 pp. 137, 13S. 
 
 His views in regard to the future taxation 
 problems of the country are foreshadowed in 
 this extract: 
 
 In March, 1865, defending an amendment of the 
 Constitution, which should strike out the clause that 
 forbids the taxing of exports, in a speech, which caused 
 an extraordinary agitation throughout the country, he 
 had declared that in the future of our country "the 
 great task and test of statesmanship will be in the ad- 
 ministration of our finances and the wise distribution of 
 the burdens of taxation. . . . An immense amount of 
 money will be required to meet the interest of our Na- 
 tional debt, to maintain our army and navy— even on a 
 peace foundation, and to defray the ordinary expenses of 
 civil government. The revenue for these objects may 
 be raised so injudiciously as to cripple and embarrass 
 the commercial and industrial interests of the whole 
 country; or on the other hand, the requisite tax may 
 be so equitably distributed and so skilfuly assessed 
 that the burden will be inappreciable to the public. 
 Whoever, as Secretary of the Treasury, shall accom- 
 plish the latter and avoid the former result, must be 
 armed with a plentitude of power in the premises. 
 He must have open to him the three great avenues of 
 taxation— the tariff, the excise system and the duties 
 on exports; and must be empowered to use each in its 
 apjjropriate place by Congressional legislation. At 
 present, only two of these modes of taxation are avail- 
 able and the absence of the third takes from the gen- 
 eral government half the regulation of trade. It is 
 for Congress to say whether the people shall have an 
 opportunity to change the organic law in this import- 
 ant respect, or whether with a blind disregard of the 
 future we shall rush forward, reckless of the financial 
 disasters that may result from a fail are uo do our duty 
 here." . . Life, pp. 195, 196. 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 323 
 
 In regard to a bill to prevent the appoint- 
 ment of sons of southern men who had been in 
 rebellion, he said: 
 
 . . . I differ entirely with the Committee. I do 
 not believe in punishing children in the rebel states. 
 When this war began the persons eligible to be ap- 
 pointed to West Point were nine, ten or eleven years 
 of age, and I do not propose to punish them for the 
 faults of their fathers. ... I am opposed to keep- 
 ing up this imaginary line. I should think the gentle- 
 man from Pennsylvania would see— if I had not a great 
 respect for him, I would say — the absurdity of such a 
 notion. —Life, p. 200. 
 
 Again, in 1869-70, we see something of his 
 political views in a debate over the appropria- 
 tion bill. He said, in part: 
 
 It will be observed that the total amount appro- 
 priated by the bill is 143,199,500. ... I desire 
 for myself, to say now, as I said then, that it is my 
 conviction that the army ought to be reduced. I had 
 the honor to introduce last year a provision in the 
 Army Appropriation Bill for the reduction of the army, 
 which did not meet with the concurrence or approval 
 of the House. . . . Therefore, the Committee on 
 Appropriations have not this- year made any recom- 
 mendation touching that question. But in order to 
 preserve my own consistency, which is important to 
 me if not to other people, I hold now that instead of 
 sixty regiments, this Congress, or, if not, the very next, 
 ought to provide for the reduction of the army to 
 thirty regiments, or just one-half what it now is. 
 
 Genera] Grant, as General-in-Chief of the Army 
 during the past year, has done everything within the 
 existing law, and under the power that the law confers 
 upon him, to reduce the army. . . . — Life, p. 201. 
 
 January 16, 1S69, he writes: 
 
 You write very sensibly about the speakership. Do 
 not imagine that I am unduly excited about it, or that 
 I desire it with an intensity which leaves me unpre 
 pared for failure and its consequent disappointment 
 and chagrin. X have measured the whole matter 
 
221 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 calmly, logically, and philosophically. I mean to win 
 if 1 can fairly and honorably. If I cannot, there's the 
 end. But if successful, I shall not have the ^elf -re- 
 proach of having done one unworthy act to secure the 
 place; and if unsuccessful, the same consciousness will 
 be my compensating and consoling fact. 
 
 Again, January 4, 1871, he says: 
 
 I have been round to the White House since dinner 
 to call on the President. He sent for me and we had a 
 frank chat on San Domingo. I will support the reso- 
 lution of inquiry, but am against the final acquisition. 
 
 In an address before the Northern Wisconsin 
 Agricultural Society, in speaking of public and 
 priva'e debts, he said in part: 
 
 Debts have originated . . . not to promote the ends 
 of peace, not to develop agricultural or the mechanic 
 arts, not to improve harbors and the navigation of rivers, 
 not to found institutions of learning, or of charity, or 
 of mercy, not to elevate the standard of culture among 
 the masses, not for any or all of these laudable objects, 
 but for the waste, the cruelty, the untold agonies of 
 war. The vast mas3 of this prodigious sum-total not 
 only went for war, but for wars of ambition and con- 
 quest, in which the fate of reigning dynasties was the 
 stake, and not the well-being of the people or even the 
 aggrandizement of the nation itself in the higher and 
 better sense. . . . 
 
 But in regard to the national debt, whatever vain 
 regrets we may indulge over the loss of so much treas- 
 ure and the fearful sacrifice of that which is beyond 
 earthly price, we have this to console,— that the war 
 which gave rise to it wa? unavoidable, apparently fore- 
 ran as part of the great experience of bitterness and 
 of blood through which it was our destiny as a nation 
 to pass, and that out of its sorrowful depths, we have 
 emerged a regenerated people, doing justice to a 
 race long oppressed, educated ourselves to higher 
 standards of liberty and of law, and having our fee; 
 hence. orth shod with the preparation of the Gospel of 
 Peace. —Life, p. 312. 
 
 Pol itics again , 1 877 : 
 
 , , . I (]() not believe a new departure is called 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 225 
 
 for. To the common mind, unbiased and unpreju- 
 diced, no difficulty presents itself under the constitu- 
 tional provision. By that I would stand, and declare 
 Hayes elected, and inaugurate him, and if the Demo- 
 crats wish to appeal to the courts, let them do so, and 
 we will quietly abide their decision. The calling in 
 members of the court to sit with coordinate branches 
 of the government upon questions which may be pre- 
 sented to them to decide judicially is, to say the least, 
 questionable, end to my mind unconstitutional. — Life, 
 pp. 405, 406. 
 
 The view taken by Blaine in regard to with- 
 drawing the troops from Louisiana, in 1877, 
 may be seen in this extract: 
 
 The electoral commission decided that the Louisiana 
 returning board was a legal and constitutional body 
 competent to do what it did. What it did do was to 
 declare who were the presidential electors of that 
 State; it did also declare who were the legislature; 
 and the Legislature, performing a mere ministerial 
 duty, declared who was the governor; and I stand here, 
 if I stand alone, to say that the honor and the credit and 
 the faith of the Republican party, in so far as the elec- 
 tion of Hayes and Wheeler is concerned, are as indis- 
 solubly united in maintaining the rightfulness of the 
 return of that body as the illustrious House of Han- 
 over that sits on the throne of England to-day is 
 in maintaining the rightfulness of the Revolution of 
 1688. Discredit Packard and you discredit Hayes. 
 Hold that Packard is not the legal governor of Louisi- 
 ana, and President Hayes ha3 no title, and the hon- 
 ored vice-president, who presides over our delibera- 
 tions, has no title to his chair. The Legislature, the 
 governor, and the presidential electors of Louisiana, all 
 derive their legality and their right to act from the 
 same source and the same count, and if the one is dis- 
 credited, the other is discredited. 
 
 I know that there has been a great deal said here 
 and there, in the corridors of the capitol, around and 
 about, in by-places and high-places, of late, that some 
 arrangements had been made by which Packard was 
 not to be recognized and upheld. I want to know who 
 had the authority to make any such arrangements I 
 
220 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 deny it. I deny it without being authorized to speak 
 for the administration that now exists. But I deny it 
 on the simple broad ground that it is an impossibility. 
 . . . I deny it on the broad ground that President 
 Hayes possesses character, common-sense, self-respect 
 patriotism, all of which he has in high measure. I 
 deny it on all the grounds that can influence human ac- 
 tion, on all the grounds on which men can be held to 
 personal and political and official responsibility. I 
 deny it for him, and I shall find myself grievously dis- 
 appointed, wounded and mutilated if my denial is not 
 vindicated in the policy of the administration. But 
 whether it be vindicated, or wheter it be not, I care 
 not. It is not the duty of a Senator to inquire what 
 the policy of an administration may be, but what it 
 ought to be; and I hope that a Republican Senate will 
 say that on this point there shall be no authority in 
 this land large enough or adventurous enough to com- 
 promise the honor of the national administration or 
 the good name of the great Republican party that 
 called that administration into existence.— Proceedings 
 Senate, March 6, 1S77. 
 
 In connection with the exclusion -of the Chi- 
 nese from the United States, Blaine said: 
 
 . . . We have on this day to choose whether we 
 shall have for the Pacific Coast the civilization of 
 Christ or the civilization of Confucius. 
 
 The allegation that the exclusion of the Chinese is 
 inhumane and unchristian need not be considered in 
 presence of the fact that their admission to the coun- 
 try provokes conflict which the laws are unable to 
 restrain. 
 
 The wealthy classes in a republic where suffrage is 
 universal cannot safely legislate for cheap labor. 
 
 Nowhere on earth has free labor been brought in 
 competition with any form of servile labor in which 
 the free labor did not come down to the level of the 
 servile labor. . . . The lower strata pull down the 
 upper. The upper never elevate the lower. 
 
 I feel that I am pleading the cause of the free Amer- 
 ican laborer, and of his children, and of his children's 
 Children, the cause of "the house against the hovel, of 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 227 
 
 the comfort of the freeman against the squalor of the 
 slave. . . . Life, p. 450. 
 
 Do we see the politician or the statesman in 
 the following extract? 
 
 I received your friendly letter with much pleasure. 
 Let me say in reply, that the course of yourself and 
 other Irish voters is one of the most extraordinary an- 
 omalies in our political history. Never, probably, since 
 the execution of Robert Emmett, has the feeling of 
 Irishmen, the world over been so bitter against Eng- 
 land and Englishmen as it is at this hour; and yet the 
 great mass of the Irish voters in the United States will 
 on Tuesday next, vote precisely as Englishmen would 
 have them vote— for the interests of England. 
 
 Having seen Ireland reduced to misery and driven to 
 despair by what they regard as the unjust policy of 
 England, the Irishmen of America use their suffrage as 
 though they were the agents and servants of the Eng- 
 lish Tories. The Free-traders of England desire noth- 
 ing so much as the defeat of Garfield and the election 
 of Hancock. They wish to break down the protective 
 tariff and cripple our manufacturers, and nine-tenths 
 of the Irish voters in this country respond with alac- 
 rity, " Yes, we will do your bidding and vote to please 
 you, even though it reduce our own wages and take 
 the bread from the mouths of our children." 
 
 There are many able men and many clever writers 
 among the Irish in America, but I have never met any 
 one of them able enough or clever enough to explain 
 this anomaly on any basis of logic and good sense. 
 
 I am glad to see from your esteemed favor that the 
 subject is beginning to trouble you. The more you 
 think of it the more you will be troubled, I am sure. 
 And you will be driven finally to the conclusion that 
 the prosperity of the Irish in this country depends as 
 largely as that of any other class upon the maintenance 
 of the financial and industrial policy represented by the 
 Republican party. —Letter in "Bangor Whig and Cour- 
 ier," October 29, 1880. 
 
 Blaine writes to Garfield, after the election 
 of the latter to the presidency, as follows, De- 
 
223 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 cember 10, 1S80; and following dates, till Feb- 
 ruary 16, 1881: 
 
 But the Grant forces were never more busy than at 
 this hour. . . Of course it would not be wise to 
 make war on them. Indeed, that would be folly. 
 They must not be knocked down with bludgeons: they 
 must have their throats cut with a feather. . . The 
 Republican party of this country is divided into three 
 sections. First, the great body of the North, with 
 Congressional representation and electoral strength 
 behind it, is with the section which for convenience of 
 designation I will call the Blaine section,— I mean the 
 strength behind me in two national conventions. . . 
 
 The secoi d section is the Grant section, taking all 
 the South practically, with the machine in New York, 
 Pennsylvania, and Illinois— and having the aim of rule 
 or ruin leaders. . . I think I am not wrong in say- 
 ing that this section contains all the desperate bad 
 men of the party, bent on lo<>t and booty, and ready for 
 any Mexican invasion or Caribbean annexation and 
 looking to excitements and fillibustering and possibly 
 to a Spanish war as legitimate means of continuing po- 
 etical power for a cli que. These men are to be handled 
 with skill, always remembering that they are harmless 
 when out of power, and desperate when in possession 
 of it. 
 
 The third section is the Reformers by profession, the 
 "unco good." They are to be treated with respect, but 
 they are the worst possible political advisers— upstarts, 
 conceited, foolish, vain, without knowledge of meas- 
 ures, ignorant of men, shouting a shibboleth which 
 represents nothing of practical reform that you are not 
 a thousand times pledged to. They are noisy, but not 
 numerous, pharisaical but not practical, ambitious but 
 not wise, pretentious but not powerful! They can be 
 easily dealt with, and can be hitched, to your adminis- 
 tration with ease. I could handle them myself with- 
 out trouble. You can do it more easily still. 
 
 In this threefold division of the Republican party, 
 your true friends will be found on the first. . 
 
 In the sscond section will be found all the men who 
 have an ulterior purpose, who accept your administra- 
 tion because they cannot help it, and are looking as 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 229 
 
 longingly to a restoration of Grant as the cavaliers of 
 England, in the time of the Protector, looked for a re- 
 turn of the Stuarts. 
 
 The third section can be made to co-operabe harmon- 
 iously with the first, but never with the second,— you 
 can see that at a glance. 
 
 I have written at immoderate and immodest length : 
 my pen ran away from me. . . 
 
 In accepting this important post I shall give all that 
 I am and all that I can hope to be freely and joyfully 
 to your service. You need no pledge of my loyalty 
 both in heart and act. I should be false to myself did 
 I not prove true to the great trust you confide to me 
 and to your own personal and political fortunes in the 
 present and in the future. 
 
 Your administration must be made brilliantly suc- 
 cessful and strong in the confidence and pride of the 
 people; not obviously directing its energies to re-elec 
 tion, but compelling that result by the logic of events 
 and by the imperious necessities of the situation. . . 
 
 It is this fact which has led me to the momentous 
 conclusion embodied in this letter,— for however much 
 I might admire you as a statesmen, I would not enter 
 your Cabinet if I did not believe in you as a man and 
 love you as a friend. 
 
 It would be personally unpleasant and politically 
 disastrous to have him [Conkling] in Cabinet associa- 
 tion. ... No Cabinet could get along with him, 
 nor could the President himself. ... He would 
 insult everybody having business with his Department 
 whom he did not happen to like, and he really happens 
 to dislike about ninety-nine in every hundred of his 
 acquaintances. . . . Conkling is bound to go with 
 you anyway if your treatment of him be decent and 
 honorable, and you will never deal otherwise with 
 him. . . . You can always trust a man not to saw 
 off the limb of a tree when he is on the other end. 
 
 . I want you to remember that you are elected 
 President of the United States, that the power of the 
 Executive is lodged in your hmds, and that you have 
 all the power and rights and are bound to assert and 
 maintain all the dignity and independence of the great 
 office. All I fear is that your instinctive generosity 
 
230 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 will carry you beyond the limits of fair justice to 
 yourself, and that you will err on that side. I say this 
 because I do not want you to trust the great patronage 
 departments where there is the remotest danger of 
 their being used adversely to your personal interests. 
 . I disclaim all and every effort to force or at- 
 tempt to force anybody on you, but I am awfully anx- 
 ious that you shall have a true friend in the treasury. 
 . . . I think a Western man at the head of the 
 treasury is a sine qua non for your success. ... 1 
 beg you to keep your thoughts in that direction. 
 . I assume that you will give one place to New Eng- 
 land, one place to New York, one place to Pennsyl- 
 vania, and one to the South. This leaves you only 
 three for the great West, extending from the base of 
 the Alleghanies to the foot-hills of the Rocky Moun- 
 tains. . . . The last two Southern Cabinet mem- 
 bers came from Tennessee. Would it not be better to 
 seek a representative from another State? The more I 
 turn the subject over "upside down and t'other end 
 to," the more I come to the conclusion that Wayne 
 MacVeagh on the whole is the stronghold for Pennsyl- 
 vania and for the Reformers. There is no other Cabi- 
 net stone in your hand that will kill so many political 
 dogs at one throw. I guess you'd better fire it. — Life, 
 pp. 490, 491, 494, 497, 501, 502. 
 
 Expansion, in connection with Cuba, Hawaii, 
 etc. 
 
 The policy of this country with regard to the Pacific 
 is the natural complement to its Atlantic policy. The 
 history of our European relations for fity years shows 
 the jealous concern with which the United States has 
 guarded its control of the coast from foreign interfer- 
 ence. Its attitude toward Cuba is in point. That rich 
 island, the key to the Gulf of Mexico, is, though in 
 the hands of Spain, a part of the American commer- 
 cial system. My predecessor, Mr. Secretary Everett, 
 showed that, without forcing or even coveting posses- 
 sion i)f the island, its condition was essentially an 
 American question ; that if ever ceasing to be Spanish, 
 Cuba must necessarily become American, and not fall 
 under any other European domination, and that the 
 ceaseless movement of segregation of American inter- 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 231 
 
 ests from European control, and unification in a 
 broader American sphere of independent life, could 
 not and should not be checked. The material posses- 
 sion of Hawaii is not desired by the United States any 
 mere than was that of Cuba. But under no circum- 
 stances can the United States permit any change in 
 the territorial control of either which would cut it 
 adrift from the American system, whereto they both 
 indispensably belong, by the operation of natural laws, 
 and must belong by the operation of political necessity. 
 —Life, pp. 511, 512. 
 
 At the close of his campaign for the presi- 
 dency in 1884, he said: 
 
 I am not speaking for myself. No man ever met 
 with a misfortune in being defeated for the presidency, 
 while men have met great misfortunes in being elected 
 to it- . . . I am pleading the cause of the Amer- 
 ican people. I am pleading the cause of the American 
 farmer, the American manufacturer, the American 
 mechanic, and the American laborer against the world. 
 I am reproached by some excellent people for appear- 
 ing before these multitudes of my countrymen upon 
 the ground that it is inconsistent with the dignity of 
 the office for which I am named. I do not feel it to be 
 so. I know no reason why I should not face the Amer- 
 ican people ... I close this canvass, Mr. Chair- 
 man, with a profound conviction that, intelligent as 
 the voters of the United States are, accustomed as they 
 are to give heed to the weight and tendency of the 
 questions to be decided, the people of the United 
 States have not yet measured, nor, as I believe, yet 
 fully comprehended, what it would mean to transfer 
 this government to the absolute control of the South- 
 ern States of this Union. ... I here now repeat, 
 that to transfer the political power of the country to 
 the Democratic party at this time would by no means 
 be one of those ordinary transfers of the government 
 from on 3 party to another which the gray-haired men 
 within my view witnessed more than once in the last 
 generation. It would not be merely an instance of 
 one party going out and another coming in It would 
 be rather a reversal and overturning of the industrial 
 systems of the government, of the financial systems of 
 
232 AMERICAN iiistm: studies. 
 
 the government; in short, a transfer of the sovereignty 
 of the country, of far greater consequence than the 
 ordinary changes of dynasty which occur in European 
 governments of a different form from ours.— Life, pp. 
 579, 583. 
 
 While secretary of state under President Har- 
 rison, he had occasion to discuss the question of 
 the seal in the Behring Sea. In part he said: 
 
 Whence did the ships of Canada derive the right to 
 do. in 1886, that which they refrained from doing for 
 nearly ninety years. ? 
 
 Upon what grounds did Her Majesty's government 
 defend, in the year 1886 a course of conduct in the 
 Behring Sea which had been carefully avoided ever 
 since the discovery of that sea? 
 
 By what reasoning did Her Majesty's government 
 conclude that an act may be committed with impunity 
 against the rights of the United States which had 
 never been attempted against the same rights, when 
 held by the Russian Empire. . . . 
 
 To the President he wrote: 
 
 If we get up a war-cry and send naval vessels to 
 Behring Sea it will re-elect Lord Salisbury. England 
 always sustains an administration with the prospect of 
 war pending. Lord Salisbury would dissolve Parlia- 
 ment instantly if we made a demonstration of war. 
 On the other side I am not sure - or rather I am sure — 
 that war would prove of no advantage to you. New 
 York and Massachusetts are steadily against war with 
 England unless the last point of honor requires it. 
 Again, I think you will bitterly disappoint Lord Salis- 
 bury by keeping quiet. We would have all the fuss 
 and there would be no war after all. Not a man in a 
 million believes we should ultimately have war.— Life, 
 pp. 667, 671. 
 
 To the delegates to the Pan-American con- 
 gress, in opening the session, he said, in part: 
 
 Gentlemen of the International American Confer- 
 ence: Speaking for the Government of the United 
 States, I bid you welcome to this Capital Speak ng 
 for the people of the United States, I bid you welcome 
 to every section and to every State of the Union. You 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 233 
 
 come in response to an invitation extended by the 
 President on the special authorization of Congress. 
 Your presence here is no ordinary event. It signifies 
 much to the people of all America to-day. It ma} 7 sig- 
 nify far more in the days to come. No Conference of 
 nations ha* ever assembled to consider the welfare of 
 territorial possessions so vast and to contemplate the 
 possibilities of a future so great and so inspiring. . 
 
 The aggregate territorial extent of the nations here 
 represented falls but little short of 12,000, 00 of square 
 miles— more than three times the area of all Europe, 
 and but little less than one-fourth part of the globe; 
 while in respect to the power of producing the articles 
 which are essential to human life, and those which 
 minister to life's luxury, they constitute even a larger 
 proportion of the entire world. Those great pos3es- 
 sions to-day have an aggregate population approaching 
 120,000,000, but if peopled as densely as the average of 
 Europe, the total number would exceed 1,000,000,000. 
 
 The delegates I am addressing can do much to es- 
 tablish permanent relations of confidence, respect, and 
 friendship between the nations which they represent. 
 They can show to the world an honorable, peaceful 
 conference of eighteen independent American Powers, 
 in which all shall meet together on terms of absolute 
 equality; a conference in which there can be no at- 
 tempt to coerce a single delegate against his own con- 
 ception of the interest of his nation; a conference 
 which will permit no secret understanding on any sub- 
 ject, but will frankly publish to the world all its con- 
 clusions; a conference which will tolerate no spirit of 
 conquest, but will aim to cultivate an American sym- 
 pathy as broad as both continents. . . . 
 
 We believe that hearty co-operation, based on hearty 
 confidence, will save all American states from the bur- 
 dens and evils which have long and cruelly afflicted the 
 older nations of the world. 
 
 We believe that a spirit of justice, of common and 
 equal interest between the American states, will leave 
 no room for an artificial balance of power like unto 
 that which has led to wars abroad and drenched Europe 
 in blood. 
 
234 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 We believe that friendship, avowed with candor and 
 maintained witk good faith, will remove from Amer- 
 ican states the necessity of guarding boundary lines 
 between themselves with fortifications and military 
 force. 
 
 We believe that standing armies, beyond those which 
 are needful for public order and the safety of internal 
 administration, should be unknown on both the Amer- 
 ican continents. 
 
 We believe that friendship and not force, the spirit 
 of just law and not the violence of the mob, should 
 be the recognized rule of administration between 
 American nations and in American nations. . . . 
 
 In closing he said: 
 
 The extent and value of all that has been worthily 
 achieved by yonr Conference cannot be measured to- 
 day. We stand too near it. Time will define and 
 heighten the estimate of your work; experience will 
 confirm our present faith; final results will be your 
 vindication and your triumph. 
 
 If, in this closing hour, the Conference had but one 
 deed to celebrate, we should dare call the world's at- 
 tention to the deliberate, confident, solemn dedication 
 of two great Continents to Peace and to the prosperity 
 which has Peace for its foundation. We hold up this 
 new Magna Charta, which abolishes war and substi- 
 tutes Arbitration between the American Republics, as 
 the first and great fruit of the International American 
 Conference. That noblest of Americans, the aged 
 poet and philanthropist Whittier, is the first to send 
 his salutation and his benediction, declaring: "If in 
 the spirit of peace the American Conference agrees 
 upon a rule of Arbitration which shall make war in 
 this hemisphere well-nigh impossible, its sessions will 
 prove one of the most important events in the history 
 of the world.— Life, pp. 677, 678, 679, 681. 
 
 Blaine's views in regard to his plan of reci- 
 procity, and the relation of the McKinley bill 
 of 1890 to it, may be seen in these extracts: 
 
 Fifteen of the seventeen republics with which we 
 have been in conference have indicated, by the votes 
 of their representatives in the International American 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 235 
 
 Conference, and by other methods which it is not nec- 
 essary to define, their desire to enter upon reciprocal 
 commercial relations with the United States; the re- 
 maining two express equal willingness, could they be 
 assured that their advances would be favorably con- 
 sidered. 
 
 To escape the delay and uncertainty of treaties, it 
 has been suggested that a practicable and prompt mode 
 of testing the question was to submit an amendment to 
 the pending tariff bill, authorizing the President to de- 
 clare the ports of the United States free to all the pro- 
 ducts of any nation of the American hemisphere upon 
 which no export duties are imposed, whenever and so 
 long as such nation shall admit to its ports free of all 
 national, provincial (State), municipal, and other taxes 
 our flour, cornmeal, and other bread-stuff, preserved 
 meats, fish, vegetables, and fruits, cotton-seed oil, rice, 
 and other provisions, including all articles of food, 
 lumber, furniture and other articles of wood, agricul- 
 tural implements and machinery, mining and mechan- 
 ical machinery, structural steel and iron, steel rails, 
 locomotives, railway cars and supplies, street cars, and 
 refined petroleum. I mention these particular articles 
 because they have been most frequently referred to as 
 those with which a valuable exchange could be readily 
 effected. The list could no doubt be profitably enlarged 
 by a careful investigation of the needs and advantages 
 of both the home and foreign markets. . . 
 
 I do not doubt that in many respects the tariff bill 
 pending in the Senate is a just measure, and that most 
 of its provisions are in accordance with the wise policy 
 of protection. But there is not a section nor a line in 
 the entire bill that will open a market for another 
 bushel of wheat or another barrel of pork. If sugar is 
 now placed on the free list without exacting important 
 trade concessions in return, we shall close the door for 
 a profitable reciprocity against ourselves. I think you 
 will find some valuable hints on this subject in the 
 President's brief message of June 19, with as much 
 practical wisdom as was ever stated in so short a space. 
 Our foreign markets for breadstuffs grows narrower. 
 Great Britain is exerting every nerve to secure her 
 bread supplies from India, and the rapid expansion of 
 the wheat area in Russia gives us a powerful compet- 
 16 
 
236 AMERICAN niSTORY STUDIES. 
 
 itor in the markets of Europe. It becomes us therefore 
 to use every opportunity for the extension of our mar- 
 ket on both of the American continents. With nearly 
 one hundred million dollars' worth of sugar seeking 
 our market every year, we shall prove ourselves most 
 unskilled legislators if we do not secure a large field 
 for the sale and consumption of our breadstuffs and 
 provisions. The late conference of American republics 
 proved the existence of a common desire for closer re- 
 lations. Our Congress should take up the work where 
 the International Conference left it. Our field of com- 
 mercial development and progress lies south of us. — 
 Life, pp. 684, 686, 687. 
 
 Again, regarding expansion, into the islands 
 of the sea: 
 
 In regard to the purchase of the Danish colonies, St. 
 George and St. Lucia, my prepossessions are all against 
 it until we are by fate in possession of the larger West 
 Indies. They are very small, of no great commercial 
 value, and in case of war would require us to defend 
 them, and to defend them at a great cost. At the same 
 time they lack strategic value. They are destined to 
 become ours, but among the last of the West Indies 
 that will be taken. . . . 
 
 I think there are only three places that are of value 
 enough to bo caken that are not continental. One is 
 Hawaii, and the others are Cuba and Porto Rico Cuba 
 and Porto Rico are not imminent, and will not be for 
 a generation. Hawaii may come up for decision at any 
 unexpected hour, and I hope we shall be prepared to 
 decide it in the affirmative. — Life, p. 692. 
 
 Concerning reciprocity with Canada Septem- 
 ber 23, 1891, Blaine wrote to President Har- 
 rison : 
 
 It is of the highest possible importance in my view 
 that there be no treaty of reciprocity (with Canada,). 
 
 I think it would be one of the worst things among 
 the farmers in a political point of view we could do, 
 and we cannot afford to lose a vote now until after the 
 presidential election. They have got it into their 
 heads that we did something for them in the McKinley 
 
JAMES G. BLAINE. 237 
 
 tariff, and giving away natural products by reciprocity 
 would end the whole matter. It would be considered 
 a betrayal of the agricultural interests. The fact is we 
 do not want any intercourse with Canada except 
 through the medium of a tariff, and she will find that 
 she has a hard row to hoe and will ultimately. I believe, 
 seek admission to the Union. 
 
 The poor showing that Canada made in the late cen- 
 sus was a revelation to the Canadians themselves and 
 if we do not grant them reciprocity they will make a 
 poorer showing ten years hence. We are tending to 
 have the great majority of the farmers with us. Let 
 us encourage them by every means we can use and not 
 discourage them by anything. We will break the al- 
 liance before six months if we steadily maintain this 
 policy.— Life, pp. 693, 69 k. 
 
 QUESTIONS 
 
 (1) Blaine's characteristics as a young man. (2) 
 What was his standing as a student? (3) What was 
 his first occupation? (4) Trace his changes of resi- 
 dence. (5) Did he have early political aspirations? (6) 
 To what parties did he belong? (7) What did he think 
 of military men as presidential candidates? (8j What 
 was his first national political work? (9) When did he 
 begin his congressional career? (10) How did he stand 
 toward Lincoln's administration? 
 
 (1) What amendment in regard to finances did he 
 wish to have made to the constitution? (2) What pre- 
 diction did he make in regard to governmental reven- 
 ues? (3) What his views in regard to a standing army? 
 (4) Outline his view 3 regarding the questions that arose 
 in connection with the election of 1876. 
 
 (1) What do you think of his argument to the Irish 
 voters? (2) Was his letter to Garfield in 1881 that of a 
 skilled politician? (3) Dees history justify his posi- 
 tions? (4) Is it an egotistical letter? (5) What his per- 
 sonal feelings toward Conkling? (6) What advice does 
 he give Garfield? (7) Was it wise? (8) Bring together 
 all he said on expansion. (9) What conclusion in re- 
 gard to his position on the subject? What position did 
 he take in regard to a presidential candidate taking 
 part in a campaign ? 
 
 (1) Outline Blaine's position and arguments in re- 
 gard to tb.s seal fisheries and the Behring Sea discussion. 
 (2) What; plans did he have in regard to our relations 
 to the South American countries? (3) What did he 
 think of the tariff bill of 1890? (4) What relations in 
 his judgment should prevail between Canada and the 
 United States. 
 
238 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. 
 
 (1) Compare Blaine and Clay. (2) Note changes in 
 character of questions discussed by Adams, for exam- 
 ple, and Blaine. 1 3) Compare the two men. (4) 
 Judge by the extracts given, what man do you con- 
 sider the greatest? (5) Which do you admire most? 
 (6) Which was the greatest orator? (7i Which the 
 ablest statesman? (8) Which the purest statesman? 
 
CHEONOLOGY 
 
 1492. Discovery of America. 
 
 1497. The Cabots on the coast of North America. 
 
 1513. Florida discovered. The Pacific Ocean first 
 
 seen. 
 1519-22. First circumnavigation of the world. 
 1519-21. The Mississippi discovered by De Soto. 
 1565. Florida settled by Spaniards. 
 1584-87. Sir Walter Raleigh's attempt at coloniza- 
 tion. 
 
 1607. Jamestown settled. Captain John Smith. 
 
 1608. Quebec founded by French. 
 
 1609. Hudson river discovered by Dutch. 
 
 1619. House of Burgesses. Slaves introduced into 
 
 Virginia. 
 
 1620. Pilgrims land at Plvmouth. 
 1630. Boston founded. 
 
 1634. Maryland settled. Religious toleration. 
 1636. Harvard college founded. Roger Williams 
 settles Rhode Island. Pequod war. 
 
 1638. New Haven founded; Swedes settled Delaware. 
 
 1639. First written Constitution — "Fundamental Or- 
 
 ders" of Connecticut. 
 1643. New England Confederacy. 
 1656-61. Persecution of Quakers in Massachusetts. 
 
 1664. New York captured by the English. 
 
 1665. English settle New Jersey. 
 
 1675. King Philip's war. 
 
 1676. Bacon's rebellion. 
 
 1682. Pennsylvania founded by Penn. 
 
 1691. Massachusetts New Charter. Leisler exe- 
 
 cuted. 
 
 1692. William and Mary College founded. Witch- 
 
 craft delusion. 
 
 1701. Yale College founded. 
 
 1704. Boston News Letter— First American newspa- 
 per. 
 
 1718. New Orleans founded by the French. 
 
 1733. Oglethorpe founds Savannah, Ga. 
 
 1746. College of New Jersey, Princeton founded. 
 
 1749. University of Pennsylvania founded. 
 
 1754. Albany convention. 
 
 1754-63. French and Indian war. 
 
 1759. Wolfe takes Quebec. 
 
 1763. Peace of Paris; Canada gained by English. 
 Mason and Dixon's Line. 
 
240 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 1765. Stamp Act Congress; Patrick Henry's resolu- 
 
 tions; "Sons of Liberty." 
 
 1766. Repeal of Stamp Act; The Declaratory Act. 
 
 1767. Townshend Revenue Act; Dickinson's Farmer's 
 
 Letter:,. 
 
 1768. British Troops in Boston. 
 
 1770. Repeal Townshend Act. "Boston Massacre." 
 
 1771. Tryon's war in North Carolina. 
 
 1772. The "Gaspee" burned; Committees of Corres- 
 
 pondence in Massachusetts. 
 
 1773. Boston "Tea Party;" Intercolonial Commit- 
 
 tees of Correspondence. 
 
 1774. Boston Port Bill; Massachusetts Charter Bill; 
 
 Quartering Troops; Quebec Act; First Con- 
 tinental Congress. 
 
 1775. War begins; Lexington; Ticonderoga. Second 
 
 Continental Congress. Washington, Com- 
 mander-in-Chief; Bunker Hill. 
 
 1776. Declaration of Independence; Boston evacu- 
 
 ated; Americans defeated at New York and 
 in New Jersey; Trenton; "Common Sense" 
 by Thos. Paine. 
 
 1777. Surrender of Lurgoyne; Articles of Confedera- 
 
 tion sent to the States; "Valley Forge." 
 
 1778. France makes treaty with States. George 
 
 Rogers Clark in Illinois, etc. 
 
 1779. War in South. 
 
 1780. War in South; Arnold's treason; Andre; Gen. 
 
 Green. 
 
 1781. Cornwallis surrenders. Robert Morris head of 
 
 finances. Confederacy completed. Bank of 
 North America. 
 
 1783. Treaty of peace. 
 
 1784. First Ordinance for Northwest Territory. 
 
 1785. Maryland and Virginia Commissions meet. 
 
 1786. Annapolis Convention. 
 
 1787. Constitutional Convention. "Ordinance of 
 
 1787." 
 
 1788. Constitution ratified by ten states. 
 
 1789. Government under the new Constitution be- 
 
 gam; Washingtcn President. North Carolina 
 ratifies the Constitution. 
 
 1790. Rhode Island accepts the Constitution. 
 
 1791. Ten Amendments adopted. Bank chartered. 
 
 Parties formed. Kentucky a State. As- 
 sumption. 
 
 1792. Columbia river discovered. French Republic 
 
 established. Vermont a State. 
 
 1793. Genet and neutrality. Cotton gin. Fugitive 
 
 Slave Law. 
 
 1794. Whiskey Insurrection. Jay's Treaty. 
 
 1795. Excitement over Jay Treaty; Treaty with 
 
 Spain. 
 
CHRONOLOGY 241 
 
 1796. "Posts" delivered. Washington's Farewell Ad- 
 
 dress. Tennessee a State. 
 
 1797. John Adams President. 
 
 1798. X. Y. Z. affair; Alien Laws; Sedition Law; 
 
 Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. 
 
 1799. Kentucky Resolutions. Army Intrigue. Wash 
 
 ing'ton dies. 
 
 1800. Treaty with France. Washington City be- 
 
 comes the Capitol. Jefferson-Burr contest. 
 
 1801. Jefferson President. 
 
 1802. Ohio a State. 
 
 1803. Louisiana purchase. 
 
 1504. Lewis and Clark expedition. XII Amendment. 
 1805-6. The Burr Conspiracy. 
 
 1806. Orders in Council. Berlin Decree. 
 
 1807. "Chesapeake" and "Leopard." Embargo. 
 
 1505. Slave trade illegal. 
 
 1809. Non-Intercourse substituted for Embargo. 
 
 Madison President. 
 
 1810. "Macon Bill No. I." 
 
 1811. "Tippecanoe." 
 
 1812. W T ar declared. Louisiana a State. 
 
 1813. War; Perry's Victory. 
 
 1814. The Hartford Convention. Washington 
 
 burned. Treaty of Peace signed. 
 
 1815. January 4, the Hartford Convention ad- 
 
 journed. January 8, Jackson's victory at 
 New Orleans. Unitarian secession from Con- 
 gregational Church. 
 
 1816. Second National Bank chartered. Dallas' re- 
 
 port on manufactures. Tariff act passed; 
 generally regarded as the first protective 
 tariff. American "Colonization Society" 
 founded. Caucus system for nominating 
 presidential candidates breaking down. 
 National debt, $127,335,000. Calhoun's "bank 
 bonus bill" for internal improvements intro- 
 duced. Monroe elected President and Tomp- 
 kins Vice-President, by 183 electoral votes, 
 to 34 for King. Indiana admitted as a state. 
 
 1817. Monroe's tour through New England and the 
 
 West. All internal taxes repealed. Specie 
 payments resumed. The Seminole War in 
 Florida begins. Madison vetoes an internal 
 improvement bill. Mississippi admitted as 
 a state. The "Savannah" the first steamship 
 to cross the Atlantic. 
 1817-20. Old party names pass out of use. Local 
 issues take the place of national. Specula- 
 tion, followed by the first great crisis. 
 
 1818. Connecticut adopts a new constitution. Jack- 
 
 son invades Florida. Hangs Ambrister and 
 Arbuthnot; thus involves the United State* 
 
242 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 with England. Clay attacks Jackson in 
 Congress. Increase of tariff on iron. Treaty 
 with Great Britain. Fisheries, boundary, 
 Oregon and commercial questions provided 
 for. Illinois admitted as a state. 
 
 1819. Florida bought from Spain for $5,000,000. 
 
 Struggle over the admission of Missouri be- 
 gins. Arkansas organized as a Territory, 
 with slavery. The crisis of 1819-21 begins. 
 The National bank investigated. Specie pay- 
 ments again suspended, except in New Eng- 
 land. The Supreme Court in McCullough 
 vs. Maryland decides the National Bank law 
 constitutional. The famous Dartmouth Col- 
 lege case, and Webster's plea; held that 
 Charters are contracts. An act against the 
 slave trade. Alabama admitted as a state. 
 University of Virginia chartered. 
 
 1820. The slave trade declared piracy. Liberia 
 
 founded. The first (?) Missouri compromise. 
 In Louisiana territory slavery to be forbid- 
 den north of latitude 36° 30'. Missouri en- 
 abling act passed. A constitution to be 
 formed with or without slavery as its peo- 
 ple wished. Monroe re-elected President 
 and only one opposing vote. Maine admit- 
 ted as a state. Population, U. S. 9,633,822. 
 
 (1) Free States, 5,132,000; (2) Slave 
 States, 4,522,000. 
 Representatives in Congress: (1) Free 
 States, 133; (2) Slave States, 90. 
 
 1821. The second (?) Missouri compromise, Clay's. 
 
 Missouri admitted as a state. The Florida 
 treaty ratified by Spain. New York forms 
 a new constitution; extends suffrage. In- 
 trigues for presidency, in 1824, begin. 
 Crawford and Adams most prominent can- 
 didates. Jackon governor of Florida. 
 
 1822. Monroe vetoes the Cumberland road bill. 
 
 Jackson comes forward as a presidential 
 candidate. 
 1818-22. The independence of the Spanish-American 
 states recognized by the United States. 
 
 1823. The so-called Monroe doctrine set forth. The 
 
 "Holy Alliance" baffled in its American 
 plans. Monroe's letter against the internal 
 improvement plans and ideas of the times. 
 
 1824. The tariff rates increased; protection ex- 
 
 tended. The great Webster-Clay debate 
 over protection. The last Congressional cau- 
 cus to nominate presidential candidates. 
 Crawford nominated for President by the 
 caucus; Adams, Clay and Jackson by the 
 
CHRONOLOGY 243 
 
 state legislatures. Pennsylvania suggests a 
 national nominating convention. Not car- 
 ried out till 1831. Lafayette visits Amer- 
 ica. No choice by electors for president. 
 (1) Jackson, 99; (2) Adams, 84; (3) 
 Crawford, 41; (4) Clay, 37. 
 
 1825. In Congress Clay's followers support Adams. 
 
 (1) Adams, 13 states; (2) Jackson, 7 
 states; (3) Crawford, 4 states. 
 Cry of "bargain and sale" raised. University 
 of Virginia opened. Clay becomes Secretary 
 of State. Adams urges internal improve- 
 ments and a national university. The Erie 
 canal opened. Webster's "Bunker Hill" ora- 
 tion. The Panama Congress. Clay's "Hu- 
 man Freedom League" to oppose the "Holy 
 Alliance" proposed. 
 
 1826. Duel between Clay and Kandolph. Trouble 
 
 with Creek Indians in Georgia. July 4, Ad- 
 ams and Jefferson die. American Temper- 
 ance Society at Boston. 
 
 1827. Congress in opposition to President Adams. 
 
 Difficulties with England settled by Gallatin. 
 
 1828. Candidates for presidency nominated by state 
 
 legislatures and mass conventions. The 
 "tariff of abominations." Webster this year, 
 for the first time, supports protection. The 
 triumph of "the people" in the election of 
 Jackson. Anti-Mason excitement. The dis- 
 appearance of Morgan. South Carolina dis- 
 satisfied with the tariff law. 
 
 1829. Jackson's inauguration; popular demonstra- 
 
 tion. Jackson and Biddle begin the bank 
 struggle. The "Kitchen cabinet." The 
 "spoils system" introduced into national pol- 
 itics. The real beginning of railroads in the 
 United States. 
 
 1830. The Maysville road veto by Jackson. The 
 
 tariff bill modified; protection retained. 
 Webster-Hayne debate. Nullification doc- 
 trine set forth. B. & O. railroad opened. 
 Population 12,866,020. 
 
 1831. Jackson reorganizes his cabinet, and breaks 
 
 with Calhoun. The Seminole controversy. 
 The Nat Turner insurrection in Virginia. 
 Abolition societies organized. The first na- 
 tional nominating convention. Garrison be- 
 gins the "Liberator." 
 
 1832. The bank veto. Monopoly denounced. Jack- 
 
 son re-elected. Tariff act; again protection 
 sustained. The Anti-Masons enter national 
 politics. The first one-idea party. Nullifica- 
 tion ordinance by South Carolina. Jackson 
 
244 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 issues his proclamation against nullification. 
 Charles Carroll, the last of the signers of 
 the Declaration of Independence, dies. 
 
 1833. The "force bill". Clay's compromise tariff 
 
 bill. South Carolina withdraws her nulli- 
 fication act. The Webster-Calhoun debate. 
 Jackson at his zenith. October 1, "removal 
 of the deposits." Clay's land distribution 
 bill vetoed. National abolition society or- 
 ganized. 
 
 1834. "Censure" of the president by the senate. The 
 
 hard-money struggle; Benton. The Whig- 
 party formed and named. McCormick's 
 reaping machine patented. 
 
 1835. Mob spirit everywhere; especially against ab- 
 
 olitionists and catholics. National debt paid 
 off. The "loco-focos." Prudence Crandall's 
 school for colored girls closed. Struggle 
 over "incendiary matter" in the mails. In- 
 dians of Georgia removed to Indian Ter- 
 ritory. 
 
 1836. "Gag" resolutions in Congress against lecep- 
 
 tion of "abolition" petitions. J. Q. .Adams 
 begins his great struggle for the ''right of 
 petition." Bill for "distribution of the sur- 
 plus" $36,000,000, among the states. July 4, 
 death of Madison. Van Buren elected pres- 
 ident. Texas wins the victory of San Jac nto. 
 The "specie circular" issued. Arkansas ad- 
 mitted as a state. 
 
 1837. The "expunging resolutions" adopted. Texas 
 
 independence recognized. The United States 
 presses for a settlement of her "cliims" 
 against Mexico. The great crisis and panic, 
 speculation collapses. Van Buren for the 
 "independent" or "sub-treasury." E. P. 
 Lovejoy murdered. First proposal to annex 
 Texas. Michigan admitted as a State. 
 
 1838. Continued troubles on the Canadian frontier. 
 
 Smithsonian Institution founded. 
 
 1839. Trouble in organizing the House. The New 
 
 Jersey seats. The "Amistad" case. The 
 
 Daguerreotype first used in the United 
 
 States. 
 
 1835-42. Era of "isms." Fourierism, homoeopathy, 
 
 hydropathy, the Graham diet, phrenology, 
 
 etc. Transcendentalism, Emerson, Thor- 
 
 eau, Margaret Fuller, Hawthorne, etc. 
 
 1840. The "Tippecanoe and Tyler too" campaign. 
 
 Election of Harrison, on "hard cider and 
 log-cabin cr3 r ." Sub-treasury act passed. The 
 Liberty party first appears in a national con- 
 test. Population, 17,069,453. , ,_.... 
 
CHRONOLOGY 245 
 
 1830-40. A real American literature beginning to ap- 
 pear. Cheap newspapers, the Sun, 1833; 
 the Herald, 1835; the Tribune, 1841, etc. 
 
 1841. Utter collapse of the "Second National Bank" 
 
 and President Harrison's death. Sub-treas- 
 urv act repealed. Clay and Tyler in opposi- 
 tion. Tyler and his cabinet quarrel over 
 Tyler's bank vetoes. 
 
 1842. The Ashburton-Webster treaty. Protective 
 
 tariff law enacted. State debts repudiated. 
 Dickens visits America. The Dorr rebellion 
 in Rhode Island. Dr. Whitman travels on 
 horseback from Oregon to St. Louis. 
 
 1843. Webster resigns as Secretary of State. 
 
 1844 Treaty of Annexation with Texas, rejected by 
 the Senate. Clay defeated by Polk for pres- 
 ident. The telegraph first used, Baltimore 
 to Washington. The Democratic campaign 
 cry, "54o 40' or fight." 
 
 1845. Joint resolution for annexing Texas. Polk's 
 four great measures announced to Bancroft; 
 Tariff reduction, acquisition of California, 
 the independent or sub-treasury restored, 
 Oregon boundary settled; all accompl sheJ. 
 Florida admitted as a state. Texas admitted 
 as a state. 
 
 1S46. The independent treasury act passed. The Ore- 
 gon boundary line settled. A treaty with 
 Great Britain. California and New Mexico 
 seized. The so-called free-trade tariff passed. 
 The "Wilmot-Proviso" proposed. Howe in- 
 vents the sewing machine. Iowa admitted 
 as a state. 
 
 1847. Victories over Mexico. Renown of Taylor and 
 
 Scott. Lincoln first appears in national pol- 
 itics. Douglas' first term in the Senate. 
 
 1848. Taylor elected over Cass. The "Free-Soil" 
 
 movement; Van Buren its candidate. Treaty 
 of Guadaloupe Hidalgo. February 23, J. Q. 
 Adams dies. Calhoun asserts right of slave- 
 holder to take his slave into any territory 
 of the United States. Discovery of gold in 
 California. The Mormons emigrate to Utah. 
 Wisconsin admitted as a state. 
 
 1849. Struggle in Congress continues over organiza^ 
 
 tion of the territories. Rush to gold fields 
 of California. 
 
 1850. Webster's "7th of March" speech. Seward's 
 
 "Higher Law" speech, March 11. , Clay's 
 compromise adopted. California a free state. 
 Slave trade in District of Columbia to end. 
 Texas boundary settled. Texas paid $10,0 J0,- 
 000. Utah and New Mexico territories with- 
 
24:0 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 out specification as regards slavery. Fugi- 
 tive slave law. The Clayton-Bulwer treaty. 
 Death of President Taylor. Fugitive slave 
 excitement begins. Population, 23,191,876. 
 
 1851. "Filibustered" invade Cuba. Letter postage 
 
 reduced to three cents. Disunion threatened. 
 Visit of Kossuth. Webster's Hulseman let- 
 ter. Maine liquor law. 
 
 1852. Scott and Pierce. The "Tweedle-Dee and 
 
 and Tweedle-Dum" campaign. Scott carried 
 only four states, Kentucky and Tennessee, 
 Massachusetts and Vermont. Clay and Web- 
 ster die. "Uncle Tom's Cabin." 
 
 1853. The Koszta difficulty. The Gadsden purchase. 
 
 1854. The Kansas-Nebraska bill. Dougias urges his 
 
 "popular sovereignty" doctrine. "Filibuster- 
 ing" ag-ainst Cuba. The Know-Nothings 
 come into being. The Republican party or- 
 ganized. The "Ostend Manifesto." The 
 struggle begins in Kansas. Treaty with 
 Japan. 
 
 1855. Personal liberty laws in northern states. The 
 
 "New England Colonization" society. Mis- 
 souri invades Kansas. Banks elected speaker 
 of the House. 
 
 1856. Wm. Walker in Nicaragua. Sumner assaulted 
 
 by Brooks. Whigs and Americans nominate 
 Fillmore. Republicans nominate Fremont. 
 Democrats nominate and elect Buchanan. 
 The first geographical party campaign. Sack 
 of Lawrence, Kansas. Threats of disunion 
 should Fremont be elected. 
 
 1857. March 6, the Dred Scott Decision. The Le- 
 
 compton constitution. Douglas breaks -rath 
 Buchanan. The new Tariff Act. Duties | ■vv- 
 ered. The panic and crisis. 
 
 1858. Bebellion in Utah. Atlantic Cable laid. The 
 
 Lincoln-Douglas debate. Seward's "irrepres- 
 sible conflict" speech at Rochester. Minne- 
 sota admitted as a state. 
 
 1859. John Brown invades Virginia. Election of 
 
 Speaker. Helper's "Impending Crisis." 
 Great Excitement in Congress. Oregon ad- 
 mitted as a state. 
 
 1860. Lincoln and the Republicans. No slave exten- 
 
 sion. Douglas and "Popular Sovereignty" 
 Democrats. Bell and the "Union." Breck- 
 enridge and slave extension. Secession ordi- 
 nance passed by South Carolina. Various 
 plans for compromise. J. J. Crittenden. 
 Population, 31,443,321. -> 
 
 1861. The Peace Conference; all plans fail. Davis 
 
 elected President of the Southern Confed- 
 
CHRONOLOGY £4? 
 
 eracy. Attack on Sumpter. War. Kansas 
 admitted as a state. Lincoln inaugurated 
 
 1862. The "Monitor." 
 
 1863. Emancipation proclamation. National Bank 
 
 Act. Gettysburg. Draft riots. 
 
 1864. Lincoln re-elected. Maryland abolishes slav- 
 
 ery. Confederacy split by Sherman. 
 
 1865. War ends; Assassination of Lincoln; Johnson 
 
 President. Thirteenth Amendment 
 
 1866. Atlantic Cable. 
 
 1867. Alaska bought. 
 
 1868. Impeachment of President Johnson. Four. 
 
 teenth Amendment adopted. 
 
 1869. Grant President. Pacific railroad completed 
 
 1870. Fifteenth Amendment. Treaty for San 
 
 Domingo. Population, 38,558,371. 
 
 1871. All states again in Congress. Chicago fire 
 
 The Washington Treaty. 
 
 1872. Geneva Award. Boston fire 
 
 1873. Panic. 
 
 1876. The Centennial at Philadelphia. Colorado a 
 
 state. 
 
 1877. Electoral Commission; Hayes President. Rail- 
 
 way strike. 
 
 1878. Bland Silver Bill. 
 
 1879. Specie payments resumed. 
 
 1880. Population, 50,155,783. 
 
 1881. Garfield President — assassinated; Arthur Pres- 
 
 ident. 
 1883. Civil Service Act. Letter postage two cents. 
 1885. Cleveland President. 
 1887. Inter-State Commerce Act. 
 
 1889. Harrison President. 
 
 1890. Population, 62,622,250. 
 
 1893. Columbian Fair. Cleveland President. 
 
 1897. McKinley President. 
 
 1898. Spanish War. Hawaii annexed. 
 
 1899. Annexation of Islands. 
 
J. H. Miller's Publications. 
 
 PARTIAL LIST. 
 
 HISTORY 
 SOURCE MATERIAL. 
 
 I. A Survey of American History, Caldwell. Source 
 extracts. (New edition) Price, 75c. 
 
 II. Some Great American Legislators, Caldwell. 
 Source extracts, treating of ten American Statesmen, from 
 Gallatin to Blaine. (New edition). Price, 75c. 
 
 III. Territorial Development, Caldwell. Source ex- 
 tracts ti eating of Colonial Boundaries, Northwest Territory, 
 Louisiana Purchase, Alaska, Hawaii, the Philippines, etc. 
 Valuable for class or library. Price, 75c. 
 
 IV. American History, Caldwell. For high school 
 use. Compcsed of Vol. I. and Vol. III. Price, $1.25. 
 
 V. Greek and Roman Civilization, Fling. A collec- 
 tion of source material in ten chapters, touching upon salient 
 topics of Grecian and Roman history. Price, 60c. 
 
 VI. Civilization in the Middle Ages, Guernsey Jones, 
 Ph.D. Source extracts Price, 60c. 
 
 VII. A Survey of English History, Mary Tremain. 
 Covers whole period of English history. Extracts from pub- 
 lic documents. Invaluable for collateral study. Price, 75c. 
 
 METHOD. 
 
 Studies in European and American History. F. M. 
 
 Fling and H. W. Caldwell. A manual setting forth the 
 princip'es and plans of the "Source Study" method. $1.00. 
 Outline of Historical Method. F. M. Fling. A series 
 of papers on Criticism of Sources, Synthetic Operations, etc. 
 Prof. Edw. Bourne (Yale) says: "I shall use 'Historical 
 Method' in one or more of my courses." Price, 60c. 
 
 ENGLISH. 
 
 Studies in Literature and Composition. W. H. Skin- 
 ner. A text for first year of high school. Also a valuable 
 manual for any teacher of English. Price, 90c 
 
 High School Exercises in Literature. L. A. Sherman, 
 Ph. D. This will consist of a series of practical exercises 
 that may be given to a class in any preparatory school. It 
 will contain about 150 pages. (Ready August 15.) 
 
 Questions on the Art of Shakespeare. L. A. Sherman, 
 Ph.D. Hamlet, Julius Caesar, each, 15c; The Winter's 
 Tale, Cymbeline, Othello, Antony and Cleopatra, each, 10c. 
 Sample pages free. 
 
 Inductive Studies in Browning. H. C. Peterson, 
 Ph.D. This edition for school and college use contains 21 
 of the most artistic of Browning's poems, with notes and 
 several hundred analytic questions. Price, 80c. 
 ADDRESS 
 
 Ainsworth & Co., 378-88 Wabash Ave., Chicago, 111. 
 
American History Studies. 
 
 H. W. CALDWELL, A.M. 
 
 Professor of American History, University of Nebraska. 
 
 Extracts from the sources of American History, Early 
 Laws, Treaties State Papers, Letters, Speeches, etc. — 
 Single copy, 5c; 10 or more copies of one number, 4c. each. 
 These are used in all grades of schools, from the-rural school 
 to the University. 
 
 Vol. I. A Survey of American History. 
 
 1&97-1898— No. I. Founding of the Colonies. ^ No. II. De- 
 velopment of Union among the Colonies. No. III. 
 Causes of the Revolution. No. IV. Formation of the 
 Constitution. No. V. Growth of Nationality. No. VI. 
 Slavery (1). No. VII. Slavery (2). No. VIII. Civil 
 War and Reconstruction. No. IX. Foreign Relations. 
 No. X. Industrial Developments. Bound Volume, 75c. 
 [Extra. Early Colonial Laws, 5c] 
 
 Vol. II. Some Great Legislators. 
 
 1898-1899— No. I. Gallatin. No. tl. J. Q. Adams. No. 
 III. Clay. No. IV. Webster. No. V. Calhoun. No. 
 
 VI. Sumner. No. VII. Douglas. No. VIII. Seward. 
 No. IX. Chase. No. X. Blaine. Bound Volume, 75c. 
 
 Vol. III. Territorial Development. Expansion. 
 
 1899-1900— No. I. Territorial Boundaries. No. II. First 
 National Boundaries. No. III. The Northwest Terri- 
 "tory. No. IV. Acquisition of Louisiana. No. V. Pur- 
 chase of Florida. No. VI. Annexation of Texas. No. 
 
 VII. Annexation ot California and New Mexico. No. 
 
 VIII. Annexation of California and Oregon. No. 
 
 IX. Alaska and Hawaii. No. X. West Indies and the 
 Philippines. Bound Volume, 75c. 
 
 European Leaflets. 
 
 Single copy, 5c; ten or more of one number at 4c. each. 
 
 1. Greek and Roman Civilization, 
 
 10 Nos.— Bound Volume, 60 cents. 
 
 2. Civilization of the Middle Ages, 
 
 10 Nos. — Bound Volume, 60 cents. 
 
 8. A Survey of English History, 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 Ainsworth & Co., 378-88 Wabash Ave., Chicago, III