WEBSTER AND HAYNE’S 
 
 CELEBRATED 
 
 SPEECHES 
 
 UNITED STATES SENATE, 
 
 MR. FOOT’S RESOLUTION 
 
 JANUARY, 1830. 
 
 ALSO, 
 
 DANIEL WEBSTER'S SPEECH IN THE SENATE OE 
 THE UNITED STATES, MAY 7, 1850, ON 
 THE SLAVERY COMPROMISE. 
 
 T. B. PETERSON AND BROTHERS, 
 
 306 CHESTNUT STREET. 
 
PKEFACE, 
 
MR. HAYNE’S SPEECH. 
 
 Dehate in the Senate on Mr. Foot's Resolution, Thursday, 
 January 21, 1830. 
 
 Mb. Foot’s resolution being under consideration, — 
 
 [When Mr. Webstek concluded his first speech on Wednesday, the 
 20th, Mr. Benton followed with some remarks in reply to Mr. W., but 
 as they were principally embodied in bis more extended speech some 
 days after, those remarks are omitted. On the day following, Mr. IIayne 
 took the floor in the following rejoinder to Mr. Webstek.] 
 
 Mr. IIAYNE said, when he took occasion, two days ago, to throw out 
 some ideas with respect to the policy of the government, in relation to the 
 public lands, nothing certainly could have been further from his thoughts, 
 than that he should have been compelled again to throw' himself upon the 
 indulgence of the Senate. Little did I expect, said Mr. H., to be called 
 upon to meet such an argument as was yesterday urged by the gentleman 
 from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster.) Sir, I questioned no man’s opinions; 
 I impeached no man’s motives ; I charged no party, or state, or section of 
 country with hostility to any other, but ventured, as I thought, in a becom¬ 
 ing spirit, to put forth my own sentiments in relation to a great national 
 question of public policy. Such was my course. The gentleman from 
 Missouri, (Mr. Benton,) it is. true, had charged upon the Eastern States an 
 early and continued hostility towards the west, and referred to a number of 
 historical facts and documents in support of that charge. Now, sir, how 
 
SPEECH 
 
 JIB. HATNE 
 
 be brought into the field. The difficulty is, not to procure men, but to 
 provide the means of maintaining them; and in this view of the subject, 
 it may be asked whether the Southern States are not a source of strength 
 and power, and not of weakness, to the country — whether they have not 
 contribute! and are not now contributing, largely to the wealth and pros¬ 
 perity of every state in this Union. From a statement which I hold in 
 my hand, it appears that in ten years—from 1818 to 1827, inclusive — 
 the whole amount of the domestic exports of the United States was 
 $521,811,045; of which three articles, (the product of slave labor,) 
 viz., cotton, rice, and tobacco, amounted to 5339,203,232 — equal to 
 about two thirds of, the whole. It is not true, as has been supposed, that 
 the advantage of this labor is confined almost exclusively to the Southern 
 States. Sir, I am thoroughly convinced that, at this time, the states north 
 of the Potomac actually derive greater profits from the labor of our slaves 
 than ice do ourselves. It appears from our public documents, that in 
 seven years — from 1821 to 1827, inclusive — the six Southern States 
 exported 8190,337,281, and imported only $55,646,301. Now, the 
 difference between these two sums (near $140,000,000) passed through 
 the hands of the northern merchants, and enabled them to carry on their 
 commercial operations with all the world. Such part of these goods as 
 _ found its way back to our hands came charged with the duties, as well as 
 the profits, of the merchant, the ship owner, and a host of others, who 
 found employment in carrying on these immense exchanges; and for 
 such part as was consumed at the north, we received in exchange north¬ 
 ern manufactures, charged with an increased price, to cover all the taxes 
 which the northern consumer had been compelled to pay on the imported 
 article. It will be seen, therefore, at a glance, how much slave labor has 
 contributed to the wealth and prosperity of the United States, and how 
 largely our northern brethren have participated in the profits of that 
 labor. Sir. on this subject I will quote an authority, which will, I doubt 
 not. be considered by the senator from Massachusetts as entitled to high 
 respect. It is from the great father of the “American System,” honest 
 Matthew Carey —no great friend, it is true, at this time, to southern 
 rights and southern interests, but not the worst authority on that account, 
 
 Speaking of the relative importance to the Union of the Southern 
 and the Eastern States, Matthew Carey, in the sixth edition of his 
 Olive Branch, (p. 27S,) after exhibiting a number of statistical tables to 
 show the decided superiority of the former, thus proceeds: — 
 
 " But I am tired of this investigation — I sicken for the honor of the 
 human species. What idea must the world form of the arrogance of the 
 pretensions of the one side, [the east,] and of the folly and weakness of 
 the rest of the Union, to have so long suffered them to pass without expo¬ 
 sure and detection. The naked fact is, that the demagogues in the East¬ 
 ern States, not satisfied with deriving all the benefit from the southern sec¬ 
 tion of the Union that they would from so many wealthy colonies —,with 
 making princely fortunes by' the carriage and exportation of its bulky and 
 valuable productions, and supplying it with their own manufactures, and 
 the productions of Europe and the East and West Indies, to an enormous 
 amount, and at an immense profit, have uniformly treated it with outrage, 
 insult, and injury. And, regardless of their vital interests, the Eastern 
 States were lately courting their own destruction, by allowing a lew rest¬ 
 less, turbulent men to lead them blindfolded to a separation which was 
 
)N THE RESOLUTION 
 
 pregnant with their certain ruin. Whenever that event takes place, they 
 sink into insignificance. If a separation were desirable to any part of the 
 Union, it would be to the Middle and Southern States, particularly the 
 latter, who have been so long harassed with the complaints, the restless¬ 
 ness, the turbulence, and the ingratitude of the Eastern Stales, that their 
 patience has been tried almost beyond endurance. ‘Jeshunm waxed fat 
 and kicked’ —and he will be severely punished for his kicking, in the 
 event of a dissolution of the Union.” Sir, I wish it to be distinctly un¬ 
 derstood that I do not adopt these sentiments as my own. I quote them 
 to show that very different sentiments have prevailed in former times as 
 to the weakness of the slaveholding states from those which now seem to 
 have become fashionable in certain quarters. I know it has been sup¬ 
 posed by certain ill-informed persons, that the south exists only by ihe 
 countenance and protection of the north. Sir, this is the idlest of all idle 
 and ridiculous fancies that ever entered into the mind of man. In every 
 state of this Union, except one, the free white population actually pre¬ 
 ponderates ; while in the British West India Islands, (where the average 
 white population is less than ten per cent, of the whole.) the slaves are 
 kept in entire subjection: it is preposterous to suppose that the Southern 
 States could ever find the smallest difficulty in this respect. On this sub¬ 
 ject, as in all others, we ask nothing of our northern brethren but to “ let ■ 
 us alone. ” Leave us to the undisturbed management of our domestic 
 concerns, and the direction of our own industry, aud we will ask no more. 
 Sir, all our difficulties on this subject have arisen from interference from 
 abroad, which has disturbed, and may again disturb, our domestic tran¬ 
 quillity just so far as to bring down punishment upon the heads of the 
 •unfortunate victims of a fanatical and mistaken humanity. 
 
 There is a spirit, which, like the father of evil, is constantly “walking 
 to and fro about the earth, seeking whom it may devourit is the spirit 
 of false pniLANTHROPr. The persons whom it possesses do not indeed 
 throw themselves into the flames, but they are employed in lighting up 
 the torches of discord throughout the community. Their first principle 
 of action is to leave their own affairs, and neglect their own duties, to 
 regulate the affairs and duties of others. Theirs is the task to feed the 
 hungry, and clothe the naked, of other lands, while they thrust the naked, 
 famished, and shivering beggar from their own doors ; to instruct the. 
 heathen, while their own children want the bread of life. When this 
 spirit infuses itself into the bosom of a statesman, (if one so possessed can 
 
 Then it is that he indulges in golden dreams of national greatness and 
 prosperity. He discovers that “ liberty is power,” and not content with 
 vast schemes of improvement at home, which it would bankrupt the treas¬ 
 ury of the world to execute, he flies to foreign lands, to fulfil obligations 
 to'“ the human race” by inculcating the principles of “ political and re¬ 
 ligious liberty,” and promoting the “ general welfare ” of the whole hu¬ 
 man race. It is a spirit which has long been busy with the slaves of the 
 south; and is even now displaying itself in vain efforts to drive the gov¬ 
 ernment from its wise policy in relation to the Indians. It is this spirit 
 which has filled the land with thousands of wild and visionary projects, 
 which can have no effect but to waste the energies and dissipate the re¬ 
 sources of the country. It is the spirit of which the aspiring politician 
 dexterously avails himself, when, by inscribing on his banner the magical 
 
16 
 
 form of anion, became known by the name of Anti-Federalists. By 
 means which need not be enumerated, the Anti-Federalists became (after 
 the expiration of twelve years) our national rulers, and for a period of 
 sixteen rears, until the close of Mr. Madison’s administration, in 1817, 
 continued to exercise the exclusive direction of our public affairs. Here, 
 sir, is the true history of the origin, rise, and progress of the party of Na¬ 
 tional Republicans, who date back to the very origin of the government, 
 
 created, not a Federal, but a National Union ; who regarded “ consolida¬ 
 tion ” as no evil, and who doubtless consider it “ a consummation devoutly 
 to be wished” to build up a great “central government,” “one and in¬ 
 divisible.” Sir. there have existed, in every age and every country, two 
 distinct orders of men — the lovers of freedom, and the devoted advo¬ 
 cates of poicer. 
 
 The same great leading principles, modified only by the peculiarities 
 of manners, habits, and institutions, divided parties in the ancient repub¬ 
 lics, animated the tchigs and lories of Great Britain, distinguished in our 
 own times the liberals and ultras of France, and may be traced even in 
 the bloody struggles of unhappy Spain. Sir, when the gallant Riego, 
 who devoted himself, and all that he possessed, to the liberties of Ins 
 country, was dragged to the scaffold, followed by the tears and lamenta¬ 
 tions of every lover of freedom throughout the world, he perished amid 
 the deafening cries of “Long live the absolute king!” The people whom 
 I represent. Mr. President, are the descendants of those who brought 
 with them to this country, as the most precious of their possessions, “ an 
 ardent love of liberty;” and while that shall be preserved, they will 
 always be found manfully struggling against the consolidation of the 
 
 The senator from Massachusetts, in alluding to the tariff, becomes quite 
 facetious. lie tells us that “he hears of nothing but tariff, tariff, tariff; 
 and, if a word could be found to rhyme with it, he presumes it would 
 be celebrated in verse, and set to music.” Sir, perhaps the gentleman, 
 in mockery of our complaints, may be himself disposed to sing the praises 
 of the tariff in doggerel verse, to the tune of “ Old Hundred.” I am 
 not at all surprised, however, at the aversion of the gentleman to the 
 very name of tariff. I doubt not that it must always bring up some 
 very unpleasant recollections to his mind. If I am not greatly mistaken, 
 the senator from Massachusetts was a leading actor at a great meeting 
 got up in Boston, in 1820, against the tariff. It has generally been sup¬ 
 posed that he drew up 'the resolutions adopted by that meeting, denoun¬ 
 cing the taritf system as unequal, oppressive, and unjust, and if I am not 
 mueh mistaken, denying its constitutionality. Certain it is, that the gen¬ 
 tleman made a speech on that occasion in support of those resolutions, 
 denouncing the system in no very measured terms ; and, if my memory 
 serves me. calling its constitutionality in question. I regret that I have 
 not been able to lay my hands on those proceedings; but I have seen 
 them, and cannot be mistaken in their character. At that time, sir, the 
 senator from Massachusetts entertained the very sentiments in relation to 
 the tariff which the south now entertains. We next find the senator 
 from Massachusetts expressing his opinion on the tariff, as a member of 
 the House of Representatives from the city of Boston, in 1824. On that 
 occasion, sir, the gentleman assumed a position which commanded the 
 respect and admiration of his country. He stood forth the powerful and 
 
. of troops, to keep back 
 ervice of the Union, to fo 
 Island of Elba, or a kal 
 the excellent and venerab 
 
 permitting that enemy to establish herself on the very soil of 
 setts, and by opening a free trade between Great Britain an 
 with a separate custom house. Yes, sir, those who cannot i 
 thought that we should insist on a free trade, in time of profc 
 could, withottt scruple, claim and exercise the right of carryinj 
 
RESOLUTION 
 
 trade with the enemy in a time of war; and finally by getting up the 
 renowned “ Hartford Convention,” and preparing the way for an open 
 resistance to the government, and a separation of the states. Sir, if I ain 
 asked for the proof of those things, I fearlessly appeal to contemporary 
 history, to the public documents of the country, to the recorded opinion 
 and acts of public assemblies, to the declaration and acknowledgments, 
 since made, of the executive and legislature of Massachusetts herself.* 
 
 Sir, the time has not been allowed me to trace this subject through, 
 even if I had been disposed to do so. But I cannot refrain from referring 
 
 began. I read, sir, from the Olive Branch of Matthew Carey, in which 
 are collected “the actings and doings” of the peace party of Hew Eng¬ 
 land, during the continuance of the embargo and the war. I know the 
 senator front Massachusetts will respect the high authority of his political 
 friend and fellow-laborer in the great cause of “ domestic industry.” 
 
 In p. 301, et seq., 309 of this work, is a detailed account of the measures 
 adopted in Massachusetts during the war, for the express purpose of 
 embarrassing the financial operations of the government, by preventing 
 loans, and thereby driving our rulers from their seats, and forcing the 
 country into a dishonorable peace. It appears that the Boston banks 
 commenced an operation, by which a run was to be made upon all the 
 banks to the south; at the same time stopping their own discounts; tlm 
 effect of which was to produce a sudden and most alarming diminution of 
 the circulating medium, and universal distress over the whole country — 
 “ a distress which they failed not to attribute to the unholy war.” 
 
 To such an extent was this system carried, that it appears, from a 
 statement of the condition of the Boston banks, made up in January. 
 1814, that with nearly §5,000,000 of specie in their vaults, they had hut 
 $2,000,000 of bills in circulation. It is added by Carey, that, at this very 
 time an extensive trade was carried on in British government bills, for 
 which specie was sent to Canada, for the payment of the British troops, 
 then laying waste our northern frontier; and this too at the very moment 
 when New England ships, sailing under British licenses, (a trade declared 
 to be lawful by the courts both of Great Britain and Massachusetts,!) 
 were supplying with provisions those very armies destined for the inva¬ 
 sion of our own shores. Sir, the author of the Olive Branch, with a 
 
:e besolution 
 
 Tes, sir, that was the propitious moment, when our country stood alone, 
 the last hope of the world, struggling for her existence against the colos¬ 
 sal power of Great Britain, “ concentrated in one mighty effort to crush 
 us at a blow ; ” that was the chosen hour to revive the grand scheme of 
 building up “a great northern confederacy”—a scheme which, it is 
 stated in the work before me, had its origin as far back as the year 1796, 
 and which appears never to have been entirely abandoned. 
 
 In the language of the writers of that day, (1796,) ‘-rather than have 
 a constitution such as the anti-federalists were contending for, (such as 
 we are now contending for,) the Union ought to be dissolved; ” and to 
 prepare the way for that measure, the same methods were resorted to 
 then that have always been relied on for that purpose, exciting prejudice 
 against the south. Yes, sir, our northern brethren were then told, “ that if 
 the negroes were good for food, their southern masters would claim the right 
 to destroy them at pleasure.” (Olive Branch, p. 267.) Sir, in 1814, all these 
 
ON THE RESOLUTION OP SIR. FOOT. 27 
 
 As soon as the public mind was sufficiently prepared for the measure, 
 the celebrated Hartford Convention svas got up; not as the act of a few 
 unauthorized individuals, but by authority of the legislature of Massachu¬ 
 setts ; and, as has been shown by the able historian of that convention, in 
 accordance with the views and wishes of the party of which it was the 
 organ. Now, sir, I do not desire to call in question the motives of the 
 gentlemen who composed that assembly. I knew many of them to be in 
 private life accomplished and honorable men, and I doubt not there were 
 some among them who did not perceive the dangerous tendency of their 
 proceedings. I will even go further, and say, that if the authors of the 
 Hartford Convention believed that “ gross, deliberate, and palpable vio- 
 
separation, amicably if they 
 
 riolently if they 
 
 Mr. President, I wish it to be distinctly understood, that all the remarks 
 iave made on this subject are intended to be exclusively applied to a 
 ■ty, which I have described as the “ peace party of New England ”— 
 bracing the political associates of the senator from Massachusetts — a 
 •ty which controlled the operations of that state during the embargo 
 l"the war, and who are justly chargeable with all the measures I have 
 irobated. Sir, nothing has been further from my thoughts than to 
 ..each the character or conduct of the people of New England. For 
 ir steady habits and hardy virtues I trust X entertain a becoming 
 pect. I fully subscribe to the truth of the description given before 
 revolution, by one whose praise is the highest eulogy, “ that the per- 
 eranee of Holland, the activity of France, and the dexterous and firm 
 rarity of English enterprise, have been more than equalled by this 
 •ent people.” Hardy, enterprising, sagacious, industrious, and moral. 
 
 ner of the constitution, led on by the patriarch of liberty, in search of the 
 land of political promise, which they lived not only to behold, but to pos¬ 
 sess and to enjoy. Again, sir, in the darkest and most gloomy period 
 •»f the war, when our country stood single-handed against “ the con- 
 
RESOLUTION' 
 
 r.nd the west, for popular rights, and assisting in that glorious triumph, 
 hv which the man of the people was elevated to the highest office in 
 their gift. 
 
 Who. then, Mr. President, are the true friends of the Union ? Those 
 who would confine the federal government strictly within the limits pre¬ 
 scribed by the constitution; who would preserve to the states and the 
 people all powers not expressly delegated : who would make this a fed¬ 
 eral and not a national Union, and who, administering the government in 
 a spirit of equal justice, would make it a blessing, and not a curse. And 
 
 constantly stealing power from the states, and adding strength to the 
 
 the states and the people,* undertake to regulate the whole industry 
 and capital of the country. But, sir, of all descriptions of men, I con¬ 
 sider those as the worst enemies of the Union, who sacrifice the equal 
 rights which belong to every member of the confederacy to combinations 
 of interested majorities, for personal or political objects. But the gentle¬ 
 man apprehends no evil from the dependence of the states on the federal 
 government; he can see no danger of corruption from the influence of 
 money or of patronage. Sir, I know that it is supposed to be a wise 
 saying that “ patronage is a source of weakness; ” and in support of that 
 maxim, it has been said, that “ every ten appointments make a hundred 
 enemies.” But I am rather inclined to think, with the eloquent and 
 sagacious orator now reposing on his laurels on the banks of the Roan¬ 
 oke, that “the power of conferring favors creates a crowd of depend¬ 
 ants ; ” he gave a forcible illustration of the truth of the remark, when 
 he told us of the effect of holding up the savory morsel to the eager eyes 
 of the hungry hounds gathered around his door. It mattered not whether 
 the cii't was bestowed on Towzer or Sweetlips. “ Tray. Blanch, or Sweet¬ 
 heart;” while held in suspense, they were all governed by a nod, and 
 when the morsel was bestowed, the expectation of the favors of to-morrow 
 kept up the subjection of to-day. 
 
 The senator from Massachusetts, in ’denouncing what he is pleased to 
 call the Carolina doctrine, has attempted to throw ridicule upon the idea 
 that a state lias any constitutional remedy, by the exercise of its sovereign 
 authority, against “ a gross, palpable, and deliberate violation of the con¬ 
 stitution.” He calls it “an idle” or “ a ridiculous notion,” or something 
 to that effect, and added, that ib would make tile Union a “mere rope of 
 
 any examination of the question, and lias been satisfied with throwing 
 the weight of his authority into the scale, I do not deem it necessary to 
 do more than to throw into the opposite scale the authority on which 
 South Carolina relies; and there, for the present, I am perfectly willing 
 to leave the controversy. The South Carolina doctrine, that is to say, 
 the doctrine contained in an exposition reported by a committee of the 
 legislature in December, 1828, and published by their authority, is the 
 good old republican doctrine of ’98 —the doctrine of the celebrated 
 “ Virginia Resolutions ” of that year, and of “ Madison’s Report” of ’99. 
 It will he recollected that the legislature of Virginia, in December, ’98, 
 took into consideration the alien and sedition laws, then considered by all 
 republicans as a gross violation of the constitution of the United States, 
 and on that day passed, among others, the following resolutions: — 
 
 “ Tlie General Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that 
 
cases of compact among parties having no common judge, each party has 
 an equal right to judge, for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode 
 and measure of redress.” 
 
 At the ensuing session of the legislature, the subject was reexamined, 
 and on the 14th of November, 1799, the resolutions of the preceding 
 year were deliberately reaffirmed, and it was, among other things, sol¬ 
 emnly declared, — 
 
 “ That, if those who administer the general government be permitted 
 to transgress the limits fixed by that compact, by a total disregard to the 
 special delegations of power therein contained, an annihilation of the 
 
of powers. Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there 
 can he r.o hesitation.” 
 
 Such, sir, are the high and imposing authorities in support of “the 
 Carolina doctrine,” which is, in fact, the doctrine of the Virginia Resolu¬ 
 tions of 1-7 08. 
 
 Sir. at that day the whole country was divided on this very question. 
 It formed the line of demarcation between the federal and republican 
 parties; ana the great political revolution which then took place turned 
 npon the very questions involved in these resolutions. That question was 
 decided by the people, and by that decision the constitution was, in the 
 emphatic language of Mr. Jefferson, “ saved at its last gasp.” I should 
 suppose, sir, it -would require more self-respect than any gentleman here 
 would be willing to assume, to treat lightly doctrines derived from such 
 high resources. Resting on authority like this, I will ask gentlemen 
 
tile liberties of my country — ail act containing unconstitutional provis¬ 
 ions, to which the people are not bound to submit, and to which, in my 
 opinion, they will not submit.” 
 
 And the senator from Massachusetts himself, in a speech delivered on 
 the same subject in the other house, said, “ This opposition is constitu¬ 
 tional and legal; it is also conscientious. It rests on settled and sober 
 
MR. WEBSTER’S SPEECH. 
 
 In Senate , January 26 , 1830 . 
 
 Following- Mr. IIayne in the debate, Mir. WEBSTER addressed 
 the Senate as follows : — 
 
 Mr. President : When the mariner has been tossed, for many days, 
 in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the 
 first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his latitude, 
 and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. 
 Let us imitate this prudence, and before we float farther, refer to the point 
 from which we departed, that we may at least be able to conjecture where 
 we now are. I ask for the reading of the resolution. 
 
 [The secretary read the resolution, as follows: — 
 
 “ Resolved , That the committee on public lands be instructed to inquire 
 and report the quantity of the public lands remaining unsold within each 
 state and territory, and whether it be expedient to limit, for a certain 
 period, the sales of the public lands to such lands only as have hereto¬ 
 fore been offered for sale, and are now subject to entry at the minimum 
 price. And, also, whether the office of surveyor general, and some of the 
 land offices, may not be abolished without detriment to the public interest; 
 or whether it be expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sales, and 
 extend more rapidly the surveys of the public lands.”] 
 
 We have thus heard, sir, what the resolution is, which is actually be¬ 
 fore us for consideration; and it will readily occur to every one that it is 
 almost the only subject about which something has not been said in the 
 speech,, running through two days, by which the Senate has been now 
 entertained by the gentleman from South Carolina. Every topic in the 
 wide range of our public affairs, whether past or present, — every thing, 
 general or local, whether belonging to national politics or party politics,— 
 seems to have attracted more or less of the honorable member’s attention, 
 save only the resolution before us. He has spoken of every thing but the 
 public lands. They have escaped his notice. To that subject, in all his 
 excursions, he has not paid even the cold respect of a passing glance. 
 
 When this debate, sir, was to be resumed, on Thursday morning, it so 
 happened that it would have been convenient for me to be elsewhere. 
 The honorable member, however, did not incline to put off the discussion 
 to another day. He had a shot, he said, to return, and he wished to dis¬ 
 charge it. That shot, sir, which it was kind thus to inform us was com¬ 
 ing, that we might stand out of the way, or prepare ourselves to fall be¬ 
 fore it, and die with decency, has now been received. Under all advan¬ 
 tages, and with expectation awakened by the tone which preceded it, it 
 has been discharged, and has spent its force. It may become me to say 
 no more of its effect than that, if nobody is found, after all, either killed 
 or wounded by it, it is not the first time in the history of human affairs 
 (37) 
 
S3 
 
 SPEECH OF 
 
 that the vigor and success of the war have not quite come up to the lofty 
 and sounding phrase of the manifesto. 
 
 The gentleman, sir, in declining to postpone the debate, told the Senate, 
 with the emphasis of his hand upon his heart, that there was something 
 rankling here , which he wished to relieve. [Mr. IIayne rose and dis¬ 
 claimed having used tiie word rankling.'] It would not, Mr. President, 
 be safe for the honorable member to appeal to those around him, upon the 
 question whether he did, in fact, make use of that word. But he may 
 have been unconscious of it. At any rate, it is enough that he disclaims 
 it. But still, with or without the use of that particular word, lie had yet 
 something here, lie said, of which he wished to rid himself by an imme¬ 
 diate reply. In this respect, sir, I have a great advantage over the hon¬ 
 orable gentleman. There is nothing here, sir, which gives me the slight¬ 
 est uneasiness; neither fear, nor anger, nor that winch is sometimes more 
 troublesome than either, the consciousness of having been in the wrong. 
 There is nothing either originating here, or now received here by the 
 gentleman’s shot. Nothing original, for I had not the slightest feeling of 
 disrespect or unkindness towards the honorable member. Some passages, 
 it i- true, had occurred, since our acquaintance in this body, whicli I could 
 Lave wished might have been otherwise; but I had used philosophy, and 
 forgotten them. When the honorable member rose, in his first speech, I 
 paid him the respect of attentive listening; and when he sat down, though 
 surprised, and I must say even astonished, at some of his opinions, nothing 
 was further from my intention than to commence any personal warfare; 
 and through the whole of the few remarks I made in answer, I avoided, 
 studiously and carefully, every thing wdiich I thought possible to he 
 construed into disrespect. And, sir, while there is thus nothing origi¬ 
 nating here, which I wished at any time, or now wish, to discharge, I 
 must repeat, also, that nothing has been received here, whicli rankles, or 
 in anv way gives me annoyance. I will not accuse the honorable member 
 of violating the rules of civilized war — I will not say that lie poisoned 
 Lis arrows. But wLetLer Lis sLafts were, or were not, dipped in that 
 which would have caused rankling if they had reached, there was not, as 
 it happened, quite strength enough in the bow to bring them to their 
 mark. If he wishes now to find those shafts, he must look'for them else¬ 
 where ; they will not he found fixed and quivering in the object at which 
 they were aimed. 
 
 The honorable member complained that I had slept on his speech. I 
 must have slept on it, or not slept at all. The moment the honorable 
 member sat down, his friend from Missouri rose, and, with much honeyed 
 commendation of the speech, suggested that the impressions which it had 
 produced were too charming and delightful to he disturbed by other senti¬ 
 ments or other sounds, and proposed that the Senate should adjourn. 
 Would it have been quite amiable in me, sir, to interrupt this excellent 
 good feeling ? Must I not have been absolutely malicious, if I could have 
 thrust myself forward to destroy sensations thus pleasing ? Was it not 
 much better and kinder, both to sleep upon them mj'self, and to allow 
 others, also, the pleasure of sleeping upon them ? But if it he meant, by 
 sleeping upon his speech, that I took time to prepare a reply to it, it is 
 quite a mistake: owing to other engagements, I could not employ even 
 the interval between the adjournment of the Senate and its meeting the 
 next morning in attention to the subject of this debate. Nevertheless, 
 lir, the mere matter of fact is undoubtedly true — I did sleep on the ^ 
 
ON THE RESOLUTION OF ME. FOOT. 41 
 
 murder, tliat the gory locks were shaken. The ghost of Banquo, like 
 that of Hamlet, was an honest ghost. It disturbed no innocent man. It 
 knew where its appearance would strike terror, and who would cry out, A 
 ghost! It made itself visible in the right quarter, and compelled the 
 guilty, and the conscience-smitten, and none others, to start, with 
 
 Prithee, see there ! behold ! - look! lo 1 
 If Island here, I saw him!” 
 
 Their eyeballs were seared — was it not so, sir ? — who had thought to 
 shield themselves by concealing their own hand, and laying the imputa¬ 
 tion of the crime on a low and hireling agency in wickedness ; who had 
 vainly attempted to stifle the workings of their own coward consciences, 
 by ejaculating, through white lips and chattering teeth, “ Thou canst not 
 say I did it! ” I have misread the great poet, if it was those who had 
 no way partaken in the deed of the death, who either found that they 
 were, or feared that they should be, pushed from their stools by the ghost 
 of the slain, or who cried out to a spectre created by their own fears, 
 and their own remorse, “ Avaunt! and quit our sight! ” 
 
 There is another particular, sir, in which the honorable member’s 
 
OK THE RESOLUTION OF MR. FOOT. 55 
 
 oourse of political conduct on these subjects, in the l-lth Congress, in 
 1816. And now, Mr. President, I have further to say, that I made up 
 these opinions, and entered on this course of political conduct, Teucro 
 dues. Yes, sir, I pursued, in all this, a' South Carolina track. On the 
 doctrines of internal improvement, South Carolina, as she was then rep¬ 
 resented in the other house, set forth, in 1816, under a fresh and leading 
 breeze; and I was among the followers. But if my leader sees new 
 lights, and turns a sharp corner, unless I see new lights also, I keep 
 straight on in the same path. I repeat, that leading gentlemen from 
 South Carolina were first and foremost in behalf of the doctrines of 
 internal improvements, when those doctrines first came-to be considered 
 and acted upon in Congress. The debate on the bank question, on the 
 tariff of 1816, and on the direct tax, will show who was who, and what 
 was what, at that time. The tariff of 1S1G, one of the plain cases of 
 oppression and usurpation, from which, if the government docs not recede, 
 individual states may justly secede from the government, is, sir, in truth, 
 a South Carolina tariff, supported by South Carolina votes. But for 
 those votes, it could not have passed in the form in which it did pass; 
 whereas, if it had depended on Massachusetts votes, it would have been 
 lost. Does not the honorable gentleman well know all this ? There 
 are certainly those who do full well know it all. I do not say this to 
 reproach South Carolina; I only state the fact, and I think it will appear 
 to be true, that among the earliest and boldest advocates of the tariff. as 
 a measure of protection, and on the express ground of protection, were 
 leading gentlemen of South Carolina in Congress. I did not then, and 
 cannot now, understand their language in any other sense. While this 
 tariff of 1816 was under discussion in the House of Representatives, an 
 honorable gentleman from Georgia, now of this house, (Mr. Forsyth,) 
 moved to reduce the proposed duty on cotton. He failed by four votes. 
 South Carolina giving three votes (enough to have turned the scale) 
 against his motion. The act, sir, then passed, and received on its passage 
 the support of a majority of the representatives of South Carolina 
 present and voting. This act is the first, in the order of those now do' 
 nounced as plain usurpations. We see it daily in the list by the side of 
 those of 182-1 and 1828, as a case of manifest oppression, justifying dis¬ 
 union. I put it home to the honorable member from South Carolina, that 
 his own state was not only “art and part” in this measure, but the causa 
 causans. Without her aid, this seminal principle of mischief, this root 
 of upas, could not have been planted. I have already said — and it is 
 true — that this act proceeded on the ground of protection. It interfered 
 directly with existing interests of great value and amount. It cut up the 
 Calcutta cotton trade by the roots. But it passed, nevertheless, and it. 
 passed on the principle of protecting manufactures, on the principle 
 against free trade, on the principle opposed to that which lets us alone. 
 
 Such, Mr. President, were the opinions of important and leading gen¬ 
 tlemen of South Carolina, on the subject of internal improvement, in 
 1816. I went out of Congress the next year, and returning again in 
 1823, thought I found South Carolina where I had left her. I really sup¬ 
 posed that all things remained as they were, and that the South Carolina 
 doctrine of internal improvements would be defended by the same elo¬ 
 quent voices and the same strong jprms, as formerly. In the lapse of 
 these six yet ; , it is true, political associations had assumed a new aspect 
 and new div ms. A party had arisen in the south, hostile to the doc- 
 
RESOLUTION 
 
 mid sanctioned by a republican president. "Who, then, is this author, 
 who assumes the high prerogative of denouncing, in the name of the 
 republican party, the republican administration of the country—a denun¬ 
 ciation including within its sweep Calhoun, Lowndes, and Cheves; men 
 who will be regarded as the brightest ornaments of South Carolina, 
 and the strongest pillars of the republican party, as long as the late 
 war shall be remembered, and talents and patriotism shall be re¬ 
 garded as the proper objects of the admiration and gratitude of a free 
 people! 1 ” 
 
 Such are the opinions, sir, which were maintained by South Carolina 
 gentlemen in the House of Representatives on the subject of internal 
 improvement, when I took my seat there as a member from Massachu¬ 
 setts, in 1823. But this is not all; we had a bill before us, and passed it 
 in that house, entitled “ An aet to procure the necessary surveys, plans, 
 and estimates upon the subject of roads and canals.” It authorized the 
 president to cause surveys and estimates to be made of the routes of such 
 roads and canals as he might deem of national importance in a commer¬ 
 cial or military point of view, or for the transportation of the mail; and 
 appropriated thirty thousand dollars out of the treasury to defray the 
 expense. This act, though preliminary in its nature, covered the whole 
 ground. It took for granted the complete power of internal improve¬ 
 ment, as far as any of its advocates had ever contended for it. Having 
 passed the other house, the bill came up to the Senate, and was here 
 considered and debated in April, 182-1. The honorable member from 
 South Carolina was a member of the Senate at that time. While the 
 bill was under consideration here, a motion was made to add the following 
 proviso: — 
 
 “ Provided , That nothing herein contained shall be construed to affirm 
 or admit a power in Congress, on their own authority, to make roads or 
 canals within any of the states of the Union.” 
 
 The yeas and nays were taken on this proviso, and the honorable mem¬ 
 ber voted in the negative. The proviso foiled. 
 
 “ Provided, That the faith of the United States is hereby pledged, that 
 no money shall ever be expended for roads or canals, except it shall be 
 among the several states, and in the same proportion as direct taxes are 
 Laid and assessed by the provisions of the constitution.” 
 
 The honorable member voted against this proviso also, and it failed. 
 
 The bill was then put on its passage, and the honorable member voted 
 for it, and it passed, and became a law. 
 
 Now, it strikes me, sir, that there is no maintaining these votes but 
 upon the power of internal improvement, in its broadest sense. In truth, 
 these bills for surveys and estimates have always been considered as test 
 questions. They show who is for and who against internal improvement 
 This law itself tvent the whole length, and assumed the full and complete 
 power. The gentleman’s votes sustained that power, in every form in 
 which the various propositions to amend presented it. He went for the 
 entire and unrestrained authority, without consulting the states, and with¬ 
 out agreeing to any proportionate distribution. And now, suffer me to 
 remind you, Mr. President, that it is this very same power, thus sanc¬ 
 tioned, in every form, by the gentleman’s own opinion, that is so plain 
 and manifest a usurpation, that the state of South Carolina is supposed to 
 be justified iu refusing submission to any laws carrying the power into 
 
(institutional limits, as the gentleman supposes, 
 il Hall, as far as I now remember, was, that th 
 if doubtful construction. The gentleman himse! 
 is no doubt about it, and that the laws are pi 
 on. Mr. Madison’s letters, already referred t 
 , by far the most able exposition extant of this 
 He has satisfied me, so far as the practice of 
 
 at maioritv of the renresentatives of Massachu: 
 
SPEECH 
 
 had proved a legal settlement in South Carolina, and was not to be 
 removed. The "accursed policy” of the tariff, also, had established the 
 fact of its birth and parentage in the same state. No wonder, therefore, 
 the gentleman wished to carry the war, as he expressed it, into the 
 enemy’s country. Prudently willing to quit these subjects, he was doubt¬ 
 less desirous of fastening others, which could not be transferred south of 
 Mason and Dixon’s line. The politics of New England became his 
 theme; and it was in this part of his speech, I think, that he menaced 
 me with such sore discomfiture. 
 
 Discomfiture ' why, sir, when he attacks any thing which I maintain, 
 and overthrows it; when he turns the right or left of any position which 
 I take up; when he drives me from any ground I choose to ocenpy, he 
 may then talk of discomfiture, but not till that distant day. What has he 
 done ? Has he maintained his own charges ? ITas he proved what he 
 alleged ? Has he sustained himself in his attack on the government, and 
 on the history of the north, in the matter of the public lands ? Has he 
 disproved a fact, refuted a proposition, weakened an argument maintained 
 by me ? Has he come within beat of drum of any position of mine ? 
 0. no: hut he has " carried the war into the enemy’s country ” ! Carried 
 me war into me enemy’s country! Yes, sir, and what sort of a war has 
 he made of it? Why, sir, he has stretched a dragnet over the whole 
 surface of perished pamphlets, indiscreet sermons, frothy paragraphs, and 
 fuming popular addresses ; over whatever the pulpit in its moments of 
 alarm, the press in its heats, and parties in their extravagance, have 
 Severally thrown off. in times of general excitement and violence. He 
 has thus swept together a mass of such things, as, but that they are now 
 old. the public health would have required him rather to leave in their 
 
 For a good long hour or two, we had the unbroken pleasure of listen¬ 
 ing to the honorable member, while he recited, with his usual grace and 
 spirit, and with evident high gusto, speeches, pamphlets, addresses, and 
 an me et ccieras of the political press, such as warm heads produce in 
 warm times, and such as it would be “ discomfiture ” indeed for any one, 
 whose taste did not delight in that sort of reading, to be obliged to peruse. 
 This is his war. This is to carry the war into the enemy’s country. It 
 is lit an invasion of this sort that he flatters himself with the expectation 
 o: gaining laurels fit to adorn a senator’s brow. 
 
 Sir. President, I shall not, it will, I trust, not be expected that I should, 
 entier now or at any time, separate this farrago into parts, and answer 
 and examine its components. I shall hardly bestow upon it all a general 
 rcinarK or two. In the run of forty years, sir, under this constitution, 
 we have experienced sundry successive violent party contests. Party 
 arose, indeed, with the constitution itself, and in some form or other has 
 attended through the greater part of its history. 
 
 Whether any oilier constitution than the old articles of confederation 
 was desirable was, itself, a question on which parties formed ; if a new 
 constitution was framed, what powers should be given to it was another 
 question : and when it had been formed, what was, in fact, the just extent 
 of the powers actually conferred, was a third. Parties, as we know, 
 existed under the first administration, as distinctly marked as those which 
 manifested themselves at any subsequent period. 
 
 The contest immediately preceding the political change in 1801, and 
 tiiu, again, which existed at the commencement of the late war, are other 
 
instances of party excitement, of something more than usual strength 
 and intensity. In all these conflicts there was, no doubt, much of vio¬ 
 lence on both and all sides. It would be impossible, if one had a fancy 
 for such employment, to adjust the relative quantum of violence between 
 these two contending parties. There was enough in each, as must always 
 be expected in populnr governments. 'With a great deal of proper and 
 decorous discussion there was mingled a great deal, also, of declamation, 
 virulence, crimination, and abuse. 
 
 In regard to any party, probably, at one of the leading epochs in the 
 history of parties, enough may be found to make out another equally 
 inflamed exhibition as that with which the honorable member has edified 
 us. For myself, sir, I shall not rake among the rubbish of by-gone 
 timefe to see what I can find, or whether I cannot find something by which 
 I can fix a blot on the escutcheon of any state, any party, or any part of 
 the country. General Washington’s administration was steadily and 
 zealously maintained, as we all know, by New England. It was vio¬ 
 lently opposed elsewhere. AVe know in what quarter he had the most 
 earnest, constant, and persevering support, in all his great and leading 
 measures. AVe know where his private and personal character were 
 held in the highest degree of attachment and veneration; and we know, 
 too, where his measures were opposed, his services slighted, and his 
 character vilified. 
 
 AA r e know, or we might know, if we turn to the journals, who ex¬ 
 pressed respect, gratitude, and regret, when lie retired from the chief 
 magistracy; and who refused to express either respect, gratitude, or 
 regret. I shall not open those journals. Publications more abusive or 
 scurrilous never saw the light titan were sent forth against AAAishington, 
 and all his leading measures, from presses south of New England; 
 hut I shall not look them up. I employ no scavengers — no one is in 
 attendance oh me, tendering such means of retaliation; and if there 
 
rhen he looked on the circle round him, and especially if he 
 , his thoughts to the high places out of the Senate. Neverthe- 
 ut back to Rome, ad annum urbe condita , and found the fathers 
 
RESOLUTION 
 
 to try the binding validity of statutes, by votes in a convention ! Sir, the 
 Hartford Convention, I presume, would not desire that the honorable 
 gentleman should be their defender or advocate, if he puts their case upon 
 6uch untenable and extravagant grounds. 
 
 Then, sir, the gentleman has no fault to find with these recently-pro¬ 
 mulgated South Carolina opinions. And, certainly, he need have none ; 
 for his own sentiments, as now advanced, and advanced on reflection, as 
 far as I have been able to comprehend them, go the full length of all 
 these opinions. I propose, sir, to say something on these, and to consider 
 how far they are just and constitutional. Before doing that, however, let 
 me observe, that the eulogium pronounced on the character of the state 
 of South Carolina, by the honorable gentleman, for her revolutionary and 
 other merits, meets my hearty concurrence. I shall not acknowledge that 
 the honorable member goes before me in regard for whatever of dis¬ 
 tinguished talent or distinguished character South Carolina has produced. 
 I claim part of the honor, I partake in the pride, of her great names. I 
 claim them for countrymen, one and all. The Laurenses, the Rutledges, 
 the Pinckneys, the Sumpters, the Marions — Americans all — whose 
 fame is no more to be hemmed in by state lines than their talents and 
 patriotism were capable of being circumscribed within the same narrow 
 limits. In their day and generation, they served and honored the country, 
 and the whole country; and their renown is of the treasures of the whole 
 country. Him whose honored name the gentleman himself bears —- does 
 he suppose me less capable of gratitude for his patriotism, or sympathy 
 for his sufferings, than if his eyes had first opened upon the light in Mas¬ 
 sachusetts instead of South Carolina ? Sir, does he suppose it is in his 
 power to exhibit a Carolina name so bright as to produce envy in my 
 bosom? No, sir, increased gratification and delight, rather. 
 
 Sir, I thank God that if I am gifted with little"of the spirit which is 
 said to be able to raise mortals to the skies, I have yet none, as I trust, 
 of that other spirit, which would drag angels down. When I shall be 
 found, sir, in my place here in the Senate, or elsewhere, to sneer at 
 public merit, because it happened to spring up beyond the little limits of 
 my own state, or neighborhood; when I refuse, for any such cause, or 
 for any cause, the homage due to American talent, to elevated patriotism, 
 to sincere devotion to liberty and the country; or if I see an uncommon 
 endowment of Heaven, if I see extraordinary capacity and virtue in 
 any son of the south, and if, moved by local prejudice, or gangrened by 
 state jealousy, I get up here to abate the tithe of a hair from his just 
 character and just fame, — may my tongue cleave to the roof of my 
 mouth! Sir, let me recur to pleasing recollections; let me indulge in 
 refreshing remembrance of the past; let me remind you that in early 
 times no states cherished greater harmony, both of principle and feeling, 
 than Massachusetts and South Carolina. Would to God that harmony 
 might again return. Shoulder to shoulder they went through the revo¬ 
 lution ; hand in hand they stood round the ad ministration of Washington, 
 and felt his own great arm lean on them for support. Unkind feeling, if 
 it exist, alienation, and distrust are the growth, unnatural to such soils, 
 of false principles since sown. They are weeds, the seeds of which that 
 same great arm never scattered. 
 
 Mr. President, I shall enter on no encomium upon Massachusetts — 
 she needs none. There she is — behold her, and judge for yourselves. 
 There is her history—the world knows it by heart. The past, at least, 
 
There are other proceedings of public bodies which li 
 alluded to, and to which X refer again for the purpos 
 more fully what is the length and breadth of that docti 
 the Carolina doctrine, which the honorable member has 
 this floor to maintain. 
 
 In one of them I find it resolved that “ the tariff of 
 
the laws, then, is the constitutional reme 
 shite, which the South Carolina doctrine 
 
supposes the tariff law to be such an exercise of power, and that, conse¬ 
 quently, a case has arisen in which the state may, if it see fit, interfere 
 by its own law. Now, it so happens, nevertheless, that Mr. Madison 
 himself deems this same tariff law quite constitutional. Instead of a 
 clear and palpable violation, it is, in his judgment, no violation at all. So 
 that, while they use his authority for a hypothetical case, they reject it 
 in the very case before them. All this, sir, shows the inherent futility — 
 I had almost used a stronger word — of conceding this power of inter¬ 
 ference to the states, and then attempting to secure it from abuse by- 
 imposing qualifications of which the states themselves are to judge. One 
 of two things is true: either the laws of the Union are beyond the control 
 of the states, or else we have no constitution of general government, and 
 are thrust back again to the days of the confederacy. 
 
 ask the gentleman, therefore, to apply his principles to that case; I ask 
 him to come forth and declare whether, in his opinion, the New' England 
 States would have been justified in interfering to break up the embargo 
 system, under the conscientious opinions which they held upon it. Had 
 they a right to annul that law ? Does he admit, or deny. ? If that which 
 is thought palpably unconstitutional in South Carolina justifies that state 
 in arresting the progress of the law, tell me whether that which was 
 thought palpably unconstitutional also in Massachusetts would have justi¬ 
 fied her in doing the same thing. Sir, I deny the whole doctrine. It 
 has. not a foot of ground in the constitution to stand on. No public man 
 of reputation ever advanced it in Massachusetts, in. the warmest times, 
 or could maintain himself upon it there at any time. 
 
 I wish now, sir, to make a remark upon the Virginia resolutions of 
 1798. I cannot undertake to say how these resolutions were understood 
 by those who passed them. Their language is not a little indefinite. In 
 the case of the exercise, by Congress, of a dangerous power, not granted 
 
all principle, 
 e denominated 
 
business, tills dying without touching the ground. After all, this is a sort 
 of iinnp-tax, worse than any part of the tariff. 
 
 Mr. President, the honorable gentleman would he in a dilemma like 
 that of another great general. lie would have a knot before him which 
 he could not untie. He must cut it with his sword. He must say to 
 his followers. Defend yourselves with your bayonets; and this is war — 
 civil war. 
 
 Direct collision, therefore, between force and force, is the unavoidable 
 result of that remedy for the revision of unconstitutional laws which the 
 gentleman contends for. It must happen in the very first case to which 
 it is applied. Is not this the plain result? To resist, by force, the 
 execution of a law, generally, is treason. Can the courts of the United 
 •States take notice of the indulgence of n state to commit treason ? The 
 common saying, that a state cannot commit treason herself, is nothing to 
 the purpose. Can it authorize others to do it? If John Fries had 
 produced an act of Pennsylvania, annulling the law of Congress, would it 
 have helped his ease ? Talk about it as we will, these doctrines go the 
 lenzth of revolution. Thev are incompatible with any peaceable admin¬ 
 istration of the government. They lead directly to disunion and civil 
 commotion: and therefore it is, that at the commencement, when they are 
 first found to be maintained by respectable men, and in a tangible form, 
 that I enter my public protest against them all. 
 
 The honorable gentleman argues, that if tiiis government be the sole 
 judge of the extent of its own powers, whether that right of judging be 
 in Congress or the Supreme Court, it equally subverts state sovereignty. 
 This the gentleman sees, or thinks he sees, although he cannot perceive 
 how the right of judging, in this matter, if left to the exercise of state 
 legislatures, has any tendency to subvert the government of the Union. 
 The gentleman’s opinion may be that the right ought not to have been 
 lodged with the general government; he may like better such a consti¬ 
 tution as we should have under the right of state interference ; but I ask 
 
 constitution itself—I ask him if the power is not found there — clearly 
 and visibly found there. 
 
 But, sir. what is this danger, and what the grounds of it ? Let it be 
 remembered, that the constitution of the United States is not unalterable. 
 It is to continue in its present form no longer than the people who estab¬ 
 lished it shall choose to continue it. If they shall become convinced that 
 they have made an injudicious or inexpedient partition and distribution 
 
 they can alter that distribution at will. 
 
 If any thing be found in the national constitution, either by original 
 provision or subsequent interpretation, which ought not to be in it, the 
 people know how to get rid of it. If any construction be established, 
 unacceptable to them, so as to become, practically, a part of the constitu¬ 
 tion. they will amend it at their own sovereign pleasure. But while the 
 people choose to maintain it as it is, while they are satisfied with it, and 
 refuse to change it, who has given, or who can give, to the state legis¬ 
 latures a right to alter it, either by interference, construction, or other¬ 
 wise? Gentlemen do not seem to recollect that the people have any 
 
MR. WEBSTER’S SPEECH. 
 
 In the Senate of the United States , March 7 , 1850 , on the 
 Slavery Compromise. 
 
 The Vice Pkesident. The resolutions submitted by the senator 
 from Kentucky were made the special order of the day at 12 o’clock. 
 On this subject the senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Walker) has the floor. 
 
 Mr. Walkek. Mr. President, this vast audience has not assembled 
 to hear me; and there is but one man, in my opinion, who can assemble 
 such an audience. They expect to hear him, and I feel it to be my duty, 
 as well as my pleasure, to give the floor therefore to the senator from 
 Massachusetts. I understand it is immaterial to him upon which of 
 these questions he speaks, and therefore I will not move to postpone the 
 special order. 
 
 Mr. Webstek. I beg to express my obligations to my friend from 
 Wisconsin, (Mr. Walker,) as well as to my friend from New York, 
 (Mr. Seward,) for tlieir courtesy in allowing me to address the Senate 
 this morning. 
 
 Mr. President: 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 fortunate that there is a Senate of the United 
 States; a body not yet mo"ed from its propriety, not lost to a just sense 
 of its own dignity, and its own high responsibilities, and a body to which 
 the country looks with confidence for wise, moderate, patriotic, and heal¬ 
 ing counsels. It is not to he denied that we live in the midst of strong 
 agitations, and are surrounded by very considerable dangers to our in¬ 
 stitutions of government. The imprisoned winds are let loose. The east, 
 the west, the north, and the stormy south, all combine to throw the 
 whole ocean into commotion, to toss its billows to the skies, and to dis¬ 
 close its profoundest depths. I do not affect to regard myself, Mr. 
 President, as holding, or as fit to hold, the helm in this combat of the 
 political elements ; but I have a duty to perform, and I mean to perform 
 it with fidelity — not without a sense of surrounding dangers, but not 
 without hope. I have a part to act, not for my own security or safety, 
 for I am looking out for no fragment upon which to float away from the 
 wreck, if wreck there must be, but for the good of the whole, and the pres¬ 
 ervation of the whole ; and there is that which will keep me to my duty 
 during this struggle, whether the sun and the stars shall appear, or shall 
 not appear, for many days. I speak to-day for the preservation of the 
 Union. “ Hear me for my cause.” I speak to-day, out of a solicitous 
 and anxious heart, for the restoration to the country of that quiet and that 
 harmony which make the blessings of this Union so rich and so dear to us 
 all. These are the topics that I propose to myself to discuss ; these are 
 
S3 SPEECH OF 3IK. WEESTEK 
 
 sequent detention of the Senate —to review, historically, this question of 
 slavery, which, partly in consequence of its own merits, and partly, per¬ 
 haps mostly, in the manner it is discussed in one and the other portion of 
 the country, has been a source of so much alienation and unkind feeling 
 between the different portions of the Union. "We all know, sir, that sla¬ 
 very has existed in the world from time immemorial. There was slavery 
 in the earliest periods of history, in the Oriental nations. There was 
 slavery among the Jews ; the theocratic government of that people made 
 no injunction against it. There was slavery among the Greeks, and the 
 ingenious philosophy of the Greeks found, or sought to find, a justifica¬ 
 tion for it exactly upon the grounds which have been assumed for such a 
 justification in this country ; that is, a natural and original difference 
 among the races of mankind, the inferiority of the black or colored race 
 to the white. The Greeks justified their system of slavery upon that 
 ground precisely. They held the African, and in some parts the Asiatic, 
 tribes to be inferior to tile white race ; but they did uot show, I think, by 
 any dose process of logic, that, if this were true, the more intelligent and 
 the stronger had, therefore, a right to subjugate the weaker. 
 
 The more manly philosophy and jurisprudence of the Romans placed 
 the justification of slavery on entirely different grounds. 
 
 The Roman jurists, from the first, and down to the fall of the empire, 
 admitted that slavery was against the natural law, by which, as they main¬ 
 tained, all men, of whatsoever clime, color, or capacity, were equal; but 
 they justified slavery, first, upon the ground and authority of the law of 
 nations — arguing, and arguing truly, that at that day the conventional 
 law of nations admitted that captives in war, whose lives, according to the 
 notions of the times, were at the absolute disposal of the captors, might, 
 in exchange for exemption from death, be made slaves for life, and that 
 such servitude might extend to their posterity. The jurists of Rome 
 also maintained that, by the civil law, there might be servitude — slavery, 
 personal and hereditary; first, by the voluntary act of an individual who 
 might sell himself into slaver)-; second, by his being received into a state 
 of slavery by bis creditors in satisfaction of a debt; and, thirdly, by 
 being placed in a state of servitude or slavery for crime. At the intro¬ 
 duction of Christianity into the world, the Roman world was full of slaves, 
 and I suppose there is to be found no injunction against that relation 
 between man and man in the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ, or 
 of any of his apostles. The object of the instruction imparted to man¬ 
 kind by the Founder of Christianity was to touch the heart, purify the 
 soul, and improve the lives of individual men. That object went directly 
 to the first fountain of ail political and all social relations of the human 
 race — the individual heart and mind of man. 
 
 Mow. sir, upon the general nature, and character, and influence of slavery, 
 there exists a wide difference between the northern portion of this coun¬ 
 try and the southern. It is said on the one side that, if not the subject 
 of aiiy injunction or direct prohibition in the Xew Testament, slavery is a 
 wrong; that it is founded merely in the right of the strongest; and that 
 it is an oppression, like all unjust wars, like all those conflicts by which a 
 
 its nature, whatever may be said of it in the modifications which have 
 taken place, is not, in fact, according to the meek spirit of the gospel. It 
 is not kindly affectioned; it does not “ seek another’s, and not its own.” It 
 does not - let the oppressed go free.” These are sentiments that are 
 
generation to relieve themselves from this relation. And in this respect 
 candor obliges me to say, that I believe they are just as conscientious, 
 many of them, and of the religious people all of them, as they are in the 
 north in holding different opinions. 
 
 Why, sir, the honorable senator from South Carolina, the other day, 
 alluded to the separation of that great religious community, the Metho¬ 
 dist Episcopal Church. That separation was brought about by differ¬ 
 ences of opinion upon this peculiar subject of slavery. I felt great 
 concern, as that dispute went on, about the result, and I was in hopes that 
 the difference of opinion might be adjusted, because I looked upon that 
 religious denomination as one of the great props of religion and morals 
 throughout the whole country, from Maine to Georgia; The result was 
 against my wishes and against my hopes. I have read all their proceed¬ 
 ings, and all their arguments, but I have never yet been abie to come to 
 the conclusion that there was any real ground for that separation; in 
 other words, that no good could be produced by that separation. I must 
 say I think there was some want of candor and charity. Sir, when a 
 question of this kind takes hold of tile religious sentiments of mankind, 
 and comes to be discussed in religious assemblies of the clergy and laity, 
 there is always to be expected, or always to be feared, a great, degree of 
 excitement. It is in the nature of man, manifested by his whole history, 
 that religious disputes are apt to become warm, and men’s strength of 
 conviction is proportionate to their views of the magnitude of the ques¬ 
 tions. In all such disputes there will sometimes men be found with whom 
 every thing is absolute — absolutely wrong, or absolutely right. They 
 see the right clearly; they think others ought so to see it, and they are dis¬ 
 posed to establish a broad line of distinction between what is right and what 
 is wrong. And they are not seldom willing to establish that line upon their 
 own convictions of the truth and the justice of their own opinions ; and are 
 willing to mark and guard that line, by placing along it a series of dogmas, 
 as lines of boundary are marked by posts and stones. There are men who, 
 with clear perceptions, as they think, of their own duty, do not see how too 
 hot a pursuit of one duty may involve them in the violation of others, or how 
 too warm an embracement of one truth may lead to a disregard of other 
 truths equally important. As I heard it stated strongly, not many days 
 ago, these persons are disposed to mount upon some particular duty as 
 
concern of the states themselves. The}' have never submitted it to Con¬ 
 gress, and Congress has no rightful power over it. 
 
 “ I shall concur, therefore, in no act, no measure, no menace, no indica¬ 
 tion of purpose which shall interfere or threaten to interfere with the 
 exclusive authority of the several states over the subject of slavery, as it 
 exists within their respective limits. All this appears to me to he matter 
 of plain and imperative duty. 
 
 “ But when we come to speak of admitting new states, the subject 
 
tory enough, and that we should follow the Spartan maxim, “ Improve, 
 adorn what you have, seek no farther.” I think that it was in some 
 observations that I made here on the three million loan hill, that I avowed 
 that sentiment. In short, sir, the sentiment has been avowed quite as 
 often, in as many places, and before as many assemblies, as any humble 
 sentiments of mine ought to be avowed. 
 
 But now that, under certain conditions, Texas is in, with all her terri¬ 
 tories, as a slave state, with a solemn pledge that if she is divided into 
 many states, those states may come in as slave states south of 36° 30', 
 how are we to deal with this subject ? I know no way of honorable legis¬ 
 lation, when the proper time comes for the enactment, but to carry into 
 effect all that we have stipulated to do. I do not entirely agree with my 
 honorable friend from Tennessee, (Mr. Bell,) that, as soon as the time 
 
 new state. The rule in regard to it I take to be this: that, when we ha' - e 
 created new states out of territories, we have generally gone upon the 
 idea that when there is population enough to form a state, sixty thousand, 
 or some such thing, we would create a state ; but it is quite a different 
 thing when a state is divided, and two or more states made out of it. It 
 does not follow, in such a case, that the same rule of apportionment should 
 be applied. That, however, is a matter for the consideration of Congress, 
 when the proper time arrives. I may not then be here. I may have no 
 vote to give on the occasion ; but I wish it to be distinctly understood to¬ 
 day, that, according to my view of the matter, this government is solemnly 
 pledged by law to create new states out of Texas, with her consent, when 
 her population shall justify such a proceeding; and, so far as such states 
 are formed out of Texan territory lying south of 36° 30', to let them come 
 in as slave states. That is the meaning of the resolution which our 
 friends, the northern democracy, have left us to fulfil; and I, for one, 
 mean to fulfil it, because I will not violate the faith of the government. 
 
 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. That law settles forever, with 
 a strength beyond all terms of human enactment, that slavery cannot exist 
 in California or New Mexico. Understand me, sir; I mean slavery as 
 we regard it; slaves in gross, of the colored race, transferable by sale and 
 delivery like other property. I shall not discuss this point, but I leave 
 it to the learned gentlemen who have undertaken to discuss it; but I sup¬ 
 pose there is no slave of that description in California now. I under¬ 
 stand that peonism, a sort of penal servitude, exists there, or rather a sort 
 of voluntary sale of a man and his offspring lor debt, as it is arranged 
 and exists in some parts of California and New Mexico. But what I 
 mean to say is, that African slavery, as we see it among us, is as utterly 
 
 impossibility” California and New Mexico are Asiatic in their formation 
 and scenery. Thev are composed of vast ridges of mountains ot enor¬ 
 mous height, with broken ridges and deep valleys. The sides of these 
 mountains are barren, entirely barren, their tops capped by perennial 
 snow. There may be in California, now made free by its constitution, 
 and no doubt there are, some tracts of valuable land. But it is not so in 
 New Mexico. Pray, what is the evidence which every gentleman must 
 have obtained on this subject, from information sought by himself or com- 
 
on the whole, that it may not have been a fortunate decision. My habit 
 is to respect the result of judicial deliberations, and the solemnity of judi¬ 
 cial decisions. But as it now stands, the business of seeing that these 
 fugitives are delivered up resides in the power of Congress and the na¬ 
 tional judicature, and my friend at the head of the judiciary committee 
 has a hill on the subject now before the Senate, with some amendments to 
 it. which I propose to support, with all its provisions, to the fullest extent. 
 And I desire to C3ll the attention of all sober-minded men, of all conscien¬ 
 tious men, in the north, of all men who are not carried away by any 
 fanatical idea, or by any false idea whatever, to their constitutional obli¬ 
 gations. I put it to all the sober and sound minds at the north, as a ques¬ 
 tion of morals and a question of conscience, What right have they, in their 
 legislative capacity, or any other, to endeavor to get round this constitu¬ 
 tion. to embarrass the free exercise of the rights secured by the constitu¬ 
 tion to the persons whose slaves escape from them ? None at all; none 
 at ail.. Neither in the forum of conscience, nor before the face of the 
 constitution, are they justified, in my opinion. Of course it is a matter 
 for their consideration. They probably, in the turmoil of the times, have 
 not stopped to consider of this ; they have followed what seems to be the 
 current of thought and of motives, as the occasion arose, and neglected to 
 investigate fully the real question, and to consider their constitutional obli¬ 
 gations ; as I am sure, if they did consider, they would fulfil them with 
 alacrity. Therefore X repeat, sir, that there is a ground of complaint 
 against the north, well founded, which ought to be removed, which it is 
 now in the power of the different departments of this government to re¬ 
 move. which calls for the enactment of proper laws authorizing the judi- 
 
 for the recapture of fugitive slaves, and for the restoration of them to 
 those who claim them. Wherever I go, and wherever I speak on this 
 subject. — and when I speak here I desire to speak to the whole north,— 
 I say that the south lms been injured in this respect, and has a right to 
 complain; and the north has been too careless of what I think the con¬ 
 stitution peremptorily and emphatically enjoins upon it as a duty. 
 
 Complaint has been made against eertain resolutions that emanate from 
 legislatures at the north, and are sent here to us, not only on the subject 
 of slavery in this District, but sometimes recommending Congress to con¬ 
 sider the means of abolishing slavery in the states. I should be very 
 sorry to be called upon to present any resolutions here which could not be 
 referable to any committee or any power in Congress ; and therefore I 
 should be very unwilling to receive from Massachusetts instructions to 
 present resolutions expressing any opinion whatever upon slavery as it ex¬ 
 ists a: the present moment in the states, for two reasons: because, first, I 
 do not consider that the legislature of Massachusetts has any thing to do 
 
 have any tiling to do with it. Sir, it has become, in my opinion, quite too 
 common; and if the legislatures of the states do not like that opinion, 
 they have a great deal more power to put it down than I have to uphold it. 
 It has become, in my opinion, quite too common a practice for the state 
 legislatures to present resolutions here on all subjects, and to instruct us 
 
any resolutions to be offered expressive of the sense of Massachusetts as 
 to what their members of Congress ought to do. He said that lie saw no 
 propriety in one set of public servants giving instructions and reading lec¬ 
 tures to another set of public servants. To their own master all of them 
 must stand or fall, and that master is their constituents. I wish these 
 
 have never entered into the question, and" never shall, about the binding 
 force of instructions. I will, however, simply say this : if there be any 
 matter of interest pending in this body, while I am a member of it, in 
 
 eral interest of the country, I shall pursue her instructions with gladness 
 of heart, and with all the efficiency which I can bring it. But if the 
 question be one which affects her interest, and at the same time affects the 
 interests of all other states, I shall no more regard her political wishes 
 or instructions than I would regard the wishes of a man who might ap¬ 
 point me an arbiter or referee to decide some question of important pri¬ 
 vate right, and who might instruct me to decide in his favor. If ever 
 
 abolition society, or to pay an abol 
 gross motives even to the leaders 
 the consequences. I cannot but s 
 the south has produced. And i: 
 gentleman who doubts of that, rei 
 
 — they think they must do something 
 ntribute to an abolition press or an 
 
 the south has produced. And is it not plain to every man i Let any 
 gentleman who doubts of that, recur to the debates in the Virginia House 
 of Delegates in 1882, and lie will see with what freedom a proposition 
 made by Mr. Randolph for the gradual abolition of slavery was discussed 
 in that body. Every one spoke of slavery as he thought; very igno¬ 
 minious and disparaging names and epithets were applied to it. The 
 debates in the House of Delegates on that occasion, I believe, were all 
 published. They were read by every colored man who could read, and 
 if there were any who could not read, those debates were read to them 
 by others. At that time Virginia was not unwilling nor afraid to discuss 
 this question, and to let that part of her population know as much of it as 
 
Mr. Randolph. Governor M 
 e all knoVt^Trause /'and' 
 
 ECH OF MF-. WEBSTER 
 
 s in 1832. As has been said bv the honorablo 
 se abolition societies commenced their course 
 id—Ido not know how true it may be — that 
 ations into the slave states; at any event, they 
 did arouse, a very strong feeling; in other 
 Lgitution in the north against southern slavery. 
 ' The bonds of the slaves were bound more 
 rivets were more strongly fastened. Public 
 had begun to be exhibited against slavery, and 
 isettssion of the question, drew back and shut 
 ish to know whether any body in Virginia can, 
 dl, and others talked there, 
 i 1832. Ve all know the 
 thing that this agitating 
 to restrain ; not to set free, 
 That is my judg- 
 
 abolith 
 
 the 
 
 [Lau 
 
 k, by strange enthusi- 
 u’e called on to contribute, 
 inion ibis day, that within 
 i collected and paid to the 
 >n lecturers, as would puv- 
 , and child in the state of 
 ,ive no doubt of it. But I 
 e abolition societies has at 
 »•] _ 
 
 complained of. The press 
 ,-iolent every wdiere. There are out- 
 inst the south, and there are reproaches 
 outli against the north. Sir, the ex- 
 ry are violent; they mistake loud and 
 cason. They think that he who talks 
 iis we must expect, when the press is 
 ways will be—for, with all its licen- 
 : and ah.-olute freedom of the press is 
 •eminent on the basis of a free consti- 
 vill be foolish paragraphs and violent 
 re, I am sorry to say, foolish speeches 
 es of Congress. In truth, sir, I must 
 liar tongue of the country has become 
 tpted by the style of our congressional 
 .vere possible for our debates in Con- 
 ople as much as they have depraved 
 their taste. I should cry out, " God save the Republic! ” 
 
 Veil, in all this I see no solid grievance ; no grievance presented by 
 the south, within the redress of the government, hut the single one to 
 which I have referred; and that is, the want of a proper regard to the 
 injunction of the constitution for the delivery of fugitive slaves. 
 
 There are also complaints of the north against the south. I need not 
 go over them particularly. The first and gravest is, that the north 
 adopted the constitution, recognizing the existence of slavery in the states, 
 and recognizing the right, to a certain extent, of representation of the 
 slaves in Congress, under a state of sentiment and expectation which do 
 
 ritiated, depraved, and corru] 
 [Laimhter.] And if it w 
 vitiate dm principles of die j 
 
115 
 
 ished, as it was supposed 
 revolution and the estab- 
 
 been secured by 
 s a slave territory. 
 
 )tion of the honor- 
 
T. B..PETERSON & BROTHERS’ LIST OF PUBLICATIONS.