Speech of Hon. Thomas L. Clingman, of North Carolina, Against the Revolutionary Movement of the Anti-Slavery Party by Thomas Lanier Clingman
Author: Unknown
Date: 0101-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

Making of America Books Basic | Boolean | Proximity |

Bibliographic | Search History

UMDL Texts home U of M login View bookbag
your bookbag has 0 items

Home Search BrowseHelp

list of all pages | add to bookbag

Title:Speech of Hon. Thomas L. Clingman, of North Carolina, against the revolutionary movement of the antislavery party; delivered in the Senate of the United States, January 16, 1860.

Author:Clingman, Thomas Lanier, 1812-1897.

Availability:These pages may freely searched and displayed.

Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically. Please contact umdl-info@umich.edu for more information.

Print Source:Speech of Hon. Thomas L. Clingman, of North Carolina, against the revolutionary movement of the antislavery party; delivered in the Senate of the United States, January 16, 1860.

Clingman, Thomas Lanier, 1812-1897.

16 p. 24 cm.

Washington,

Printed at the Congressional Globe Office,

1860.

Page 1 view page image

F . c4;-41 SPEECH OF HON. THOMAS L~’ CLINGMAN, ,,.. OF NORTH CAROLINA, AGAINST THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT OF THE - ANTISLAVERY PARTY; DELIVERED

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 16, 1860. WASHINGTON: PRINTED

AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 1860. i.,. t, d es is

Page 2 view page image

C; I 4j”1~, i 0 fry 4 I 1. I I li

Page 3 view page image

SPEEC,H. it. The proposition was again and again brought forward by the distinguished Senator from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS] and others, and as often rejected ihby the combined vote of the entire Whig party of the North, and a portion of the Democrats of that section. After years of fruitless struggle it was abandoned, and the principle of congressional non intervention adopted by the compromise measures of 1850..: In other words, it was then established, in sub stance and effect, that the people of the Territo ries, free from all congressional legislation on the subject of slavery, should regulate it for them selves, subject only to the limitatioss of the Constitution of the United States, as interpreted by the courts of the country. This settlement, like the proposition for the extension of the Missouri line, was resisted by the great body of the northern Whigs, who we’te.for tlae Wilmot pro viso and against the extension: of slavery in any mode. It was also opposed by the southern friends of the ,.Mssot’tri ine, who preferred that syvstem to congressional non-intervention,..and who still chershe’d the hope that it: might be adopted. In the final struggle, they were reduced to a dozen southern Senators and thirty Representatives, of whom was one. I call the attention of Sinators to another strik*-ing fact in this connection. Itis charged not only by the northern Opposition, but also by the soutl*ern opponents of the Democratic party,.that it is responsible for the alleged evils of congressionaI non-intervention and the disturbances of so-called “squatter sovereignty ” in the Territories. I affirm that, in 1850, when this system was adopted, it was sustained by the representatives of the southern.vVhigs with the greatest unanimity. I: was no exception to this remark, for I had announced already my separation from the organization of the Whig party. I repeat that the southern Opposition of that day-, under the lead of Mr. Clay, were the.first portion of their fellow-citizens to abandon the Missouri line and support the principle of non-intervention by Congress., On the other hand, the last and firmest friends of the w aMr.

CLINGMAN s aidi,, Mr. PRESIDENT. It is my purpose to speak to tday of the condition of the, count ry, as connected r with agitation of te slave ry questions. I shall do ) this with p erfect frankness, and with no reserve, the ex cept what parliamentary rules and Senatorial i courtesies impose.

By such a course onlf ycan the real nature of the impending evil be ascertained, and a remedy suggested. Itaving carefully stu died the suvject du ring the greater pa rt of my a p ol itical life, a nd f rom differ ent po int s of view, I <:L intend to express my opinions seriously, and as ez fully as the occasion seems to require st aefore spea king di rectly to the mnerits of th e subject, I sh all devo te a few minute s to a prelim i nary question. It has been contended that the Democratic party is responsible for the antisla v e ry agitat ion of the North. A retrospect into the past will vindicate it most triumphanitly from the charge. h ee cou rs e of the old Federalparty, in t he war of 1812, had broaught it iontodiscredit an d disgrace with the American people. Its lead ers, with a v iew of recovering the popular favor, an d through it the control of the Government, seized upon the occasion of the application of Miss ouri for admission into the Unioen, and, by appealin g tot hean ti-slv ery feeling of the northern States, cr ea ted a sectional party.powerful enough to prevent, for a time, the admission of the State.

During the s truggle, a provision was adopted that slave ry should never exist in the territory west of M issouri and north o f th e lie of latitude of 360 30’. Though this arrangement was distasteful to the South, and by many regarded as dishonorable and unconstitutional, it was acquiesced in for the ‘ sake of peace. And when, in 1845, Texas was annexed to the Union, ty the Democratic party mainly, this Missouri line was extended through it, and slavery, which legally existed in every part of that State, was abolished and prohibited north of the line. When, subsequently, territory was acquired from Mexico, the Democratic party, with but few exceptions, attempted to apply the same princi ples to it, and extend the line of 36~ 30’ through! 41 4i,,-6 C.- -. L “/) IC_ -2 -33

I

Page 4 view page image

4 that Territory; and did, in fact, send bodies of armed ruffians to hold it by force, constituting,as the Senator from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS] said, a military occupation. This movement provoked’ retaliation; and the strife thus occasioned was referred to by them’as evidence against the policy of non-intervention. By the same effort on their part, they could have created disorders in any State of the Union, and might, with as much justice, have attempted to discredit the principle of State sovereignty.

In fact, they refer to the late invasion of the State of Virginia, by some of their employes, as an argument against the state of sOciety pr evailing in the South. It is undoubtedly true, however, that in consequence of the repeal of the Missouri restriction, true and patriotic men were defeated in the North by Free-Soilers and Abolitionists. When the Democratic party had the manliness and the statesmanship to reform the currency system in part by the adoption of the sub-treasur plan, it sustained severe losses for a time. In the more arduous undertaking of placing the slavery question on a permanent and solid basis, with reference to the action of the Federal Government, it has had to encounter, perhaps, greater difficulties. I am not sure, however, that it would have been as much weakened, but for accidental circumstances which it could not foresee.

During the excitement arising out of the repeal of the Missoutri-restriction, there occurre d that singular organization called the American party, whi-ch carried a majority of almost every one of the northern-States. IIt seaV,red, during this period of excitement, and-permnanrttly separated from the Democratic party, many who would othherwise have returned to it. On its sudden collapose, most of its members-in the free States uriitedwith a few outside Abblitionists and foir,l‘6d the present’ Black Republican pa ty.. But for’these occurrences, I have’ no doubt that the D’emocatic party would have, ere this,’

recovered its’ageishde[hy in several of the northern States. But i’aaitn, Mr. President, When, in the y-ayr 1857, Robert J. Walker ws,i made -Goternor of Kansas, he publicly declared that: the climate of that Territory fitted it only to be L’ free State; and also as,/ured the people that the Whole constitution should be submitted to -them. This-position was condemned geneially-in the South as amounti ng to Executi~ve interference, or interveni-ton with the right’of the citizens Of the’Territory to decide tliese quetitins f~rjthentseres. By Sway of defense for’Goverhor Walker, it wa baid that a number of southern:men had expresse d the opinion th:at it would ]Se~a fee State. Every 0he saw, by wever, that if Go’Vernior Walker had taken the Other side, he might, with even more platisibility, ha6ve declared that Kansas ought to bea slaveholding State, beeatise itvras on thie ramne pamlel of I titude With’

Missouri,-Kentuck, Vi~rginia, MaiTland, and -Delaware, all of which Were slaveholding’States,- and this position of his mnight’have’ been fortified’ by any number of deelamations of promiieint. Free’Soilers and Abolitionists, to tie effct thag; Uhder the Kansas act, that Territor’y Would inevitably be a slaveholding State. The entire South, almost, condemned his pos~ition, therefore, -as Unfair,‘and an unjust exercise of Executive inf~einee in the Territory. It so’happened,howvever, that, for months, tie paper at the seat of ~oVeirom-ent, and othors supposed-to:repreent Missour i lin e w ere those represented at the Nashville conv ention-whose ultimatum it was-and such Senators and Representatives from the S outh as w ere in th at day denounced as ultras and fireeaters, because of their n ot adopting the principle of congressi onal non-intervention in lieu of the M iss ouri line. When these facts are remembered, will the present s out hern Opposi tion and its orgains contin ue to assail the Democratic party for an act w hich e they themselves earnestly and unitedlyconcurred in? Can they take the ground that it was right to aboli sh the Mi ss our i line, in order that fr ee States s h ould be made south of it, but th at it s hould not, in like manner, be obliterated to place the South on an equal footing north of it? After a majority both of the South and of the Democratic party had adopted the principle of congressional non-intervention, we who had oposed it acquiesced, and the Democratic and Whiz conventions of 1852 both sanctioned it. When the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska w ere adm it ed t ma i prt aled, the Democratic party applied the same principle to th em; and, i n s o doing, f ound it n ecessary to repeal the old Missouri restriction, in order that there might be no interventio nf. by Conress to contrlol in any tay the inhabitants of those errito ies. Wer e theynot committed to do thisS in the strongest and m os t emphatic terms, by heir platform and their late action as to the Mexican territories, while the Whig hOr Opposition conv e ntion had professed, in its platform, to have acquiesced i l thae sane pl”nciples? Baut it is said that both parties hiad decIared themselves opposed to a fuirth er aitation o f the slavery question. So they had; bu t the re was a specific pledge in favor of con i grcssional non-intervention in the Terr itories and , the carrying i t.

out ought to have produced no agitation whatever, and woluld no t in a h ealth mova. Foth rstotels, thy Yoe ieSuhams,cnendhspsto,tee s tat e of public opinion in the Nothh. The Democratic party could’not honorably avoid doing what it did; and Would have been liable to the charge,:had it failed to do this, of shifting its principles froim time to time, and so shaping its course as tofavor non-ititelventibn whenit would thereby admit free States into t heUnion, and of going for congress iontal intervention, on the other hatd, when it might thereby prevent the’forimation of a slaveholding State. Had it failed to maintain:its principles on this occasion, it would have beeni justly exposed to this charge. Their opponents in the North, however, on the repeal of the Missouri restriction, raised at once an immense clamor,. showing that their friendship for non-intervention was only pretended, and that they had acquiesced in the measures of 1850 only because they Created a free State south of 360~30’-, and did not intend the principles to be: applied in a-case in which-, by any possibility, the S’outh might carry its institutions north of this line. We:all know that, prior to 1854, itheyas regularly and v’ehenetitly denounced the Missouri! compromise’as they have since done the Kansas intitity-,. butt as soon as it was proposed to repeal this frestriCti”n to’carry out the principle of congressional non-interivention, they suddenly became the Warm advocates of this same Missouri line, and-deplore-d its remova]. tFrom the first to the last, they s~howed themnselves to be Free-Soilers, and determined to exclude the South from all share in the public territory of the Union. While the Kansas bill wa~s pendring, they threat~ened to hire men to oerlpy i I i,-

It’. i / I

Page 5 view page image

z )l, P? 5 settled convictions. But now the evil has attained “-such.alarming dimensions tlmt it demands conrit’erationi.’. When a dark and rapidly advancing cl0ud’ has already’covered half the heavens, and pthe muiteings of the distant thunder and the wailtings of the coming storm are loudly heard, none but a false sentinel. will proclaim a calm.

Emihnently futile, too, and mischievous, are declarations of southern men against agitation and infayor of unioih’and harmony. When a man is threatened with vi6lence, will he stay the hand of tWie assailant by proclaiming his love of peace? When a country ais invaded by a public enemry, can the inhabitants protect themselves by passing resolutions in favor of peace and harmony? All the world regards such things as evidence of weakv ness or cowardice, and as only calculated to stimulate theinvaders.‘When PhIlip of Macedon was threatening Greece, his hired partisans recommended repose and quiet, and denounced Demos thenes ar a political agitator. It was in the midst of men who werecrying out “peace!

peace! ” that Patrick Henry thundered that there was “no peacee!” If the Abolitionists in the North could be induced to abandon agitation on the subject of slavery, it would be well; but thev,reiect with derision tihde sugg estion, and becomeonly m ore inso l ent ad southern men cry out the louder f or quiet and un i o n. When, some twventy-five years ago, the abolition society at Boston, under’the lead and guidance of a British Subject, attracted public attention, though it declared thatits purposes were merel peaceful, and intended to persuade men to liberate the sla.ves, yet so insignificant in numbers was it, that the candidate for Congress in that district refused to reply to its interrogatories, or to give an pledges as to his course-on the subiect of slavery. For this he was complimented by Garrison Gray Otis, who,.nevertheless, said with prophetic sagacity: “.And can you doubt, fellow-citizens, that these associations will.act together for political purposes? Is it in human nature.-foe such combinations to forbear’? If, then, their numbers’ should be augmented, and the success they anticipate realized in.,making proselytes, how soon might you see? majority in Congress returned under-the influence ot’ the associaltion!s? And how long afterwards would this Unioii last? Though few in numbers, the Abolitionists went resolutely and actively to work. There was a strong feeling in favor of liberty pervading the public mind generally, while its attention had never been called to the specific differences-physical, mental, and moral-existing between the’white man and the negro. The point of operations selected was one remote from negro slavery, where the people were ignorant of its actual features, and thus fitted more easily to be imposed upon. I’n that vicinity, too, were the remains of old prejudices against the’southern section of the Union. The effort of the Abolitionists was directed to the corrupting of knowledge at its fountain heads, by the diffuilsion of p.ublications directed to that end. Its first fruits were seen in its influences on women~ preachers’ teachers, and professors, persons of lively’sensib’ilities generally, not so much accustomed to deal With matters of fact, more easily deluded by cun1ningly-devised sophisms, and more frequently acting.Fr~om the influence of feelings. So~on abolition :sentimnents appeared in books of education; got t he v iews of the President, sustained, in the stroogest end mot erphatic terms, the position of Gmovern r Walker]/ Almost the entire Debmocracy of te i te th e efo zls trefore, took this groud in su”pport of what -they understood to he the views of th anstr an a s ed the Administration, and assured their fellow-citizers tha t hthe people of KaKn sas w er e to: have. the privilege of vo ting on thq whole constitution of the l~ta~tc.: Butt,ad theowards the ofse to that year, the conveait ion of the Territory derded o s ubmit ogly the l.avery la se to the voters genecrally. The-President, therefore, r commend ed the admission of the St ate u nder the o rstsitution so adopted. That this rec omm en da tion of his was right, wI never doubted; beca use I think it has b ee ni full settled by the usa es of thes States, that their conventions may tubnlt o r n ot, as they choo se, aeithe r the whole or a part of thei r c onstit u tions to a vote of the peopl e. Never theless, t his position being iconsistnt wit h that which had been so ge n er ally taken in the N orth, many men who zealously sustained it were afterwards defeated at home. b ec aus e of th eir-party havin been previously committed.to-a different line-off policy’.’ I kno’w that many southern men wh o had no donub t that the action oo f th e K
ansa s c onv ention w as theoretically and as, a m atter of constit utional law. right, nevertheless regretted that action, because it had th e apearance of seeki ng to pavoid an ope por.tun sty for a fai r expresesion of the spopular will. Whil e we held that Congress had no right to interfere with the action of thy Territor’y in thi s respect, yet we felt that the issue was one which was injuring, our friends in the No rth, and could not ipossiblye beefit us. If ther e ever had b een any cha nce of its becoming o slave State in fact, the course of Governor’ Walker had already cu t tha t of by. carrying ove er all the officials and their influenc e in the Territory to the cipe of the Free-State par ty. Withno purpose to ast, ens ure on any one, I ndevertheless frankly refer to this as a circumstanc e f or w hich the Democratic party, as a whole, are. not justly responsible,‘but wh ich aided the antislavery party sas at present organized. On a survey of the entire ground, I mainta in that it will appear that the action of the Democratic party for the last fifteen years on the slavery question, has been wise, patriotic, and statesmanlike. w I proceed, however, to the consideration of the great question before the country. Immediately after the presidential -election in 185~, I met the veteran Secretary of State, then a Senator from Michigan, on the floor of the Senate, and in reply to an inquiry as to how he was, he anxlswere,i: “Well in health, but depressed in spirits. Sir,? said he, “I formerly thought that the Union would never be dissolved; but I am now notwitlout painful apprehensions of a different result.’ They say that the excitement in the North has grown out of the Kansas bill. A hundred Kansas bills would not have produced this result. These people mean to abolish slavery in your section,. Ydu y may think that they. are not fanatics; but..the misfortune is that they’are. You will ain nothing by making to them concessmons; you cannot thereby help us; bult you will ruin you~rselves.

By stancding iirm,’ you can at least protect your~selves.”.. HIS Wor:ds made the iteeper imn~pression upon me becausel they were in acco~rdance with m-y own.

Page 6 view page image

q I possession of schools, colleges;and churchles. As its powers increased, its efforts were multiplied, until it covered the land with its publications.t Some twelve monthsago, it was stated in the newspapers that one of the antislavery organizations a had resolved to circulate, during the following year, in the State of New York, one million of its tracts.

Can such an amount of printed matter as this, consisting, as it does, of ingeniously written misrepresentations and falsehoods, fail to produce some effect? Remember that this is repeated from year to year, and aided by hired and voluntary lecturers, speakers, and preachers. Abolitionism, to a great extent, pervades the literature of the free States. So strong is the feeling against sla-a very there, that the writers of novels and plays, to secure the public patronage,exercise their wits in imagining all that can be conceived as worstin human nature, and represent it as a true type of the state of society in the South. The bulk of the newspaperpress, too, in the North,isanti-slavery. Such is the character of the entire press of the dominant party there, and of a large portion ofthe neutral and religious papers; while a part even of the minority, or Democratic press, avoids the subjectas much as possible, instead ofattempting to stem the current. Though northern city papers are much read in the Soulth, on the contrary, our papers have little or no circulation in the North. If they had, the efforts of the antislavery party would, to some extent, be counteracted. The cities of New York and Philadelphia, for example, are not abolitionized; and this is attributed, by some, to the fact that they are engaged largely in southern trade. But the mechanics of Massachusefts are just as much interested, and yet t hey are intensely antislavery’ in their feelings. Tive true solution, I think, will be found in the fact that these cities are the resort of so many southerners; that our state of society is thereby better understood, and cannotbe so successfullydefamed, The same reason applies to the free States on the borders of the slaveholding country. It is not as the Abolitionists allege, that their consciences are so much blunted that they cannot appreciate the evils of slavery; but simply because they do understand it, that they cannot be imposed upon by the falsehoods of the antislavery writers. In addition to this reason’, the western States have a large influx of southern emigrants. Wh il e Vermnont is intensely abolitionized, New Hampshire, adjoining it, is less so. This may be accounted for from the fact that New Hamipshire was originally strongly Democratic, and its press resisted, therefore, to somne extent, the statements of the Abolitionists. Had not New Hampshire been a small State and surrounded with adverse influences,she would probably not have been over-: powered. The antislavery movement has gone on with increasing strength, until it has educated a large portion of the northern people to entertain feelings of hostility to slavery and the southern I States.- The movement has progressed independently of political occurrences, but it has occasionally been accelerated or retarded by them. For example: in 1850 it was weakened somewhat, partly by the great discussion at that time, which enlightened somewhat the popular mind, and also by the peculiar character ofuthe legislation of the period. California was admitted as a free State, with boundaries reaching far south of the Mis-t souri line, and givingor t the Nor th the ma jori ty in this body; whilY e the principle of non-interveibtion applied to Utah and New Mexico, was regarded as a fruitless abstraction,‘the general.opinion prevailing o that, to use the word s of Mr. Webste r, the law of God had excluded slavery from them.

As-to the fu giti ave slave law,it was seenthatitcould pract ically, like its predecessor, the act of 1793, be trendered a nullity by State action and individual resistane. It is a great mi s take to suppose that the repea lof the Missouri restriction in 1854 produced the pre sent an tislavery organization. In 1847 and 1p48 the House of Representatives, by large majorities, repeatedly passed the Wilmot proviso; and this was understood to have been. done in accordance with the wishes of their constituents. Prior to 1850, most of the churches had been divided by-this issue. From year to year the antislavery sentiment acquired-more and more political influence; and in 1848 it took possession of the greater portion of the Whig party in the free States. No one was so influential in effecting this result as the Senator from New York. In a speech delivered during-that year in Ohio, the object, in part, of which was to induce the antislavery men to join the Whig party rather than the Bufalo-platform Free-Sailers, he uses such expressions as these. I call th~e attention of Senators particularly to them, because I shall have occasion to refer to them agaia presently: “The pairty of treedom’ seeks complete and universal emancipation. *: “Slavery is the sin of not some of the States only, but of them all; of.not one nation only, but of all nations. It perverted and corrupted the moral sense of mankind deeply and universally, and this corruption became a universal habit. Habits of thouglht become fixed principles. No American State has yet delivered itself entirely from these habits. We, in Nes York, are guilty of,slavery still by withholding the right’of suff~ragfle from the race we have e mancipated: You, in Ohio, are guilty in the same way by a system of black laws still more aristocratic and odious. It is wri.tten in the Constitution of the United States that five slaves shall count equal to three freemen as a basis of representation; and it is written also, in violation of Divine law, that we shall surrender the.‘fugitive slave who takes refuge at our ,fireside from his relentless pursuer. You blush not at these things; because they have become as fawiliar as household words; and your pretended Free-Soil allies claim peculiar merit lor mainta,ining these miscalled guarantees of slavery which they find in the national compact. Does not all this prove that the Whig party have itept up with the spirit of the age? that it is as true and faithtill to human freedom as the inert conscience of the American people will permit it to be? Wliat, then, you say, can nothing be done for freedom becauseflte public conscience remains inert? Yes much can be done, everything can be done. Slavery can be limited to its present bounds. It can be ameliorated. It can be and must be abolished, and you and I ean and muiist do it. T”he task is simple and easy, as its consummation will be beneficent and its rewards glorious. It requires only to follow this simple rule of action: To do everywhere and on every occasion what we can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can at any time, because at that precise ttmne and on that particular occasion we cannot do more. ‘ ” Circumllstances determinie possibilities.” ” But we must begin deeper and4 lower than the composition and combination of factions or parties, wherein the strength and security of slavery lie. You answer that it lies in the Ctonstitutionrof the United States and the constitutionsz and lawfs.of slaveholding States. Not at all. It is in the: erroneous ~entiment of the American people. Constitutions and laws can no more rise above the Virtue of the people than the limpid stream can climb above its native spring. Inculcate the love of freedom and the equal rights of man under the paternal roof; see to it that 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 I. I i ‘I, (5 I

Page 7 view page image

#t V’I X4,iI that man would have been accepted as a good member of the Black Republican party. But while all the members of the party are itc tuated by this principle or feeling, they differ as to the particular steps or measure to be taken. The most moderate of them say they are merely op posed to the extension of slavery, and therefore they are for prohibiting it in the Territories, and opposed to the admission of any other slavehold ing States. The Senator from Vermont [Mr. COLLAMER] said not long since that this was his position, that he was for confining slavery to its present limits, so that’in’ time it might cease to be profitable. and in that way be extinguished. As this position is taken by-manry men who claim to be moderate and conservative in their views, let us examine it for a few moments. They say that if slavery be confined to its present limits, the slaves will increase in numbers to that extent that slave labor will in time be so abundant that fhe supply will exceed the demand; and that the own ers will, from choice, set them free rather than be at the expense of maintaining them for their labor. I,et it be assumed for illustration that it costs ten cents to feed and clothe a slave: then if, owing to the great number of slaves who exist in the Territory, their labor would be worth less than’ten cents per day, undoubtedly it would be an advantage for the owners to liberate them. But remember that when the labor of -a negro should be worth only ten cents, that of the white man would likewise come down to this price. The result, therefore, is, that population is to’be’crowded in the South to that extent that every laborer is to be reduced to the starving point, as it was in Ireland during the times of the famine. Now, I would ask the Senator from -Vermont this ques tion in all candor: if a system was proposed to be instituted by which his constituents were to be reduced to the starving point, and thus crushed, would he counsel them to await such a result? or would he not advise them to STAND FROM UND’ER before they were destroyed? As there are already four million’slaves in the South, when their num bers are increased many times, no one will pre tend’ that they ever would be removed. The plan is to keep the negroes and such whites as are compelled to stay among them down at the starving point for all time. And this is the policy of the most moderate and conservative of the Black Republican party. There are others of them who say, that in addition to this the fugitive slave law must be repealedslavery abolished in-the District of Columbia, the forts and arsenals, and wherever the United States has exclusive jurisdiction. Others of them contend likewise that the slave trade between the States must be abolished, and alao the coastwise trade between the States. Other classes insist, too, that slavery should be attacked in the States themselves. The largest number of the party, however, stand on the same ground of the Senator from New York, [Mr. SEWARD.] He says that slavery has no “constitutional guarantee” which may not be released and ought not to be relinquished; that “circumstances determine possibilities;” that they must stand ready “sto do everything when and on every occasion that we can;” and that ” whenever the public mind; hall will the abolition of slavery, the way will be open for it;”

that ” it can be and must be abolished, and limbs at your door, and defend him as you would your pa ternal gods; correct your own error, that slavery has any constitutional guarantee which may notbe released, and ought not to be relinquished.” “Whenever the public mind shall will’the abolition of slavery, the way will open for it. ” I k now that you will tell me this s all too slow. Well, then, go f aster if y ou can, and I will go with you; but, re member the i ns t ructive lesson that was taught in the words, c these hings ought ye to have done, and not to have left th e othe t er s undone.” Such efforts as this were per severed in from t ime to time. In 1850 he m ade that speech in which he proclaimed that there was a ” higher law” than the Constit u tion, for which he received the emph atic den uncia tion of Mr. C l ay. His sub sequent efforts have b een i n this same line; and atdRochester more recently he endeavored to ren de r the slav eholders of the South as odious as possible, and declared t hat ther e was an “I irre pressible conflict” between the free and the slave holding S
tates. T o stimu late th e northern people to attack us, he affirmed that unles s th ey abolish ed slave ry throughout the entire So uth, we would extend slavery ov er all the n orthern States. In substa nce he says, to p rotect themselves they must d estro y our s ocial and political system.

Whe n a man says that there is an irrepressible conflic t b etween him and me, and that y head’ or his must fall, he proclaims himself my dadliest enemy. It avails no thing if h e even adds that he intenls to ac t quietl y and legally, but that my head must fall to save his own. In the present in stance, the Senator say s that it is for the South to decide whether its system of s oci ety shall be destroyed’ peaceably or by “violence.” He is benevolent enough to say, that if we will submit, the work shall be done for us quietly and peaceably. By hi efforts ta and those of others, the bulk of the old Wh ig party was abolitionized, and its members, with the aid of accessions from the Democratic ranks and Abolition societies, have constituted that political organization which today threatens the existence of the Republic. It claims for itself the name of Republican party, and by its opponents is designated as the Black Repul;tican party.

The latterdesignation is proper to distinguish it from the old Republican party, whose “image and superscriptron”it seeks to counterfeit; and also because its-efforts are entirely directed to advance the black or negro race. What are the principles of this party, as indicated by its declarations and its acts? It has but a jingle principle, and that is hostility to negro slavery in the United States. Some of its mifembers have called it a party for human freedom; but this is a mistake; for though there are in the state of slavery in different parts of the world, men of all races, yet it has manifested no sympathy for any but the negro; and even to negro slavery, it seems indifferent Butside of the United States. I maintain it has no principle whatever, but hostility to negro slaver in the United States. A man might be for or against the tariff, the bank, the land distribution, or internal improvements; he might be a Protestant or Catholic, a Christian or infidel; but if he was only actuated by an intense feeling of hostility to negro slavery, or, as that is interwoven with the social system of’the South, if it were only known that -he was anxious that the Federal Government should exercise all its powers for the destruction of the southern States,, I

Page 8 view page image

8 The Federal systemI, instead of giving us pro-. tection, only affords our enemies immunities-and facilities for attack. Instead of being a shield, the Union has been converted into a sword to stab us the more deeply. It is idle for Senators to say that a majority of the people of their States are not in favor of these unlawful proceedings. If only one man out of every hundred should be a thief, and the other ninety-nine should not restrain them, by legisla tion or otherwise, this minority of thieves -would be able to steal ali the property in the community.

Ifosocieties were formed in Massachusetts to atJ’al property in Connecticut, or New York, the Le gislature and people of the State would doubtless take steps to restrain them. This-i donie etten with reference to foreign countries, to prevent war between them. American citizens ate punished for going into Canada to disturb that British com nlunity. If societies were formed in Canada for a similar purpose,and were,in fact,to steal an equal amount of property from New England, New York, Ohio, and other northern States, to what is carried away by the Abolitionists from the South, we should be involved in a war with Great Britain” in less than six months. What would be the feelis of those border States, if Canadian orators should boast that their societies had robbed themni of $45,000,000
worth of their property, just as& they now say they hold that value of southern runaway slaves? But men who combine to plunder the people of the southern States, so fare from, be ing punished, are, in many of the fte e State s, encouraged b the legislat i on ther e. During the last session, the Senator firom New York [Mr. SEWARD] introduced a proposition for additional legislation to prevent the foreign or African slave trade to the U’nited States. In 1808, Congress passed laws to prohibit that trade, and since that time, a period of more than fifty years, as far as I know or have reason to believe, the law has been violated but in a single instance. What other law on your statute-book has been so well kept? I repeat, what law has Congress ever passed, which there was a temptation to violate, that has been so well’observed? That it was not broken often, is not owing to any want of opportunity. Northern, as well as foreign ships, have been engaged in the trade, and the extent of the southern coast affords much greater facilities for the introduction of slaves than does the Island of Cuba, into which large numbers are annually carried. This law has not been broken, simply because the people of the South were sot willing to violate it. Now, sir, let me state a case for the consideration of the Senate. Suppose, instead of what has actually occurred, the State -of Georgia, where some negroes were landed, and a number of other southern States, had passed the strongest laws which could be devised to defeat the act of Congress forbidding the African slave trade, and encouraging that traffic by all the means in their’power; suppose, further, that southern Senators, and other prominent public men, had, in their speeches, earnestly irecommended the vi.olation of the law If Congress, and that all through the South money was subscribed and associations formed to defeat the lawr, and provide facilities by railroad or otherwise-for the introduction of Africans, and mobs gotten up ou an d I n and and must do it. ” More recently he Bad: “The interest of the white race demands the ultimate emancipation of all men. Whether that consummation shall’ be allowed to take effect, with needful and wise precautions against sudden change and disaster, or be hurried oa by violence, is.all that remains for you to decide.” Healso declares that he will go with those who can phnow him t he fastest road to effect the obi ect. Such is te t rn ad t i the governi rinciple and sirit o the - ng p p p arty, t o use all the power they have, or can by any pos sibility acqcire, for trhe abolition of sla very. ‘ehen we look to the acts of this party, in what a ttitude is it p resente d? It h as m ade the whole newspaper press subject to its control intensely hostilte t o euthetr section sa of the Union. Such is the owerf the o r,e o t epublicpress that it was able to keep England and France for centuries in a state of hatred and war with each other. Only a f ew eeks since, to prevent a collision between the two countries, th e Empe ror of Fr a nce pub lic ly checked th press of his own countra; and yetf the fiercest ar ticles in the F rench journals were moderate in comparison with the general tone of the antislavery press towards the S outh. This arty, t oo, sends up rep resentatives to the two Houses of Congress from time to time, who, neglecti a he be b ing all the public business of the country, tievote themselves to preparing and reciting denunciatory harangues agai nst the southern St ates. Some years ago, an intelligent foreigner, who happer ned t o h earone of these tirades in this body ex aressed ihis astonishment at the quiet manner Cnsit w hias l istened to by southe rn Senat ors. l H e d eclared that if, when a Europe an congress had onet for business purposes, a similar course had been t aken, the congress w ould at once have b e en brok en up. In ou r State Legislatures, such things,i te, aif they occur, are soon stopped by personal collisions. In Congress, out of deference t o section al feelings, there is no attemp t to check such men as choose to embark in the trade of heapino all manner of Obloquy o n our constituents.

o his antislavery pa rty has torn th o pieces most of the great Chr istian associations of the country; in spite of all th e re s istance which the esprit du corps and Christian charity prevailing among them could present. It has stricken down every public man in the North within its reach, who has shown a willingness to administer the Constitution fairly in relation to slavery. Whenever it has obtained the control of the Legislature, it has caused themnto pass the most stringent acts for the nullification of that clause of the Constitution which provides for the return of fugitive slaves. When, many years ago, the State of South Carolina threatened to nullify a law of Congress, the whole Union was thrown into a state of the greatest excitement; but so common have these proceedings become in the free States, that they now scarcely excite a remark when passed. This party, too, has organized societies, and hired-agents to steal and carry away slaves from the southern States; and when a gang of twenty or more is taken of at a time, it is made a matter of public rejoicing; and their papers boast of the perfection of the undorgrouitd railroads, and of the millions of dollars’ worth of property that they 3 have taken from the South. lo I I I Z, /

Page 9 view page image

.9 ~~/o A. Amp people of the North have no right to interfere with it, the party so defending will in the end lose ground; becauses masses of men when excited by real or imaginary wrongs will in time break over mere legal restraints which they regard as unjust and criminal. They hold that “where there is a will, there is a way,“and will find some mode of action.

But in this case the real issue is, whether or not the negro is the equal of the white man physically, intellectually, and morally? Though a usually evaded in the discussion, this is the real h question which lies at the foundation of the con troversy. If the people of the northern States should regard the negro as being the equal of the white man, then they will continue to feel a sym pathy for him in slavery, and can be excited to efforts for his liberation. If, on tile contrary, he be different in material respects from the white man, and also inferior, then his case must be de cided on its own merits and not from any sup posed analogy to that of the white man. It is not, as the Abolitionists in their silliness assert, a mere question of color or prejudice against a black skin. If the negro were in fact in all other respects like the white man, his blackness would have been of no more consequence than the dif ference between black and red hair or light and dark eyes. The feeling against him grows out of the fact that he is in all respects different from the white man and inferior. When I put the ques tion to any one that I may meet here, the chances are that he will at onee agree with me, in private conversation, and admit, in the language used some time ago by the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. TRUMBULL,] that Omnipotence has made a differ ence between the white man and the negro; and yet it is this very opposite view in favor of negro equality which gives its main force and vitality to the antislavery movement. When, sir, some twelve years ago I, in discussion, threw out sug gestions about the difference of races, I was de nounced as one who attributed injustice to God Almighty in alleging that He had made the ne groes inferior. Will any Senator on the other side of this Chamber tell me why it is that Prov idence brings half the children that are born in New England into the world with constitutions so feeble that they cannot live until they are twenty-one years of age?. Or will they,upon their views of His justice, explain why it is that in the same family one brother is provided with a good constitution and strong intellect, while a second has from his birth the’seeds of debility and incur able disease, and a third is mentally imbecile or perhaps idiotic? Would the injustice to the feeble be greater if they were black men? Are We to refuse to believe the facts which nature constantly Presents to us, because they do not harmonize with our ideas of the justice of the Creator? The Bible itself does not explain to us why it is that, while ten talents are given to one man, to another but a single talent is given. For the inequality of the negro, Providence. is responsible, as Ie is for the entire creation which surrounds us. When human laws are in accordance with thesys tem of nature, they are wise; but if in oppositloh to it, they ar~e productive only of mischief. The question is significantly asked in the Scripture, “;Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leop ard’his spots?” The ancients expressed their opinions on this subject in the fable which rep to overpower the Untii ted States marshals, could not a h t undre d negroes have been imported for every one that the Abolitionists have stolen? Yes, with a shore-line of more than ten thousand miles,-millions minght have been imported. Thi s proceeding would aave be en a violation of the laws of the U nited States, just like that which has occur red w i th reference to the fugitive slave law. In the c ase su pposed, however, t he s ou the rn men would have had greatly the advantage on the score both of political economy and moralit y. They might have said, with truth, tha t the ne groes imported from Africa add ed to the produc tion and wealth of the Unite d S ta t es, white those carried North by the Abolitionists were generally converted into idle vagrants. It might also have been said that African svages were by being brought to the United States partially civilized, and not only made more intelligent and moral, but also christi anized in large numbersi; w hile the ne greoes carried to the North become so worthless and so vicious, that many ofthe States there were seeking to exclude them by legislation, as com munities do the plague and other contagious dis orders. And the Senator from New York, who has declared that it is a religious duty of the peo ple of the North to violate the fugitive slave law, and urged them, instead of delivering up the run away negroes, to protect and defend them as they do their paternal gods, stands up in the fate of the American Senate and complains of violation of the laws against the African slave trade! Was there ever such an exhibition? I repeat, was the like ever seen since the creation of the world? I may use strong language, but truth demands it. That Senator, too, has fully indorsed the incendiary and revolutionary doctrines of the Helper book, as a large majority of the members of his party in the House have done. Such, then, Mr. President, are the views of this party, as indicated alike by its declarations and its acts. Its members are moving onwith an accelerated velocity. While the more moderate of them now occupy the ground of the Abolitionists twenty years ago, most,of them are far in advance of that position. Ought we -to stand still until all the States are as thoroughly abolitionized as Massachusetts now is? If not, what can be done to arrest the mischief? I propose, then, seriously, to consider this question. In my judgment there are two modes in which it can and ought to be met. The first is under the Constitution/s the second may be outside of it. If abolitionism be a popular delusion, can it not be dispelled by proper efforts? Truth can overcome error; but to enable it to do so it must be properly presented to the human mind. As the antislavery party have acquired their present ascendency by vigorous and widely-extended efforts, if they are to be overthrown, it is only by decided and persevering exertions on the other side. There are, in ny opinion, sufficient conservative elements in the free-States for this 12urpose, if they can only be properly arrayed in opposition. It is necessar that the discussion should be widel extended and also directed to the merits of the question involved. The constitutional argumnent is sufficient for the intelligent and honest, but if it be said, for example merely, that -slavery as -existingjin the southern States is a great wrong and a great evils yet that under the Constitution the. I I i i r p I 11 y: . 9

Page 10 view page image

t:’, j 10 I think it clear that the difference between the white race and the negro is as great as that be tween certain different species of animals of the same genus, that approximate each other in their structure and habits. But it is said, Do you deny the manhood of the negro? No more than I should deny the monkeyhood of an ape if I should say he is not a baboon, or the duckship of a mallard if I deny that he is a canvas-back duck. Instead of indulging in vague generalities about human li be rt y an d in the righ ts of man, examine the nature and condition of the negro himself. Four thousand years ago, in the climate best suited to, his constitution, he was a savage and a slave. In his own country he stands in the same category with ivory, dates, and other tropical productions. If transferred, as merchandise, to a foreigner, he is usually benefited by escaping from a master who will eat him in times of scarcity to one who treats him with more lenity and often with kind ness. Egypt was the seat of the earliest civiliza tion knowni to man, and the Egyptians held the negro as a slave, but were not able to civilize his race; though subsequently, in contact with the Carthagenians, Romans, and Saracens, he still remained a savage and a slave. In the West Indies, and in other portions of America where they form independent communi-. ties, notwithstanding the advantages they had from the teachings of white men, and their great powers of imitation, they seem to be returning to their original savage state. When we turn to the free negroes of the United States, what shall I say of them? Why northern as well as southern men, and even Canadians, characterize them as the most worthless of the human race. Formerly the Abolitionist ascribed their degradation to the want of political and social privileges. But during the middle ages, in Europe, the Jews were not only without political privileges, but were, as a class, odious and severely persecuted, yet they were, nevertheless, intelligent, energetic, and wealthy. In point of fact, in some portions of the northern States, the negro has been made a pet of, and but for his native inferiority,/ nust have thriven and even become distinguished. On the other hand, it is an indisputable fact that the four million negroes who are held in slavery in the South, when their condition is considered with reference to their physical well-being and comfort, their productiveness as laborers, their intelligence,‘morality, and religion, stand superior to any other portion of their race. While the free negroes in the North, with fresh accessions from abroad, dinainish in numbers, the slaves of the South increase as rapidly as the white race, and, upon the whole, perhaps, add as much to the wealth of the country in which they are located as any equal number of laborers in the world. What the Abolitionists have to do is to findd, or create, a negro community which is superior to that of the slaves of the South. When they shall have done this, they will have laid some grounds for their appeals in behalf of emancipation. Hitherto they have enlisted the sympathies and feelings of the North by falsely assuming that the negro and white man have in all respects the same nature. Let the inequality which the Creator has made be recognized, and their system falls to the ground. But the Abolitionists sometimes say that, even resented a black man as having be en killed in an effort to wash him white. Ther e is no middle round which can be main tained on this question. If the negro be your equal, why do you excl ude him from your par lor s? If he be unequal, your whole argument has in fact lost its foundation and fails. If it once be admitted th at the negro is inferior, te then the entire edifice of Aboli tionism falls to the ground, because itis intimate ly interwoven with, and owes its vital ity to, the o ppo sit e belief. When pressed boldly on t hi s issue, the Aboliti oni st s of late are trying to evadelit. It is a singular and striking fact that when thi is issu e has b een ma de in the free States i r cl, a directly, and discussed before the people, they hav e decid ed the point against the negro. Such was th e c ase in Connecticut oand ew York on the question of suffrage, a nd also: in th e rStates of Illi nois an n d Indiana on the proposition to exclude free negroes from those States. In the contest, too, i n Illino is, in. the year 1858, which resulted in the triumph of the distinguished Senator from Illinois,tMr. D OUGLAS,] this was the leading issue. Had that Sen ator cont ented him se lf with simply saying that slavery was an evil which his constituents had no c onstitution al right to interfere with, I do not believe he would have been successful.

But h e understood thequestion, went at once into the merits of i t, and carried the war into the enemy’s ranks. And his opponent’early in th e co nt est began to cower and shrink from his blows, a nd trie d in vai n to eva de the i ssue. The American people unders tand the negro, and where a direct appeal is made to t the they truly respond Though the story of Dean Swift, in whi ch, i n a certain count ry, e r eresn s the represents the horse as being greatly super i or to th e ma n, is an ingeni ous one, yet it misleads nobody among us, because horses are so common that their qualities are understood. S o the romances of the Abolitionists, i n which the represen t the negro as b eing equal a nd even superior: to the write man, deceive no one fam iliar with the: negro. In southern Ohio, for example, where free negroes are quite comm on i there is little or no Abolitionis m; while in the nort her n art, in whic h the negro is eseldom seen, anti:slavery carries everything before it. European writers know littl e or nothing of the negro, and hencee our professors, preachers, and other mere b ook-men of the North, are easily led astray by Europe an and AmericaeAbolitionists;,but the people of the country,who Ore accusto med to look at f acts, ar e no t s o readily imtosed on. A thorough investigatio n of the subject shows the negro to be in fer ior, and hence the principles which apply to wh ite men can not be extended to him. No farmer assu mes that iwhat igs advantageous to the hoN, f or ex a mple, is necessarily so to the sheep. To determine, therefore, what is to be done with the negro, you -must study the negro himself. Remember, I do not undertake to decide how or when the n egro race became differe nt f ro m the white. They may, as many men of science contend, have beent endered different since the ir cre atio n, by a n tact of Provi dence. Some plausibles ay say, that inasmuch as we learn from the Scripture thata certain race were condemned to be slaves through all time, the negro best fulfills this description, and hence take him as the representative of that class. W~ithout attempting to decide who is right as to theory, 0

Page 11 view page image

( I -,, if it be true that the negro is inferior, for that reason, namely, on account of his weakness, he ought not to be enslaved. Does this reasoning apply to children? The average of human life is less than forty years, and how can you justify depriving human beings of liberty for more thani half that time? If children were the equals of adults it would be wrong to control them. It is simply because they are inferior that we justify their subjection to the will of others. Upon these principles the negro, being, as compared with the white man, always a child, is benefited by the control to which he is subjected. . When pressed on these points by an array of facts, the Abolitionists fall back on the opinions of Mr.

Jefferson and others of the last century. But since their day the sciences have made a prodigious advance, and in all that relates to the peculiarities and distinctions that exist between the different races of men, there has been the greatest progress of any. In fact, it is a science which has almost grown up in our day, and it has made such strides as to have taken possession of the intellect of America. Already there are hundreds who have adopted the doctrine to one who believed it ten years ago. It is only necessary for the true men to take it up boldly, and press it home, and the Abolitionists can be routed throughout the North. The shrewder antislavery men, however, seeming that they cannot make longer a successful fight for the negro, affirm that their objection to slavery is not on his account, but for the sake of the white men, and that they and the South are injured by the institution, and that our people are for that reason wanting in enterprise and industry. To that argument I have this to say in reply. Where, Mr. President, in all history’was it known that one nation was so strongly under the influnence of benevolence, as to cause it to make war upon another merely to compel the nation attacked to become more enterprising and prosperous p? Who has invaded Spain or Turkey to compel the Spaniards or Turks to become more industrious and thrifty? Will any one gravely pretend that this torrent of fanaticism in the North has no other origin except a desire to compel the people of the South to be more industrious, and to take better care of their own interest, and be more attentive to their own business? The idea is preposterous. I have no doubt but that misrepresentations on these points have contributed to strengthen the antislavery party. But, sir, is there any difficulty in making a complete defense on this point? With no wish, Mr. President, to wound the sensibilities of any one, or to claim superiority for my section, let us, nevertheless, look at some of the principal facts. One of the best tests of the prosperity of a country and its healthy condition is the progress of its population. Compare the population of the fifteen slaveholding States with that of all the free States as shown by the census of 1840 and of 1850, the last decade ascertained. If we deduct from both sections the foreign emigrant population, which is an accidental increment, it will be found that the slaveholding States have increased much faster in population than the free States. Again, sir, a-fair estimate of the wealth o f the two sections will show that the citizens of the southern States are as rich per Jad, I think in fact richer than those of the free State s. It was also shown by Mr. BRANCH, a colleague of m ine, some two years aio, t hat of t he o ld Atlantic States the slaveholdng had more miles of railroad in proportion to their white population than the free States. There are other evidences of our material wealth, to which I will presently advert On the score of’ morals, it may be said that we have fewer criminals and paupers, and, propor tionally, church accommodations for a larger num ber of members. It is said, however, that any one who merely looks at the two sections will see the inferiority of the southern systemn. But you must remember that our population is extended over a territory of nine hundred thousand miles in extent, while many of the northern States have a dense popu lationi. It is. the tendency of an agricultural people, with an unlimited area, to extend itself rapidly at first, while commerce and manufactures concentrate population. Tried by this standard, any one of a dozen monarchies’which I passed through, during the past summer, has the advan tage of any portion of the Union. Even in Italy, oppressed as it has been for ages, in its agricul tural landscape can bring to shame tlhe best cul tivated State of New England. According to the logic of the Abolitionists, these States ought to be placed under the dominion of the House of-Aus tria or the Pope of Rome. The entire State of Massachusetts is not larger than one of the congressional districts of North Carolina. Where a million of people are brought within a small area the eye of an observer rests on many habitations and fields. In time, the whole Union, iffilled with people, may be superior to the best cultivated parts of Europe; but even now, the inhabitants of sparsely-settled districts have as much wealth and comfort, all things being considered, as those who live in crowded communities. At no period of our history have the southern States been more prosperous than at present, and-even during the commercial pressure of 1857 which has so seri ously affected the northern States. I do not, however, propose, Mr. President, to enter into a general argument on these topics, but to main tain that the conservative men of the North have within their reach facts enough to establish two propositions. The first is; that the negro, in the condition of slavery, is not a proper object for sympathy, and is, in fact, benefited by’his subjection. The second one is, that the white race are not injured by the institution; that the southern.States constitute, in the aggregate, a prosperous community, and ought not to be the subject of denunciation at the North. Should this be made to appear, then, whatever of real feeling exists against us will be diminished, and, in that event, we may expect that persons who, like the Senator from New York, [Mr. SEWARD,] patronize abolition from such motives as induce a jockey on a race-course to back the horse that he thinks likely to win-all such persons, I say, will find it expedient to abandon antislavery agitation as a trade. To Effect such results, however,- the friends of the Constitution; in the North must make up their minds to undergo the labor of a thorough canvases of their region against the antislavery men, and bl;y proper publications refute their misrepresentations. The Abolitionists declaim constantly against I . 1, I “I I - I,, i ,, ,.,; I I,;; a-I I e ill I 4 I

Page 12 view page image

12 the slave power. Why, sir, it is sixteen years since there was any attempt by the Democratic partyto noninate a citizen of the slaveholding States for the office of President; and for the last ten years, in the conventions of all parties, the contest has been solely among northern men, In fact, during that period no electoral vote has been given in a slaveholding State, for the office of President, to any southern man. Our only object has been to select among northern gentlemen one who was not our enemy. The men chosen have been-assailed by our opponents, not because they were neglectful of any northern interest, but simply because they were willing to d6 us equal justice with the other section, and -refused to exercise the powers of the common Government against us. Ithas been urged that the southern States should, by retaliatory legislation, prohibit the sale within their limits of the productions ofthose ofthe northern States that have failed to do us justice. As the Constitution of the United States has been interpreted, both by the Federal and State courts, there s ample power to effect this by imposing a tax on articles after they have been imported and the packages broken; in other words, on retailers. Two objects are expected to be effected by this system. In the first place, to make it the interest of the northern States to counteract the efforts of the Abolitionists; and secondly, to prepare the southern States for a separation, if they should find it necessary to take such a step. I have often thought, Mr. President, that it,was unfortunate that the framers of the Constitution made no provision for the expulsion of a State. If the Union be a place of misery, then, to punishl refractory members, they should undoubtedly be kept in it, as criminals are detained in penitentiaries; but if, on the other hand, it be a beneficial and desirable thing to remain in the Union, then bad members ought to be excluded from it. No State in my judgment, has a right to enjoy the advant i ages of the Union, and yet refuse to submit to the obligations it imposes. Such laws of Congress as are held by the courts to be constitutional ought to be obeyed by all the States that share the advantages of the Union. If, for example, when a dozen years ago the State of Massachusetts passed laws to nullify the act for the recovery of fugitives, if she had been expelled from the Union, two striking effects would have been produced. In the first place, the consciences of the inhabitants of that State would have been freed from all responsibility for the sin and turpitude of slavery; and, secondly, their goods, when brought into the United States, would have been taxed
asthoseofotherforeigners are. The impression which such an occurrence would have made on their minds and those of the country generally, might possibly then have arrested the antislavery movement when it was comparatively feeble. In the present condition of things, such. a course would not be practicable, perhaps. - If, however, Mr. President, this hostile movement of the antislavery party cannot be arrested under the Constitution, let us consider the second remedy, namely, a temporary or permanent separation of the southern from the northern States. Senators on the other side of thea Chamber doI not think this will occur. When Giddcings and I others proclaim that “the South cannot be kicked i! out of the Union,” such a declaration is received l! by the auti-slavery party of t he country wibl( evi-, dent satisfaction, and gene rally >ith appge. You Senators, a nd. your supporters do no.t believe there. is. dan er in any event, because:prom, inent slaveholders and men of wealth occasionally tell you they are conservative, and that the: sooutt, ern people will submit to any treatment you mnoy think fit to impose. But you s rhoueld rnbem that these persons, are not always the readieit to., volunteer to defend the country in time of burr? and that many of them dread civil commotion. During our Revolution there were wealthy tories in every one of the colonies; and at the time General Washington evacuated the city of New York, he was urged by one of his subordinate officers, a northern man, to burn the city, for the reason tha,t two thirds of the property to be destroyed bel on,-ed to tories. You do not believe, also, because you say tht if the South were in earnest, it would be mare united, and would nat send up, i sli,el does kfror certain. districts, members of Congress w-hk as’mp you il p arty movements, and in answer to your threats proclaim theirlove of the Union. You should understand, however, that the cn, stituencies of such members are merely misled a$. to the purposes, principles, and power of your party by those newspapers on which they r elf for information. Let them have proper 9nowtedge as to the condition of the country. wehere your influence prevails,and they will manrfeat the same feeling that therestof the Soutl does. Gra4;ualy a knowledge’of your movements and objects in spreadingover the southern States, Two occurrences have materially contributed to unmask your objects andl disclose the dangers which threaten. The first was the vote which Mr.

Fillmore reeeived in 1856. When it was seen: that. a mn like him, of avowed antislavery opinions, merely because he showved his willingness to enforce the fugitive slave law, and declared his purpose to give to the South the benefits of the Constitution, was beaten largely in every free State, by. a mere adventurer like Fremont, a great impression was made on the conservative men of the South. They began to realize the state of feeling in the North, and more disunionists were made by that occurrence than perhaps any one which preeeded it. The second incident which taused even a Ampu stronger impression oln the minds of the southern people, was the manner in which the acts of John Bro.wn were received in the North.

Instead of the indignation and abhorrence which the atrociousness of his crimes ought naturally to have excited, there were manifestations of admiration and sympathy. Large meetings were helad to express these feelings, sermons and prayers were made in his behalf, church bells tolled aie cannon fired, and more significant than all these, were the declarations of almost the entire R.ep,ublican pmre;, that his punishment would strengthen the antislavery cause. Yet Senators tell us that these things were done because of the courage Brown exhibited. But our people think you are mis. taken. Though the mere thief may be and usually is a coward, yet it is well lknowni thzat:men who engage in robbery or piracy as a p.roeission geaerally ossess.courage. Criminals havre been executed frequently in New England who, both in -the-commission of their crimes, and in tl~t death, mnanifested asmueh courage as John Br:own, I i I .,., LrI -1

Page 13 view page image

I 65 - * s -~~~1 and yet none: of them called forth such feelings .of sympathy. At a meeting in Boston, where thbusands were assembled, when Emerson, a lit. erary man of eminence, proclaimed that Brown had made “
the gallows as glorious as the cro sse, B’ he was rapturously applauded.

At the large meetirmg at Natick, where the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr.

WiLsON] was a spectator, the principal orator, Wright, declared that the people of the North look upon “Jesus Christ as a deadfailure,” and hereafter will rely on “John Brown, and him hanged.” In the southern States, wheure old-fashioned Christian notions still prevail, it would be thought right to beat such blasphemers even outofachurch, if they had congregated there. We are told now that they were not interrupted because the people of Massachusetts are law-abiding, and in favor of the liberty of speech. But our constituents do not believe one word of this, because they know that, of all the people in the Union, the inhabitants of Massachusetts are the most excitable and the most intolerant and over bearing. They know that men who dare to oppose the antislavery party there are persecuted with intense hatred; -that mobs can begotten up on the-smallest-occasions, and that ten thousand man can be assembled on the shortest notice to rescue a runaway negrq from the custody of a United States marshal. -eOur people know thit these things could not have occurred unless there had been an intense feeling of hostility to the South, and, therefore, strong sympathy with our assailanits. Is not this the reason why your leading editors have declared that the punishment of John Brown will strengthen the antislavery cause? Such is the construction the people of the South put on this whole matter, and hence the demonstrations you witness among them. But you hold that the South is unable and unwilling to resist you; and the Senator from New :Yck [Mr.

SEaSPA ] has declared, in substance, that the Union is never to be dissolved. He also told the Senate that the contest between the free and slaveholding States had ended by the formner winning the victory. He and the rest of you expect us in future to submit quietly to what you may see fit to order. Had the British Parliament believed that the colonies would resist their tax bills our Revolution would not have occurred; but Lord North and others declared that the clamor in America came from a few seditious agitators, and that the great body of the people were so loyal to the Government that they were ready to subtit to the action of the Parliament. They affirmed that there was no danger of resistance; and, least of all, oftheir thinkingof dissolvingthe union with the’mother country. Our ancestors wiselydetermined that the cannon of Great Britain were less dangerous than her acts of Parliament. uLet uslook at this matter for a few moments calmly. At this time the population of the South is inearly thirteen million, of which more than eight million are free persons -and four million slates. At the beginning of-our Revolution the population of the colonies, both free and slave, was less than three million. The slaveho]Aing States are then far more than four times as strong as were the colonies when they dissolved the union with Great Britain.: Is-it likely that after having been -independent .for eighty years, our people a re less attached to kthei r rigts? But many o f your Abolitionists say that slaveholding has enfeebled our people, and rendered them so spiritless th a t the y are neither willing nor able to make defense. Ed mund Burke thought differe ntly, and said that of all men slave - holders were. the m ost tenacious of their rights, and defended their liberties with the highest and -haughtiest spirit. I do not refer to the war of the Revolution, when all the States were slaveholding; but in the last war with’Great Britain the southern States sent out more men than the northern, and it has never yet, as far as I have heardbeen;pretenddd that Harrison and Johnson, Scott and Forsyt4, were not as brave as those who went~fr-om the free States to the Canada line, or that Jackson and the men under him in the Southwest, did not exhibit a proper courage. To the war with Mexico, though, much the less populous section, the South sentnearly-twice as many men as the North. A leading Black Republican editer says that one regiment:from New York would be able to conquer all the southern States. A regiment from the State of New York certainly conducted itself well during the Mexican war; but it has not, I think, been affirmed that it behaved better than the regiments from the slaveholding States. If you, therefore, think that one of your regiments is able to subdue the South, our people will probably differ with you in opinion. You say that fear of the slaves will prevent any resistance to you. Ass asudden movement of a few negroes, stimulated by abolition emissaries, might destroy a family or two, there is undoubtedly apprehension felt. Fifty persons, however, are killed in this cotunitry by vwcioUs and unmanageable horses, to one who suffers from the act of a rebellious negro. There is, in fact, about as much reason to apprehend a general insurrection of the horses as of the slaves oflthe South when left to themselves. When, during the war of 1812, the British armies were in the slaveholding territory, though they induced a number of slaves: to join them, they found no advantage: to result from it, and their Government paid ior all carried of at the close ofthe war. Though the Spartans and Romans were the greatest slaveholders in the world, and though, too, they held in the most rigid servitude men of their own color and ra’ce, and therefore liable to rebel in great,fore, -yet they were strong enough to overthrow-all their enemies. In our opinion, the slaves are a positive-element of strength, because they add to the production of the country, while the white race can furnish soldiers enough. Every man, too, among us, is accustomed to ride and to carry-weapons from his childhood. There:are, however, other important elements to be taken into the account. During the last fiscal year the exports of the United States, exclusive of specie, were O278,000,000. Of this amount, ,the free States furnished, exclusively, $5,281,000, the slave States $188,693,000, and the two sections jointly, also, $84,417,000. Of this latter sum of $84,000,000, the slave States probably furnished one third, but certainly one’ fourth. A fourth added to the amount exclusively furnished by them, makes a total of $210,000,00 as the value of their exports to foreign countries. They also exported alarge amount to the free States. New England alone received about fifty millior dollars’ ” t 1,.,. 13

Page 14 view page image

*‘14 worth of southern productions; and to the rest of i the free States were sent, doubtless, more. The entire’exports from the slaveholding States to the free States, and to foreign countries combined, must greatly have exceeded three hundred million dollars. As the South sells this much,it, of course, can afford to buy a like amount. If, therefore, it constituted a separate confederacy, its imports would exceed three hundred million dollars; a duty of twenty per cent. on this amount, which would be a lower rate than has generally been paid under our tariffs heretofore, would yield a revenue of $60,000,000. More than fifty million of this sum could well be spared for the defense of our section, and the support of larger armies and navies than the present Government has. Though it may seem strange to you that the South should in this way raise as large a revenue as the whole Union has ever done, and this, too, with a lower tariff, you must remember that most of the tariff taxes the South pays go, in fact, in the shape of protection to those northern manufacturers who thireaten us with negro insurrections and subjugation. Do you think that with these prospects before our people they are ready to submit unconditionally to you? They have the strongest feelings of contempt for the avaricious and greedy, the canting and hyp)ocritical, the mean, envious, and malicious Abolitionists. Little as they may think of the free negro, he is, in their judgment, more respectable than the white man who comes down to his level; and with all the world to choose a master from, your negro-worshiper would be their last choice. In makingup our calculations, we must also look to the other side. The free States have a population of seventeen or eighteen million. Though this is considerably more, numerically, than our strength, yet it is much less, relatively, than was the population of Great Britain in 1776. I have no doubt that your people are courageous, generally; but the best and bravest of them are in the Democratic ranks; and, while they would defend their section, if attacked, I doubt if they would easily be induced to assail us. Many of your Abolitionists belong to tke “peace party,”’ and have little appetite for cold steel, though they are most efficient in getting up popular clamors, and are formidable at the ballot-box. It is also true, that while everything the South needs she can either produce or commonly get cheaper in Europe, under a system of free trade, your northeastern States are especially dependent on the South for its productions and freights. How many of your manufacturers and mechanics would emigrate to the South to avoid the payment of tariff taxes? If itwere known that one third of the stores in New York could not be rented, how much would real property fall, then? Deprived of southern freights, what would be the loss on your vast shipping interest? I give you, in this calculation, the benefit of the assumption that all the free States would go with you. In fact, I do not believe that the Northwest would remain connected with New England, still less that you could retain California and Oregon. IT But you, Senators, do not believe the South will resist. Look for a moment at the course of things there. In those sections that I am best acquainted X with, there are hundreds ofdisunionists now where l there was one ten years ago. By disunionists, I i mean men who would prefer to see, the Union eon tinue, if the Constitution were fairly administered, but who have already deliberately come to the conclusion t]at this is impossible,and would will ingly to-day see the Union dissolved. In some of the States, th sate class constitutes decided uma iorities now, and in oth ers whe re the y are not, ‘the majority is ready to unite with them upon the happening of some further causes. In m’y judg ment, the election of the presidential candidate of the Black Republican party will furnish that cause. The principles of that party, as announced in the contest of 1856, were such that no honorable south ern man could possibly belong to it. I see that the general committee in their call properly take this view, and only extend their invitation to the Opposition in the free States. What precise anti slavery platform they adopt is not very import ant, as they will of course make it so as to ob tain the support of their most moderate members, knowing that the ultra ones will go with them any how.; In fact they know that in the language’-of the Senator from New York, [Mr.

SEWARD,],cir cumstances determine possibilities,” and that he and they are willing ” at all times” to do all they can, in power or out of it, to overthrow slavery. It is said, however, that we ought to wait for somq overt act; and the; Senator from New Hamp shire [Mr. HALF,] the other day declared that it ,was wrong and insolent for southern men to talk of resisting merely because they, the Republicans, elected men to carry out “their views!” That Senator is very wise, and knows that, whensaiman wishes to subdue a-wild horse, he treats the animal with the greatest kindness at first, and commits no overt act on him until he is tell and securely tied. Suppose that your candidate was known to be in favor of making a treaty with Great Britain, by which the United States were to be reannexed as colonies to that country, and he had been elected by the majority of votes, would the minority, who might still wish to preserve their independence, be bound to wait until the treaty had been actually ratified, and British armies had taken possession of the country, and begun to maltreat the inhabitants? In the present case, the very inauguration of your candidate makes him commander of the Army and Navy.

One of his fir’st acts would be, doubtless, to station them advantageously, while, at the same time, he could carefully remove from the South all the public arms, lest the people should take them for defense. -He would fill the southern, States with postmasters, and other officials, whose efforts would be directed to dividing, as much as possible, the people of the South;, and to forming conneetions with the negroes. Doubtless, some such policy as this would be adopted before any direct blow was struck at slavery anywhere. Should we, under these disadvantages, begin to resist, a long and bloody struggle, lik~ that of our Revolution, might be the consequence. The veryimpression that Fremont was to be elected produced some disturbances among the slaves; and with a Black Republican President a hundred such forays as John Brown’s might occur in a single year. Though the negroes left to themselves are harmless, yet, when assisted and led on-by Europeans in St. Domingo, they destroyed the white inhabitants., As the Senator from New York [M~r.

SEWA.RD] holds that the constitutional guarantees i~n favror of slavery, being “?in violation of the divine I c t

Page 15 view page image

law,” cannot be enforced, and ” ought to be relin-innocent person to save my own; and I have never quished,’” he would be on the side of the negro.

doubted but that it was the duty of every citizen The objections are not personal merely to this_ to give his life cheerfully to preserve the Union of Senator, but apply equally to any member of the these States, while that Union was founded on an party elected by it. It has, in fact, been sug-honest observance of the Constitution. Of the gested that, as a matter of prudence, for the first benefits of the Confederacy to all sections, pro election they should choose a southern Free-Soiler. vided justice be done in the administration of the Would the colonies have submitted more willingly Government, there can be no question. to Benedict Arnold than to Lord Cornwallis? By Independently of its advantages to us all, there way of palliation it has been said, that even if a are reasons why it should be maintained. Con Black Republican should he electcd, he would siderationsofthiikindwere,duringthelast year, probably disappoint his party, and be more con-brought to my mind from new points of view, and servative than they are; and that the worst he withaddedforce.

When,lastspring, I landedin would do, might be to plunder the country, by England,J found that country agitated with ques legislation or otherwise.

This, however, would tions of reform. In the struggle which was main be only a reprieve to us; for the very fact of his tained on both sides with the greatest animation, election on such grounds, and our submission, as there were constant references to the United States; it would destroy our friends in the North, would and the force of our example was stimulating the demoralize and degrade our own people and ren-Liberals, and tending to the overthrow of aristo der them incapable of resistance, while our ene-I cratic and monarchic restrictions. Our institu mies, flushed with success, would select, after-Itions and our opinions were referred to only to be wards, more ultra agents to carry out their applauded, except-by a small but influential aris “views.” No other “overt act” can so imper-tocratic clique. That olhgarchy cannot forget the atively demand resistance on ourpart, as the sim-Revolution of July, 1776, which deprived Britain ple election of their candidate. heir organiza-of this magnificent western empire; and it sees, tion is one of avowed hostility, and they come with even bitterer feelings, its own waning power against us as enemies; and should we submit, we and vanishing privileges under the inspiriting in shall be in the condition of an army which sur-fluences of our pr6sperity. It, however, is always renders at discretion, and can only expect such ready to take by the hand any American of prom terms as thehumanityoftheconquerormaygrant. inent position who habitually denounces and de But, we are asked how we will go about making preciates his own Government, and labors for its a revolution or dissolving the Union? This would overthrow. possibly have been a difficult question to answer In this connection,Iremember a statementmade during the first year of our Revolution, when our to me by the late American Minister at Paris, Mr.

forefathers were avowedly fighting to get good Mason. He spoke of having had a conversation terms of reconciliation with the mother country. with one whose name I do not feel at liberty to Mr. Jefferson said that six weeks before the Dec-mention, but whose influence on the opinion of laration was made, a majority of the men who continental Europe is considerable, who admitted made it had not even thought of independence.

to him that there was nothing in fact wrong in our The people of the colonies, though they had not negro slavery; but who, nevertheless, declared authorized anybody to make it, accepted it, never-that if the Union of our States continued, at no theless, as a fact. distant day we should control the world; and, Who anticipated the sudden revolutions that therefore, as an European he felt it to be his duty overthrew several monarchiesin France? Though to press antislavery views, as the only chance to it requires skill to create governments, yet men divide us. I have otherand many reasons to know often destroy them very unscientifically. As the that the monarchies of Europe’, threatened with main strength of all governments is in public opin-downfall from revolutionary movements, seek, ion, so, when that is forfeited, they often seem to through such channels as they control, to make fall easily and suddenly. As the Government of similar impressions. A hundred times was the the United States, with the attachment of its citi-question asked me, “Will you divide in Amerzens, is the strongest in the world, so, when that ica?” But never once was the inquiry made of is lost, it would become one of the weakest. me, “Will slavery be abolished, will your coun [ may say, however, that I do not thinkli there try become more respectable in the eyes of the will be any secession of the southern members of Abolitionists?” The middle and lower classes of Congress from this Capitol. It has always struck England, who are struggling to acquire additional me that this is a point not to be voluntarily sur-privileges, look with satisfaction and hope to our rendered to the public enemy. If lives’should be progress. France, too, is imbued with Amerilost here, it would seem poetically just that this can ideas, and, notwithstanding its despotic form should occur. I cannot find words enough to of government, is one of the most democratic express my abhorrence and detestation of such countries in Europe. Italy I found in the midst creatures as Garrison and Wendell Phillips, who of revolutions, and its monarchies falling down stimulate others to deeds of blood, and, at the same without even a day’s notice, and its inhabitants, time, are so cowardly that they avoid all danger while recalling the republican ideas of past ages, themselves. As from this Capitol so mucli has looked withexultationtothat greattrans-Atlantic gone forth to inflame the public mind, if our coun-Confederacy, where there are no kings and no tryinen are to be involved in a bloody struggle, dukes; and more than once, while passing through I trust in God that the first fruits of the collision Tuscany or Lombardy, the enthusiasm of the may be reaped here. While it is due to justicel people reminded me, by their music and banners that I should speak thus, it is but fair to myself and shoutings, of my own countrymen, at a to say, that I do not remember a time when I Fourth of July celebration. Germany, the recepwould have been willing to sacrifice the life of an tacle of millions of letters from this side of the e I’ll 15

Page 16 view page image

. -a 16 do us the justice to sag that it would be “madness or folly to believe’ that we would,” submit to be governed by such a Chief Magistrate’

as Fremont. the general tone of feeling in the South, and the rapid formation of vigilance committees and military companies, indicate that our people have not forgotten the lessons of the Revolution, and there may be a contest among the States as to which shall be most prompt to resist To avoid any such necessity, ourpeople are disposed, generally, to make every effort onsistent with honor. They will, with great unanimity, go into battle upon the old platform of principles, and, waiving all past issues, heartily support the standard-bearer who may be selected. But the fate of the country mainly depends upon the success which may crown the efforts of tose brave and patriotic men in the North, who, in spite of the odds arrayed against them, have so long maintained an unequal struggle against the antislavery current. They fight under a flag ;which waves in every State of the Union. Should it fall, it carries with it an older and a still more honored emblem-that banner under whichWashington marched to vietbry; which Jackson maintained triumphantly, and which has been borne gallantly and gloriously over every sea. I have still confidence in the good fortune of the UJnited States, and in view of the many providential occurrences in the past, still anticip’at ea triumph for the Republic.

water, is being rapidly educated, and is already far advanced to a stable free system. T The Swiss and the Belgians are boasting of the resemblances of their Governments and ours. Everywhere, too, are our countrymen distinguished and recognized for their intellectual activity and energy.

The people abroad have, perhaps, exaggerated ideas of our immense progress, our vast power, and growing ascendency in the civilized world.

The masses, pressed down by military conscriptions and inordinate taxation, look with pride and confidence to the great American Republic, that in time they hope will dominate over the earth and break the power of its kings. But the Senator from New York, [Mr. SFwaRD,] and those who act with him, have determined that these hopes shall no longer be cherished, and that our system shall fall, to gratify the wishes andmeet the views of the British Exeter Hall antislavery society. He holds that our Government has hitherto been administered in ” violation of the divine law,” and that our former institutions must give way to the “higher law,’ ” abolitionism, and free negroism. This is the issue we are now called upon to meet.

Should the decision of the ides of November be adverse to the fortunes of the Republic, it will become the high duty of the South, at least, to protect-itself. Northern gentlemen, I believe,,, with great unanimity say that if the conditions were reversed, they would not be willing tosubmit for a moment; and many, -like Mr. Fillmore, I .1 4 1 -

Powered by DLXS

To comment or inquire about content, contact moa-feedback@umich.edu To report errors, contact umdl-help@umich.edu

Reprint Information for this collection