I wish to speak to-day, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, but as an American, and a member of the Senate of the United States. It is fortunate that there is a Senate of the United States; a body, not yet moved from its propriety, not
lost to a just sense of its own dignity, and its own high responsibilities, and a body to which the country looks, with confidence, for wise, moderate, patriotic, and healing counsels. It is not to be denied that we live in the midst of strong agitations, and are surrounded by very considerable dangers to our institutions and government. The imprisoned winds are let loose. The East, the North, and the stormy South, combine to throw the whole ocean into commotion, to toss its billows to the skies, and disclose its profoundest depths. I do not affect to regard myself, Mr. President, as holding, or as fit to hold, the helm in this combat with the political elements; but I have a duty to perform, and I mean to perform it with fidelity, not without a sense of
existing dangers, but not without hope. l have a part to act, not for my own security or safety, for I am looking out for no fragment upon which to float away from the wreck, if wreck there must be, but for the good of the whole, and the preservation of all; and there is that which will keep me to my duty during this struggle, whether the sun and the stars shall appear, or shall not appear, for many days. I speak to-day for the preservation of the Union. “Hear me for my cause.” I speak, to-day, out of a solicitous and anxious heart, for the restoration to the country of that quiet and that
harmony which make the blessings of this Union so rich and so dear to us all. These are the topics that I propose to myself to discuss; these are the motives, and the sole motives, that influence me in the wish to communicate my opinions to the Senate and the country; and if I can do anything, however little, for the promotion of these ends, I shall have accomplished all that I expect.
Mr. President, it may not be amiss to recur very briefly to the events which, equally sudden and extraordinary, have brought the political condition of the country to what it now is. In May, 1846, the United States declared war against Mexico. Our armies, then on the frontiers, entered the provinces of that republic, met and defeated all her troops, penetrated her mountain passes, and occupied her capital. The marine force of the United States took possession of her forts and her towns, on the Atlantic and on the Pacific. In less than two years, a treaty was negotiated, by which Mexico ceded to the United States a vast territory, extending seven or eight hundred miles along the shores of the Pacific, and reaching back over the mountains, and across the desert, until it joins the frontier of the State of Texas. It so happened, in the distracted and feeble state of the Mexican Government, that, before the declaration of war by the United States against Mexico had become known in California, the people of California, under the lead of American officers, overthrew the existing provincial government of California, the Mexican authorities, and run up an independent flag. When the news arrived at San Francisco that war had been declared by the United States against Mexico, this independent flag was pulled down, and the stars and stripes of this Union hoisted in its stead. So, sir, before the war was over, the forces of the United States, military and naval, had possession of San Francisco and Upper California, and a great rush of emigrants from various parts of the world took place into California in 1846 and 1847. But now, behold another wonder.
In January of 1848, the Mormons, or some of them, made a discovery of an extraordinarily rich mine of gold, or, rather, of a very great quantity of gold, hardly fit to be called a mine, for it was spread near the surface, on the lower part of the South, or American, branch of the Sacramento. They seem to have attempted to conceal their discovery for some time; but soon another discovery, perhaps of greater importance, was made of gold, in another part of the American branch of the Sacramento, and near Sutter’s Fort, as it is called. The fame of these discoveries spread far and wide. They inflamed more and more the spirit of emigration towards California, which had already been excited; and persons crowded in hundreds, and flocked towards the Bay of San Francisco. This, as I have said, took place in the winter and spring of 1848. The digging commenced in the spring of that year, and from that time to this the work of searching , for gold has been prosecuted with a success not heretofore known in the history of this globe. We all know, sir, how incredulous the American public was at the accounts which reached us, at first, of these discoveries; but we all know, now, that these accounts received, and continue to receive, daily confirmation, and down to the present moment I suppose the assurances are as strong, after the experience of these several months, of mines of gold apparently inexhaustible in the regions near San Francisco, in California, as they
were at any period of the earlier dates of the accounts. It so happened, sir, that, although after the return or peace, it became a very important subject for legislative consideration and legislative decision, to provide a proper territorial government for California, yet differences of opinion in the counsels of the Government prevented the
establishment of any such territorial government, at the last session of Congress. Under this state of things, the inhabitants of San Francisco and California, then amounting to a great number of people, in the summer of last year, thought it to be their duty to establish a local government. Under the proclamation of General Riley, the people chose delegates to a Convention; that Convention met at Monterey. They formed a constitution for the State of California, and it was adopted by the people of California in their primary assemblages. Desirous of immediate connection with the United States, its Senators were appointed and Representatives chosen, who have come hither, bringing with them the authentic Constitution of the State of California; and they now present themselves, asking, in behalf of their State, that it may be admitted into this Union as one of the United States. This constitution, sir, contains an express prohibition against slavery, or involuntary servitude, in the State of California. It is said, and I suppose truly, that of the members who composed that Convention some sixteen were natives of, and had been residents in, the slaveholding States, about twenty-two were from the non-slaveholding States, and the remaining ten members were either native Californians or old settlers in that country. This prohibition against slavery, it is said, was inserted with entire unanimity.
Mr. Hale. Will the Senator give way until order is restored ?
-P Sergeant-at-Arms will
The Vice resident. The see that order is restored, and no more persons admitted to
the floor.
of the day will not
Mr. Cass. I trust the scene other be repeated. The Sergeant-at-Arms must display more energy in suppressing this disorder.
Mr. H . The noise is outside of the door.
ale
Mr. Webster. And it is this circumstance, the sir, prohibition of slavery by that Convention, which has contributed to raise, I do not say it has wholly raised, the dispute as to the propriety of the admission of California into the Union under this constitution. It is not to be denied, Mr. President, nobody thinks of denying, that, whatever reasons were assigned at the commencement of the late war with Mexico, it was prosecuted for the purpose of the acquisition of territory, and under the alleged argument that the cession of territory was the only form in which proper compensation could be made to the United States by Mexico, for the various claims and demands which the people of this country had against that government. At any rate, it will be found that President Polk’s message, at the commencement of the session of December, 1847, avowed that the war was to be prosecuted until some acquisition of territory should be made. And, as the acquisition was to be south of the line of the United States, in warm climates and countries, it was naturally, I suppose, expected by the South, that whatever acquisitions were made in that region would be added to the slaveholding, portion of the United States. Very little of accurate information was possessed of the real physical character, either of California or New Mexico; and events have turned out as was not expected; both California and New Mexico are likely to come in as free; and therefore some degree of disappointment and surprise has resulted. In other words, it is obvious that the question which has so long harassed the country, and at some times very seriously alarmed the minds of wise and good men, has come upon us for a fresh discussion; the question of slavery in these United States.
Now, sir, I propose, perhaps at the expense of some detail and consequent detention of the Senate, to review historically this question, which, partly in consequence of its own importance, and partly, perhaps mostly, in consequence of the manner in which it has been discussed in one and the other portion of the country, has been a source of so much alienation and unkind feeling.
We all know, sir, that slavery has existed in the world from time immemorial. There was slavery, in the earliest periods of history, in the oriental nations. There was slavery among the Jews; the theocratic government of that people ordained no injunction against it. There was slavery among the Greeks; and the ingenious philosophy of the Greeks found, or sought to find, a justification for it exactly upon the grounds which have been assumed for such a justification in this country; that is, a natural and original difference among the races of mankind, and the inferiority of the black or colored race to the white. The Greeks justified their system of slavery upon that idea, precisely. They held the African, and in some parts the Asiatic, tribes to be inferior to the white race; but they did not show, I think, by any close process of logic, that, if this were true, the more intelligent and the stronger had therefore a right to subjugate the weaker.
The more manly philosophy and jurisprudence of the Romans placed the justification of slavery on entirely different grounds.
The Roman jurists, from the first and down to the fall of the empire, admitted that slavery was against the natural law, by which, as they maintained, all men of whatsoever clime, color, or capacity were equal; but they justified slavery, first, upon the ground and authority of the law of nations, arguing, and arguing truly, that at that day the conventional law of nations admitted that captives in war, whose lives, according to the notions of the times, were at the absolute disposal of the captors, might, in exchange for exemption from death, be made slaves for life, and that such servitude might descend to their posterity. The jurists of Rome also maintained that by the civil law there might be servitude or slavery, personal and hereditary; first, by the voluntary act of an individual who might sell himself into slavery; secondly, by his being received into a state of slavery by his creditors in satisfaction of his debts; and, thirdly, by being placed in a state of servitude or slavery for crime. At the introduction of Christianity, the Roman world was full of slaves, and I suppose there is to be found no in junction against that relation between man and man, in the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or of any of his apostles. The object of the instruction imparted to mankind by the founder of Christianity was to touch the heart, purify the soul, and improve the lives of individual men. That object went directly to the first fountain of all political and all social relations of the human race, as well as of all true religious feeling, the individual heart and mind of man.
Now, sir, upon the general nature, and character, and influence of slavery, there exists a wide difference be tween the Northern portion of this country and the Southern. It is said on the one side that, if not the subject off any injunction or direct prohibition in the New Testament, slavery is a wrong; that it is founded merely in the right of the strongest; and that it is an oppression, like unjust wars, like all those conflicts by which a mighty nation subjects a weaker nation to its will; and that slavery, in its nature, whatever may be said of it in the modifications which have taken place, is not in fact according to the meek spirit of the Gospel. It is not “kindly affectioned;” it does not “seek another’s, and not its own;" it does not “ let the oppressed go free.”
These are sentiments that are cherished, and recently with greatly augmented force, among the people of the Northern States. They have taken hold of the religious sentiment of that part of the country, as they have more or less taken hold of the religious feelings of a considerable portion of mankind. The South, upon the other side, having been accustomed to this relation between the two races all their lives, from their birth; having been taught, in general, to treat the subjects of this bondage with care and kindness, and I believe, in general, feeling for them great care and kindness, have not taken the view of the subject which I have mentioned. There are thousands of religious men, with consciences as tender as any of their brethren at the North, who do not see the unlaw fulness of slavery; and there are more thousands, perhaps, that, whatsoever they may think of it in its origin, and as a matter depending upon natural right, yet take things as they are, and, finding slavery to be an established relation of the society in which they live, can see no way in which, let their opinions on the abstract question be what they may, it is in the power of the present generation to relieve themselves from this relation. And, in this respect, candor obliges me to say, that I believe they are just as conscientious, many of them, and the religious people, all of them, as they are in the North who hold different opinions.
Why, sir, the honorable Senator from South Carolina,
the other day, alluded to the separation of that great
religious community, the Methodist Episcopal Church.
That separation was brought about by differences of
opinion upon this particular subject of slavery. I felt
great concern, as that dispute went on, about the result;
and I was in hopes that the difference of opinion might
be adjusted, because I looked upon that religious deno
mination as one of the great props of religion and morals,
throughout the whole country, from Maine to Georgia,
and westward, to our utmost western boundary. The
result was against my wishes and against my hopes.
I have read all their proceedings, and all their argu
ments ; but I have never yet been able to come to the
conclusion that there was any real ground for that sepa
ration ; in other words, that any good could be produced
by that separation. I must say I think there was some
want of candor and charity. Sir, when a question of
this kind seizes on the religious sentiments of man
kind, and comes to be discussed in religious assemblies of
the clergy and laity, there is always to be expected, or
always to be feared, a great degree of excitement. It
is in the nature of man, manifested by his whole history,
that religious disputes are apt to become warm, as men’s
strength of conviction is proportionate to their views of
the magnitude of the questions. In all such disputes,
there will sometimes men be found with whom every
thing is absolute, absolutely wrong, or absolutely right.
They see the right clearly; they think others ought so to
see it, and they are disposed to establish a broad line of
distinction between what is right, and what is wrong.
And they are not seldom willing to establish that line
upon their own convictions of truth and justice; and
are ready to mark and guard it, by placing along it a
series of dogmas, as lines of boundary on the earth’s sur
face are marked by posts and stones. There are men who,
with clear perceptions, as they think, of their own duty,
do not see how too hot a pursuit of one duty may involve
them in the violation of others, or how too warm an em-
bracement of one truth may lead to a disregard of other
truths equally important. As I heard it stated strongly,
not many days ago, these persons are disposed to mount
upon some particular duty as upon a war horse, and to
drive, furiously on and upon, and over, sdl other duties that
may stand in the way. There are men who, in times of
that sort, and in disputes of that sort, are of opinion that
human duties may be ascertained with the exactness of
mathematics. They deal with morals as with mathema
tics ; and they think what is right may be distinguished
from what is wrong, with the precision of an algebraic
equation. They have, therefore, none too much charity
towards others who differ from them. They are apt, too,
to think that nothing is good but what is perfect, and
that there are no compromises or modifications to be
made in submission to difference of opinion, or in defer
ence to other men’s judgment. If their perspicacious
vision enables them to detect a spot on the face of the
sun, they think that a good reason why the sun should
be struck down from heaven. They prefer the chance
of running into utter darkness, to living in heavenly
light, if that heavenly light be not absolutely’without
any imperfection. There are impatient men, too impa
tient always to give heed to the admonition of St. Paul,
“ that we are not to do evil that good may cometoo
impatient to wait for the slow progress of moral causes
in the improvement of mankind. They do not remem
ber that the doctrines and the miracles of Jesus Christ
have, in eighteen hundred years, converted only a small
portion of the human race; and among the nations that
are converted to Christianity, they forget how many vices
and crimes, public and private, still prevail, and that
many of them, public crimes especially, which are so
clearly offences against the Christian religion, pass with
out exciting particular indignation. Thus wars are
waged, and unjust wars. I do not deny that there may
be just wars'. There certainly are; but it was the re
mark of an eminent person, not many years ago, on the
other side of the Atlantic, that it was one of the greatest
reproaches to human nature, that wars were sometimes
just. The defence of nations sometimes causes a just
war against the injustice of other nations.
Now, sir, in this state of sentiment upon the general
nature of slavery lies the cause of a great part of
those unhappy divisions, exasperations, and reproaches,
which find vent and support in different parts of the
Union. Slavery does exist in the United States. It
did exist in the States before the adoption of this Con
stitution, and at that time.
And now let us consider, sir, for a moment, what was
the state of sentiment, North and South, in regard to
slavery, at the time this Constitution was adopted. A
remarkable change has taken place since; but what did
the wise and great men of all parts of the country think
of slavery, then? In what estimation did they hold it
at the time when this Constitution was adopted? Now,
it will be found, sir, if we will carry ourselves by his
torical research back to that day, and ascertain men’s
opinions by authentic records still existing among us,
that there was no great diversity of opinion between
the North and the South, upon the subject of slavery.
And it will be found that both parts of the country held
it equally an evil, a moral and political evil. It will
not be found that, either at the North or at the South,
there was much, though there was some, invective
against slavery as inhuman and cruel. The great ground
of objection to it was political; that it weakened the
social fabric; that, taking the place of free labor, society
became less strong and labor was less productive; and,
therefore, we find from all the eminent men of the time
the clearest expression of their opinion that slavery was
an evil. And they ascribed its existence, here, not
without truth, and not without some acerbity of temper
and force of language, to the injurious policy of the
mother country, who, to favor the navigator, had entailed
these evils upon the colonies. I need hardly refer, sir,
particularly to the publications of the day. They are
matters of history on the record. The eminent men, the
most eminent men, and nearly all the conspicuous politi
cians of the South, held the same sentiments; that slavery
was an evil, a blight, a blast, a mildew, a scourge, and
a curse. There are no terms of reprobation of slavery
so vehement in the North of that day as in the South.
The North was not so much excited against it as the
South; and the reason is, I suppose, because there was
much less of it at the North, and the people did not see,
or think they saw, the evils so prominently as they were
seen, or thought to be seen, at the South.
Then, sir, when this Constitution was framed, this
was the light in which the Convention viewed it. The
Convention reflected the judgment and sentiments of
the great men of the South. A member of the other
House, whom I have not the honor to know, in a recent
speech, has collected extracts from these public docu
ments. They prove the truth of what I am saying,
and the question then was, how to deal with it, and
how to deal with it as an evil? Well, they came to
this general result. They thought that slavery could
not be continued in the country, if the importation of
slaves were made to cease, and therefore they provided
that after a certain period the importation might be
prevented, by the act of the new government. Twenty
years was proposed by some gentleman, a Northern
gentleman, I think, and many of the Southern gentle
men opposed it as being too long. Mr. Madison, espe
cially, was minething warm against.it. He said it would
bring too much of this mischief into the country to
allow the importation of slaves for such a period. Be
cause we must take along with us, in the whole of this
discussion, when we are considering the sentiments and
opinions in which the constitutional provision originated,
that the conviction of all men was, that if the importa
tion of slaves ceased, the white race would multiply
faster than the black race, and that slavery would there
fore gradually wear out and expire. It may not be
improper here to allude to that, I had almost said, cele
brated opinion of Mr. Madison. You observe, sir, that
the term slave, or slavery, is not used in the Constitution.
The Constitution does not require that “fugitive slaves”
shall be delivered up. It requires that “persons bound
to service in one State, and escaping into another, shall
be delivered up.” Mr. Madison opposed the introduction
of the term slave, or slavery, into the Constitution; for,
he said that he did not wish to see it recognized by the
Constitution of the United States of America, that there
could be property in men. Now, sir, all this took place
at the' Convention in 1787; but, connected with this,
concurrent and cotemporaneous, is another important
transaction not sufficiently attended to. The Convention
for framing this Constitution assembled in Philadelphia
in May, and sat until September, 1787. During all
that time, the Congress of the United States was in ses
sion at New York. It was a matter of design, as we
know, that the Convention should not assemble in the
same city where Congress was holding its sessions. Al
most all the public men of the country, therefore, of
distinction and eminence, were in one or the other of
these two assemblies; and I think it happened, in some
instances, that the same gentlemen were members of
both. If I mistake not, such was the case of Mr. Rufus
King, then a member of Congress from Massachusetts,
and at the same time a member of the Convention to
frame the Constitution. Now, it was in the summer
of 1787, the very time when the Convention in Phila
delphia was framing this Constitution, that the Con
gress in New York was framing the ordinance of 1787.
They passed that ordinance on the 13th July, 1787, at
New York, the very month, perhaps the very day, on
which these questions, about the importation of slaves
and the character of slavery, were debated in the Con
vention at Philadelphia. And, so far as we can now
learn, there was a perfect concurrence of opinion be
tween these respective bodies; and it resulted in this
ordinance of 1787, excluding slavery as to all the ter
ritory over which the Congress of the United States
had jurisdiction, and that was, all the territory north
west of the, Ohio. Three years before, Virginia and
other States had made a cession of that great territory
to the United States. And a most magnificent act it
was. I never reflect upon it without a disposition to do
honor and justice, and justice would be the highest
honor, to Virginia, for the cession of' her northwestern
territory. I will say, sir, it is one of her fairest claims
to the respect and gratitude of the United States, and
that, perhaps, it is only second to that other claim
which attaches to her; that, from her counsels, and
from the intelligence and patriotism of her leading
statesmen, proceeded the first idea put into practice of
the formation of a general constitution of the United
States. Now, sir, the ordinance of 1787 was applied
thus to the whole territory over which the Congress
of the United States had jurisdiction. It was adopted
two years before the Constitution of the United States
went into operation; because the ordinance too effect
immediately on its passage, while the Constitution of
the United States, having been framed, was to be sent
to the States to be adopted by their Conventions; and
then a government was to be organized under it. This
ordinance, then, was in operation and force when the
Constitution was adopted and the Government put in
motion, in April, 1789.
Mr. President, three things are quite clear as histori
cal truths. One is, that there was an expectation that,
on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa,
slavery would begin to run out here. That was hoped
and expected. Another is, that, as far as there was any
power in Congress to prevent the spread of slavery in
the United States, that power was executed in the most
absolute manner, and to the fullest extent. An honora
ble member, whose health does not allow him to be here
to-day—
C
A Senator. He is here. (Referring to Mr. alhoun.)
Mr. W . I am very happy to hear that he is;
ebster
serve his country! The honorable member said, the
other day, that he considered this ordinance as the first,
in the series of measures, calculated to enfeeble the
South, and deprive them of their just participation in the
benefits and privileges of this government. He says very
properly that it was enacted under the old confedera
tion and before this Constitution went into effect; but,
my present purpose is only to say, Mr. President, that
it was established with the entire and unanimous con
currence of the whole South. Why, there it stands!
The vote of every State in the Union was unanimous in
favor of the ordinance, with the exception of a single
individual vote, and that individual vote was given by a
Northern man. But, sir, the ordinance abolishing, or
rather prohibiting, slavery northwest of the Ohio, has
the hand and seal of every Southern member in Con
gress. So this ordinance was no aggression of the North
on the South.
The other and third clear historical truth is, that the
Convention meant to leave slavery/ in the States, as
they found it, entirely under the authority and control
of the States themselves.
This was the state of things, sir, and this the state of
opinion, under which those very important matters were
arranged, and those three important things done; that
is, the establishment of the Constitution with a recogni
tion of slavery as it existed in the States; the establish
ment of the ordinance prohibiting, to the full extent of
all territory owned by the United States, the introduc
tion of slavery into that territory, while leaving to the
States all power over slavery in their own limits; and
creating a power, in the new government, to put an end
to the importation of slaves, after a limited period. And
here, sir, we* may pause. We may reflect for a moment
upon the entire coincidence and concurrence of senti
ment, between the North and the South, upon all these
questions, at the period of the adoption of the Constitu
tion. But opinions, sir, have changed, greatly changed,
changed North, and changed South. Slavery is not re
garded in the South now as it was then. I see an honor
able member of this body paying me the honor of listening
to my remarks (Mr. M ) ; he brings to me, sir, freshly
ason
and vividly, what I have learned of his great ancestor,
so much distinguished in his day and generation, so
worthy to be succeeded by so worthy a grandson, with
all the sentiments he expressed in the Convention in
Philadelphia.
Here we may pause. There was, if not an entire
unanimity, a general concurrence of sentiment, running
through the whole community, and especially entertained
by the eminent men of all parts of the country. But
soon a change began, at the North and the South, and a
severance of opinion showed itself; the North growing
much more warm and strong against slavery, and the
South growing much more warm and strong in its sup
port. Sir, there is no generation of mankind whose
opinions are not subject to be influenced by what ap
pears to them to be their present, emergent, and exigent
interests. I impute to the South no particularly selfish
view in the change which has come over her. I impute
to her certainly no dishonest view. All that has hap
pened has been natural. It has followed those causes
which always influence the human mind and operate
upon it. What, then, have been the causes which have
created so new a feeling in favor of slavery in the South,
which have changed the whole nomenclature of the
South on that subject, so that, from being thought and
described in the terms I have mentioned and will not
repeat, it has now become an institution, a cherished in
stitution in that quarter; no evil, no scourge, but a great
religious, social, and moral blessing, as I think J have
heard it latterly spoken of? I suppose this, sir, is owing
to the sudden uprising and rapid growth of the COTTON
plantations of the South. So far as any motive consist
ent with honor, justice, and general judgment could act,
it was the COTTON interest that gave a new desire to
promote slavery, to spread it, and to use its labor. I
again say that that was produced by causes which we
must always expect to produce like effects; the whole
interest of the South became connected, more or less,
with it. If we look back to the history of the commerce
of this country at the early years of this government,
what were our exports ? Cotton was hardly, or but to a
very limited extent, known. The tables will show that
the exports of cotton for the years 1790 and 1791 were
not more than forty or fifty thousand dollars a year. It
has gone on increasing rapidly, until the whole crop may
now, perhaps, in a season of great product and high prices,
amount to a hundred millions of dollars. In the years
I have mentioned, there was more of wax, more of* in
digo, more of rice, more of almost every article of export
from the South, than of cotton. I think it is true
when Mr. Jay negotiated the treaty of 1794 with Eng
land, that he did not know that cotton was exported at
all from the United States; and I have heard it said, also,
that the custom-house in London refused to admit cotton,
upon an allegation that it could not be an American
production, there being, as they supposed, no> cotton
raised in America. They would hardly think so now 1
Well, sir, we know what followed. The age of cotton
became the golden age of our Southern brethren. It
gratified their desire for improvement and accumulation,
at the same time that it excited it. The desire grew by
what it fed upon, and there soon came to be an eager
ness for other territory, a new area or new areas, for the
cultivation of the cotton crop; and measures leading to
this result were brought about rapidly, one after another,
under the* lead of Southern men at the head of the
Government, they having a majority in both branches
to accomplish their ends. The honorable member from
South Carolina observed that there has been a majority
all along in favor of the North. If that be true, sir, the
North has acted either very liberally and kindly, or very
weakly; for they never exercised that majority effi
ciently five times in the history of the Government,
when a division, or trial of strength, arose. Never.
Whether they were out-generaled, or whether it was
owing to other causes, I shall not stop to consider; but
no man acquainted with the history of the country
can deny, that the general lead in the politics of the
country for three-fourths of the period that has elapsed
since the adoption of the Constitution, has been a South
ern lead. In 1802, in pursuit of the idea of opening a
new cotton region, the United States obtained a cession
from Georgia of the whole of her western territory, now
embracing the rich and growing State of Alabama. In
1803, Louisiana was purchased from Erance, out of
which the States of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Missouri,
have been framed, as slaveholding States. In 1819, the
cession of Florida was made, bringing in another region
of slaveholding property and territory. Sir, the honorable
member from South Carolina thought he saw in certain
operations of the Government, such as the manner of col
lecting the revenue, and the tendency of measures cal
culated to promote emigration into the country, what ac
counts for the more rapid growth of the North than the
South. He ascribes that more rapid growth, not to the
operation of time, but to the system of government,
and administration, established under this Constitution.
That is matter of opinion. To a certain extent it may be
true; but it does seem to me that if any operation of the
Government could be shown in any degree to have pro
moted the population, and growth, and wealth of the
North, it is much more sure that there are sundry im
portant and distinct operations of the Government, about
which no man can doubt, tending to promote, and which
absolutely have promoted, the increase of the slave in
terest and the slave territory of the South. Allow me
to say that it was not time that brought in Louisiana;
it was the act of men. It was not time that brought in
Florida; it was the act of men. And lastly, sir, to com
plete those acts of men which have contributed so much
to enlarge the area and the sphere of the institution of
slavery, Texas, great and vast and illimitable Texas,
was added to the Union as a slave.State in 1845; and
that, sir, pretty much closed the whole chapter, and set
tled the whole account. That closed the whole chapter,
that settled the whole account, because the annexation
of Texas, upon the conditions and under the guaranties
upon which she was admitted, did not leave within the
control of this Government an acre of land, capable of
being cultivated by slave labor, between this Capitol and
the Rio Grande or the Nueces, or whatever is the proper
boundary of Texas, not an acre. From that moment,
the whole country, from this place to the western bound
ary of Texas, was fixed, pledged, fastened, decided, to
be slave territory forever, by the solemn guaranties of
law. And I now say, sir, as the proposition upon which
I stand this day, and upon the truth and firmness of
which I intend to act until it is overthrown, that there
is not at this moment within the United States, or any
territory of the United States, a single foot of land, the
character of which, in regard to its being free-soil terri
tory or slave territory, is not fixed by some law, and
some irrepealable law, beyond the power of the action
of the Government. Now, is it not so with respect to
Texas ? Why it is most manifestly so. The honorable
member from South Carolina, at the time of the admis
sion of Texas, held an important post in the Executive
Department of the Government; he was Secretary of
State. Another eminent person of great activity and
adroitness in affairs, I mean the late Secretary of the
Treasury (Mr. W ), was a conspicuous member of
alker
this body, and took the lead in the business of annexa
tion, in co-operation with the Secretary of State; and I
must say that they did their business faithfully and tho
roughly; there was no botch left in it. They rounded
it off, and made as close joiner-work as ever was ex
hibited. Resolutions of annexation were brought into
Congress, fitly joined together, compact, firm, efficient,
conclusive upon the great object which they had in
view, and those resolutions passed.
Allow me to read a part of these resolutions. It is
the third clause of the second section of the resolution
of the 1st March, 1845, for the admission of Texas,
which applies to this part of the case. That clause
reads in these words:—
“New States, of convenient size, not exceeding four
in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and hav
ing sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent
of said State, be. formed out of the territory thereof,
which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions
of the Federal Constitution. And such States as may
be formed out of that-portion of said territory lying
south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude,
commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall
be admitted into the Union with or without slavery, as
the' people of each State asking admission may desire;
and in such State or States as shall be formed out of
said territory'north of said Missouri Compromise line,
slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall
be prohibited.”
Now what is here stipulated, enacted, secured? It
is, that all Texas south of 36° 30', which is nearly the
whole of it, shall be admitted into the Union as a slave
State. It was a slave State, and therefore came in as a
slave State; and the guaranty is, that new States shall
be made out of it, and that such States as are formed
out of that portion of Texas lying south of 36° 30' may
come in as slave States to the number of four, in addi
tion to the State then in existence, and admitted at that
time by these resolutions. I know no form of legisla
tion which can strengthen this. I know no mode of
recognition that can add a tittle of weight to it. I
listened respectfully to the resolutions of my honorable
friend from Tennessee (Mr. B (. He proposed to re
ell
cognize that stipulation with Texas. But any additional
recognition would weaken the force of it; because it
stands here on the ground of a contract, a thing done
for a consideration. It is a law founded on a contract
with Texas, and designed to carry that contract into
effect. A recognition, now, founded not on any consi
deration or any contract, would not be so strong as it
now stands on the face of the resolution. Now I know
no way, I candidly confess, in which this Government,
acting in good faith, as I trust it always will, can relieve
itself from that stipulation and pledge, by any honest
course of legislation whatever. And, therefore, I say
again that, so far as Texas is concerned, in the whole of
Texas south of 36° 30', which, I suppose, embraces all
the territory capable of slave cultivation, there is no
land, not an acre, the character of which is not established
by law, a law which cannot be repealed without the vio
lation of a contract, and plain disregard of the public
faith.
I hope, sir, it is now apparent that my proposition,
so far as it respects Texas, has been maintained; and
that the provision in this article is clear and absolute; and
it has been well suggested by my friend from Rhode
Island that that part of Texas which lies north of
thirty-four degrees of north latitude and which may be
formed into free States, is dependent, in like manner,
upon the consent of Texas, herself a slave State.
Well, now, sir, how came this? How came it to pass,
that within these walls, where it is said by the honor
able member from South Carolina that the free States
have always had a majority, this resolution of annexa
tion, such* as I have described it, found a majority in
both Houses of Congress ? Why, sir, it found that ma
jority by the great number of Northern votes added to
the entire Southern vote, or at least nearly the whole
of the Southern votes. The aggregate was made up
of Northern, and Southern votes. In the House of
Representatives it stood, I think, about eighty Southern
votes for the admission of Texas, and about fifty North
ern votes for the admission of Texas. In the Senate,
the vote stood for the admission of Texas twenty-seven,
and twenty-five against it; and of those twenty-seven
votes, constituting a majority for the admission of Texas
in this body, no less than thirteen came from the free
States, and four of them were from New England. The
whole of these thirteen Senators, constituting, within a
fraction, you see, one-half of all the votes in this body
for the admission of Texas, with its immeasurable ex
tent of slave territory, were sent here by free States.
Sir, there is not so remarkable a chapter in our his
tory of political events, political parties, and political
men, as is afforded by this measure for the admission of
Texas, with this immense territory, that a bird cannot
fly over in a week. [Laughter.] Sir, New England,
with some of her own votes, supported this measure.
Three-fourths of the votes of liberty-loving Connecticut
were given for it, in the other House; and one-half here.
There was one vote for it in Maine, but I am happy to
say not the vote of the honorable member who addressed
the Senate the day before yesterday (Mr. H ), and
amlin
who was then a Representative from Maine in the.
House of Representatives: but there was a vote or
two from Maine, ay, and there was one vote for it from
Massachusetts, given by a gentleman then represent
ing, and now living in, the district in which the pre
valence to some extent of free-soil sentiment for a cou
ple of years or so has defeated the choice of any mem
ber to represent it in Congress. Sir, that body of North
era and Eastern men, who gave those votes at that time,
are now seen taking upon themselves, in the nomen
clature of politics, the appellation of the Northern
Democracy. They undertook to wield the destinies
of this empire, if I may call a republic an empire, and
their policy was, and they persisted in it, to bring into
this country, and under this government, all the ter
ritory they could. They did it under pledges, abso
lute pledges to the slave interest in the case of Texas,
and afterwards they lent their aid in bringing in these
new conquests to take their chance for slavery or free
dom. My honorable friend from Georgia, in March,
1847, moved the Senate to declare that the war ought
not to be prosecuted for acquisition, for conquest, for
the dismemberment of Mexico. The same Northern
Democracy entirely voted against it. He did not get a
vote from them. It suited the views, the patriotism, the
elevated sentiments of the Northern Democracy to bring
in a world here, among the mountains and valleys of
California and New Mexico, or any other part of Mexico,
and then quarrel about it; to bring it in, and then endea
vor to put upon it the saving grace of the Wilmot pro
viso. There were two eminent and highly respectable
gentlemen from the North and East, then leading gentle
men in the Senate—I refer, and I do so with entire re
spect, for I entertain for both of those gentlemen, in
general, high regard, to Mr. Dix, of New York, and Mr.
Niles, of Connecticut—who both voted for the admission
of Texas. They would not have that vote any other way
than as it stood; and they would have it as it did stand.
I speak of the vote upon the annexation of Texas.
Those two gentlemen would have the resolution of an
nexation just as it is, and they voted for it just as it is,
and their eyes were all open to its true character. The
honorable member who addressed us the other day from
South Carolina, was then Secretary of State. His corre
spondence with Mr. Murphy, the charge d’affaires of the
United States in Texas, had been published. That cor
respondence was all before those gentlemen, and the
Secretary had the boldness and candor to avow in that
correspondence that the great object sought by the an
nexation of Texas was to strengthen the slave interest of
the South. Why, sir, he said so, in so many words—
Will the
Mr. Calhoun. honorable Senator permit me
to interrupt him for a moment?
Mr. W . Certainly.
ebster
Mr. Calhoun very reluctant
. I am to interrupt the
honorable gentleman; but, upon a point of so much im
portance, I deem it right to put myself
rectus in curia.
I did not put it upon the ground assumed by the Sena
tor. I put it upon this ground: that Great Britain had
announced to this country, in so many words, that her
object was to abolish slavery in Texas, and through
Texas to accomplish the abolishment of slavery in the
United States and the world. The ground I put it on
was, that it would make an exposed frontier, and, if
Great Britain succeeded in her object, it would be impos
sible that that frontier could be secured against the ag
gressions of the abolitionists; and that this Government
was bound, under the guaranties of the Constitution, to
protect us against such a state of things.
Mr. W . That comes, I suppose, sir, to exactly
ebster
the same thing. It was, that Texas must be obtained
for the security of the slave interest of the South.
Mr. Calhoun Another very given.
. view is distinctly
Mr. W . That was the object set forth in the cor
ebster
respondence of a worthy gentleman not now living, who
preceded the honorable member from South Carolina in
the Department of State. There repose on the files of the
Department of State, as I have occasion to know,' strong
letters from Mr. Upshur to the United States minister in
England, and I believe there are some to the same min
ister from the honorable Senator himself, asserting to this
effect the sentiments of this Government, viz: that Great
Britain was expected not to interfere to take Texas out
of the hands of its then existing Government, and make
it a free country. But my argument, my suggestion is
this; that those gentlemen who composed the Northern
Democracy when Texas was brought into the Union,
saw, with all their eyes, that it was brought in as a slave
country, and brought in for the purpose of being main
tained as slave territory to the Greek Kalends. I rather
think the honorable gentleman who was then Secretary
of State might, in some of his correspondence with Mr.
Murphy, have suggested that it was not expedient to say
too much about this object, lest it should create some
alarm. At any rate, Mr. Murphy wrote to him, that
England was anxious to get rid of the constitution of
Texas, because it was a constitution establishing slavery;
and that what the United States had to do, was to aid
the people of Texas in upholding their constitution; but
that nothing should be said, which should offend the
fanatical men of the North. But, sir, the honorable mem
ber did. avow this object himself, openly, boldly, and
manfully; he did not disguise his conduct, or his motives.
Mr. Calhoun. Never, never.
Mr. Webster. he means is very say.
What he apt to
Mr. C . Always, always.
alhoun
Mr. W . And I honor him for it. This admis
ebster
sion of Texas was in 1845. Then, in 1847,
flagrante bdlo
between the United States and Mexico, the proposition I
have mentioned was brought forward by my friend from
Georgia, and the Northern Democracy voted straight
ahead against it. Their remedy was to apply to the ac
quisitions, after they should come in, the Wilmot proviso.
What follows ? These two gentlemen, worthy and honor
able and influential men, and if they had not been they
could not have carried the measure, these two gentlemen,
members of this body, brought in Texas, and by their
votes they also prevented the passage of the resolution
of the honorable member from Georgia, and then they
went home and took the lead in the Free-soil party. And
there they stand, sir! They leave us here, bound in ho
nour and conscience by the resolutions of annexation;
they leave us here, to take the odium of fulfilling the
obligations in favor of slavery, which they voted us into,
or else the greater odium of violating those obligations,
while they are at home making capital and rousing
speeches for free-soil and no slavery. [Laughter.] And,
therefore, I say, sir, that there is not a chapter in our
history, respecting public measures and public men, more
full of what should create surprise, more full of what does
create, in my mind, extreme mortification, than that of
the conduct of this Northern Democracy.
Mr. President, sometimes, when a man is found in a
new relation to things around him and to other men, he
says the world has changed, and that he has not changed.
I believe, sir, that our self-respect leads us often to make
this declaration in regard to ourselves, when it is not
exactly true. An individual is more apt to change, per
haps, than all the world around him. But, under the
present circumstances, and under the responsibility which
I know I incur by what I am now stating here, I feel at
liberty to recur to the various expressions and statements,
made at various times, of my own opinions and resolu
tions respecting the admission of Texas, and all that has
followed. Sir, as early as 1836, or in the early part of
1837, there was conversation and correspondence between
myself and some private friends, on this project of annex
ing Texas to the United States; and an honorable gentle
man with whom I have had a long acquaintance, a friend
of mine, now perhaps in this chamber, I mean General
Hamilton, of South Carolina, was knowing to that corre
spondence. I had voted for the recognition of Texan in
dependence, because I believed it was an existing fact,
surprising and astonishing as it was, and I wished well to
the new republic : but I manifested from the first utter
opposition to bringing her, with her slave territory, into
the Union. I happened, in 1837, to meet friends in New
York, on some political occasion, and I then stated my
sentiments upon the subject. It was the first time that I
had occasion to advert to it; and I will ask a friend near
me to do me the favor to read an extract from the
speech, for the Senate may find it rather tedious to listen
to the whole of it. It was delivered in Niblo’s Garden,
in 1837.
Mr. G then read the following extract from the
reene
speech of Mr. Webster, to which he referred:
“ Gentlemen, we all see that, by whomsoever possessed,
Texas is likely to be a slaveholding country; and I
frankly avow my entire unwillingness to do any thing
which shall extend the slavery of the African race on
this continent, or add other slaveholding States to the
Union.
“ When I say that I regard slavery in itself as a great
moral, social, and political evil, I only use language
which has been adopted by distinguished men, them
selves citizens of slaveholding States.
“ I shall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage
its further extension. We have slavery already among
us. The Constitution found it among us; it recognised
it, and gave it solemn guaranties.
“ To the full extent of these guaranties, we are all
bound in honor, in justice, and by the Constitution. All
the stipulations contained in the Constitution in favor of
the slaveholding States, which are already in the Union,
ought to be fulfilled, and, so far as depends on me, shall
be fulfilled in the fulness of their spirit, and to the exact
ness of their letter. Slavery, as it exists in the States,
is "beyond the reach of Congress. It is a concern of
the States themselves. They have never submitted
it to Congress, and Congress has no rightful power
over it.
“ I shall concur, therefore, in no act, no measure, no
menace, no indication of purpose, which shall interfere or
threaten to interfere with the exclusive authority of the
several States over the subject of slavery, as it exists
within their respective limits. All this appears to me to
be matter of plain and imperative duty.
“ But when we come to speak of admitting new States,
the subject assumes an entirely different aspect. Our
rights and our duties are then both different. * * *
“ I see, therefore, no political necessity for the annexa
tion of Texas to the Union—no advantage to be derived
from it; and objections to it of a strong, and, in my
judgment, of a decisive character.”
Mr. W . I have nothing, sir, to add to, nor to
ebster
take from, those sentiments. That speech, the Senate
will perceive, was in 1837. The purpose of immediately
annexing Texas at that time was abandoned or postponed;
and it was not revived with any vigor for some years. In
the meantime it had so happened that I had become a
member of the Executive Administration, and was for a
short period in the Department of State. The annexation
of Texas was a subject of conversation, not confidential,
with the President and heads of Departments, as well as
with other public men. No serious attempt was then
made, however, to bring it about. I left the Department
of State in May, 1843, and shortly after I learned, though
by means which were no way connected with official in
formation, that a design had been taken up of bring
ing Texas, with her slave territory and population, into
this Union. I was in Washington at the time, and per
sons are now here who will remember that we had an
arranged meeting for conversation upon it. I went home
to Massachusetts and proclaimed the existence of that
purpose, but I could get no audience, and but little atten
tion. Some did not believe it, and some were too much
engaged in their own pursuits to give it any heed. They
had gone to their farms, or to their merchandise, and it
was impossible to arouse any sentiments in New England
or in Massachusetts, that should combine the two great
political parties against this annexation; and indeed there
was no hope of bringing the Northern Democracy into
that view, for their leaning was all the other way. But,
sir, even with Whigs, and leading Whigs, I am ashamed to
say, there was a great indifference towards the admission
of Texas, with slave territory into this Union. The
project went on. I was then out of Congress. The an
nexation resolutions passed the 1st of March, 1845; the
Legislature of Texas complied with the conditions and
accepted the guaranties ; for the phraseology of the lan
guage of the resolution is, that Texas is to come in “ upon
the conditions and under the guaranties herein prescribed.”
I happened to be returned to the Senate in March, 1845,
and was here in December, 1845, when the acceptance by
Texas of the conditions proposed by Congress was commu
nicated to us by the President, and an act for the consum
mation of the connexion was laid before the two Houses.
The connexion was then not completed. A final law doing
the deed of annexation, ultimately, had not been passed;
and when it was put upon its final passage here, I expressed
my opposition to it, and recorded my vote in the negative;
and there that vote stands, with the observations that I
made upon that occasion. It has happened that between
1837 and this time, on various occasions and opportunities,
I have expressed my entire opposition to the admission of
slave States, or the acquisition of new slave territories, to
be added to the United States. I know, sir, no change in
my own sentiments, or my own purposes, in that respect.
I will now again ask my friend from Rhode Island to
read another extract from a speech of mine made at a
Whig Convention in Springfield, Massachusetts, in the
month of September, 1847.
Mr. Greene here read the following extract:
“We hear much just now of for the dangers
& panacea
and evils of slavery and slave annexation, which they call
certainly is a just sentiment,
the/ Wilmot proviso’ That
but if is not a sentiment to found any new party upon.
It is not a sentiment on which Massachusetts Whigs differ.
There is not a man in this hall who holds to it more firmly
than I do, nor one who adheres to it more than another.
(i I feel some little interest in this matter, sir. Did not
I commit myself in 1837 to the whole doctrine, fully, en
tirely ? And I must be permitted, to say that I cannot
quite consent that more recent discoverers should claim
the merit and take out a patent.
“ I deny the priority of their invention. Allow me to
say, sir, it is not their thunder. * * *
“We are to use the first and last and every occasion
which offers to oppose the extension of slave power.
“ But I speak of it here, as in Congress, as a political
question, a question for statesmen to act upon. We must
so regard it. I certainly do not mean to say that it is
less important in a moral point of view, that it is not
more important in many other points of view; but, as a
a legislator, or in any official capacity, I must look at
it, consider it, and decide it as a matter of political
action.”
Mr. W . On other occasions, in debates here, I
ebster
have expressed my determination to vote for no acquisi
tion, or cession, or annexation, North or South, East or
West. My opinion has been, that we have territory
enough, and that-we should follow the Spartan maxim,
“Improve, adorn what you have, seek no further.” I
think that it was in some observations that I made
on the three-million loan bill, that I avowed that senti
ment. In short, sir, the sentiment has been avowed quite
as often, in as many places, and before as many assem
blies, as any humble sentiments of mine ought to be
avowed.
But now, that, under certain conditions, Texas is in,
with all her territory, as a slave State, with a solemn
pledge, also, that if she shall be divided into many States,
those States may come in as slave States south of 36° 30',
how are we to deal with this subject ? I know no way
of honest legislation, when the proper time comes for the
enactment, but to carry into effect all that we have stipu
lated to do. I do not entirely agree with my honorable
friend from Tennessee, (Mr. B ,) that, as soon as the
ell
time comes when she is entitled to another representa
tive, we should create a new State. The rule in regard
to it I take to be this: that, when we have created new
States out of Territories, we have generally gone upon
the idea that when there is population enough to form a
State, sixty thousand or some such thing, we would create
a State; but it is quite a different thing when a State is
divided, and two or more States made out of it. It does
not follow, in such a case, that the same rule of appor
tionment should be applied. That, however, is a matter
for the consideration of Congress, when the proper time
arrives. I may not then be here. I may have no vote
to give on the occasion, but I wish it to be distinctly under
stood, to-day, that, according to my view of the matter, this
Government is solemnly pledged, by law and contract, to
create new States out of Texas, with her consent, when
her population shall justify and call for such a proceeding,
and- so far as such States are formed out of Texan terri
tory lying south of 36° 30', to let them come in as slave
States. That is the meaning of the resolution which our
friends,1 the Northern Democracy, have left us to fulfil;
and I, for one, mean to fulfil it, because I will not violate
the faith of the Government. What I mean to say is,
that the time for the admission of new States formed out
of Texas, the number of such States, their boundaries,
and the requisite amounts of population, and other things
connected with the admission, are in the free discretion
of Congress, except this, to wit, that when new States,
formed out of Texas, are to be admitted, they have a
right, by legal stipulation and contract, to come in as
slave States.
Now, as to California and New Mexico, I hold slavery
to be excluded from those Territories by a law, even su
perior to that which admits and sanctions it in Texas.
I mean the law of nature, of physical geography, the law
of the formation of the earth. That law settles for ever,
with a strength beyond alb terms of human enactment,
that slavery cannot exist in California or New Mexico.
'Understand me, sir; I mean slavery as we regard it; slaves
in gross, of the colored race, transferable by sale and deli
very, like other property. I shall not discuss the point,
but leave it to the learned gentlemen who have undertaken
to discuss it; but I suppose there is no slave of that descrip
tion in California now. I understand that a sort
peonisun^
' ofpenal servitude, exists there, or rather a sort of voluntary
sale of a man and his offspring for debt, as it is arranged
and exists in some parts of California and some provinces
of Mexico. But what I mean to say is, that African sla
very, as we see it among us, is as utterly impossible to find
itself, or to be found in California and New Mexico, as any
other natural impossibility. California and New Mexico
are Asiatic in their formation and scenery. They are
composed of vast ridges of mountains of enormous height,
with broken ridges and deep valleys. The sides of these
mountains are barren, entirely barren; their tops capped
by perennial snow. There may be ’in California, now
made free by its constitution, and no doubt there are,
some tracts of valuable land. But it is not so in New
Mexico. Pray, what is the evidence which every gentle
man must have obtained on this subject, from informa
tion sought by himself or communicated by others ? I
have inquired and read all I could find, in order to acquire
information on this important question. What is there
in New Mexico that could, by any possibility, induce any
body to go there with slaves ? There are some narrow
strips of tillable land on the borders of the rivers ; but
the rivers themselves dry up, before midsummer is gone.
Alt that the people can do in that region, is to raise some
little articles, some little wheat for their tortillas, and all
that by irrigation. And who expects to see a hundred*
black men cultivating tobacco, com, cotton, rice, or any
thing else, on lands in New Mexico, made fertile only by
irrigation ? I look upon it, therefore, as a fixed fact, to
use an expression current at this day, that both Cali
fornia and New Mexico are destined to be free, so far as
they are settled at all, which I believe, especially in re
gard to New Mexico, will be very little for a great length
of time; free by the arrangement of things by the Power
above us. I have therefore to say, in this respect also,
that this country is fixed for freedom, to as many persons
as shall ever live in it, by as irrepealable and more irre-
pealable a law, than the law that attaches to the right
of holding slaves in Texas; and I will say further, that
if a resolution, or a law, were now before us to provide a
territorial Government for New Mexico, I would not vote
to put any prohibition into it whatever. The use of such a
prohibition would be idle, as it respects any effect it would
have upon the Territory; and I would not take pain'S use
lessly to re-affirm an ordinance of Nature, nor to re-enact
the will of God. And I would put in no Wilmot proviso
for the mere purpose of a taunt or a reproach. I would put
into it no evidence of the votes of superior power, for no
purpose but to wound the pride, even whether a just
pride, a rational pride, or an irrational pride, to wound
the pride of the gentlemen who belong to Southern States.
I have no such object, no such purpose. They would think
it a taunt, an indignity; they would think it to be an act
taking away from them what they regard a proper equality
of privilege; and whether they expect to realize any bene
fit from it or not, they would think it at least a plain theo-
‘ retie wrong; that something more or less derogatory to
their character and their rights had taken place. I propose
to inflict no such wound upon any body, unless something
essentially important to the country, and efficient to the
preservation of liberty and freedom, is to be effected.
Therefore, I repeat, sir, and I repeat it because I wish it
to be understood, that I do not propose to address the
Senate often on this subject. I desire to pour out all my
heart in as plain a manner as possible; and I say, again,
therefore, that if a proposition were now here for a Go
vernment for New Mexico, and it was moved to insert a
provision for a prohibition of slavery, I would not vote
for it.
Now, Mr. President, I have established, so far as I
proposed to go into any line of observation to establish,
the proposition with which I set out, and upon which I
propose to stand or fall; and that is, that the whole ter
ritory of the States in the United States, or in the newly
acquired territory of the United States, has a fixed and
settled character, now fixed and settled by law, .which
cannot be repealed; in the case of Texas without a vio
lation of public faith, and by no human power in regard
to California or New Mexico; that, therefore, under one
or other of these laws, every foot of land in the States or
in the Territories has already received a fixed and decided
character.
Sir, if we were now making a Government for New
Mexico, and anybody should propose a Wilmot proviso,
I should treat it exactly as Mr. Polk treated that pro
vision for excluding slavery from Oregon. Mr. Polk was
known to be in opinion decidedly averse to the Wilmot
proviso; but he felt the necessity of establishing a govern
ment for the Territory of Oregon? and? though the pro
viso was in it? he knew it would be entirely nugatory;
and, since it must be entirely nugatory, since it took
away no right, no describable, no estimable, no weighable
or tangible right of the South, he said he would sign the
bill for the sake of enacting a law to form a government
in that Territory, and let that entirely useless, and, in
that connection entirely senseless, proviso remain. Sir?
we hear much of the annexation of Canada; and if
there be any man, any of the Northern Democracy, or
any one of the Tree-Soil party, who supposes it necessary
to insert a Wilmot proviso in a territorial government for
New Mexico? that man will of course be of opinion that
it is necessary to protect the everlasting snows of Canada
from the foot of slavery by the same overspreading wing
of an act of Congress. Sir, wherever there is a substan
tive good to be done; wherever there is a foot of land to
be staid back from becoming slave territory? I am ready
to assert the principle of the exclusion of slavery. I am
pledged to it from the year 1837; I have been pledged
to it again and again; and I will perform those pledges;
but I will not do a thing unnecessarily that wounds the
feelings of others, or that does disgrace to my own under
standing.
Mr. President? in the excited times in which we live,
there is found to exist a state of crimination and recrimi
nation between the North and South. There are lists of
grievances produced by each; and those grievances, real
or supposed, alienate the minds of one portion of the
country from the other, exasperate the feelings, and sub
due the sense of fraternal affection, patriotic love and
mutual regard. I shall bestow a little attention, sir,
upon these various grievances produced on the one side,
and on the other. I begin with complaints of the South.
I will not answer, further than I have, the general state
ments of the honorable Senator from South Carolina, that
the North has grown upon the South in consequence of
the manner of administering this Government, in the
collecting of its revenues, and so forth. These are dis
puted topics; and I have no inclination to enter into
them. But I will state these complaints, especially one
complaint of the South, which has in my opinion just
foundation; and that is, that there has been found
at the North, among individuals and among legislators,
a disinclination to perform, fully, their constitutional
duties in regard to the return of persons bound to ser
vice who have escaped into the free States. In that
respect, it is my judgment that the South is right, and
the North is wrong. Every member of every Northern
Legislature is bound by oath, like every other officer in
the country, to support the Constitution of the United
States; and this article of the Constitution, which says
to these States, that they shall deliver up fugitives from
service, is as binding in honor and conscience as any
other article. No man fulfils his duty in any Legislature
who sets himself to find excuses, evasions, escapes from
this constitutional obligation. I have always thought
that the Constitution addressed itself to the Legislatures
of the States or to the States themselves. It says that
those persons escaping to other States shall be delivered
up, and I confess I have always been of the opinion that
it was an injunction upon the States themselves. When
it is said that a person escaping into another State, and
becoming therefore within the jurisdiction of that State,
shall be delivered up, it seems to me the import of the
passage is, that the State itself, in obedience to the Con
stitution, shall cause him to be delivered up. That is
my judgment. I have always entertained that opinion,
and I entertain it now. But when the subject, some
years ago, was before the Supreme Court of the United
States, the majority of the judges held, that the power
to cause fugitives from service to be delivered up was a
power to be exercised under the authority of this Govern
ment. I do not know, on the whole, that it may not
have been a fortunate decision. My habit is to respect
the result of judicial deliberations, and the solemnity of
judicial decisions. But, as it now stands, the business of
seeing that these fugitives are delivered up resides in the
power of Congress and the national judicature, and my
friend at the head of the Judiciary Committee has a bill
on the subject now before the Senate, with some amend
ments to it, which I propose to support, with all its pro
visions, to the fullest extent. And I desire to call the
attention of all sober-minded men, of all conscientious
men, in the North, of all men who are not -carried away
by any fanatical idea or by any false idea whatever, to
their constitutional obligations. I put it to all the sober
and sound minds at the North as a question of morals,
and a question of conscience. What right have they, in
their legislative capacity, or any other capacity, to en
deavor to get round this Constitution, to embarrass the
free exercise of the rights secured by the Constitution to
the persons whose slaves escape from them ? None at
all; none at all. Neither in the forum of conscience,
nor before the face of the Constitution, are they justified,
in my opinion. Of course it is a matter for their con
sideration. They probably, in the turmoil of the times,
have not stopped to consider of this; they have followed
what seemed to be the current of thought and of motives
as the occasion arose, and they neglected to investigate
fully the real question, and to consider their constitu
tional obligations; as I am sure, if they did consider,
they would fulfil them with alacrity. Therefore, I re
peat, sir, that here is a ground of complaint against the
North well founded, which ought to be removed, which
it is now in the power of the different departments of
this Government to remove; which calls for the enact-
ment of proper laws authorizing the judicature of this
Government, in the several States, to do all that is neces
sary for the recapture of fugitive slaves, and for the resto
ration of them to those who claim them. Wherever I
go, and whenever I speak on the subject, and when I
speak here I desire to speak to the whole North, I say
that the South has been injured in this respect, and has
a right to complain; and the North has been too careless
of what I think the Constitution peremptorily and em
phatically enjoins upon her as a duty.
Complaint has been made against certain resolutions
that emanate from Legislatures at the North, and are
sent here to us, not only on the subject of slavery in this
District, but sometimes recommending Congress to con
sider the means of abolishing slavery in the States. I
should be sorry to be called upon to present any resolu
tions here which could not be referable to any committee,
or any power in Congress; and, therefore, I should he
unwilling to receive from the Legislature of Massachu
setts any instructions to present resolutions expressive of
any opinion whatever on the subject of slavery, as it ex
ists at the present moment in the States, for two reasons:
because, first, I do not consider that the Legislature of
Massachusetts has any thing to do with it; and next, I
do not consider that I, as her representative here, have
any thing to do with it. Sir, it has become, in my
opinion, quite too common, and, if the Legislatures of
the States do not like that opinion, they have a great
deal more power to put it down than I have to uphold
it; it has become, in my opinion, quite too common
a practice for the State Legislatures to present resolutions
here on all subjects, and to instruct us on all subjects.
There is no public man that requires instruction more
than I do, or who requires information more than I do,
or desires it more heartily; but I do not like to have
it come in too imperative a shape. I took notice, with
pleasure, of some remarks upon this subject made the
other day in the Senate of Massachusetts, by a young
man of talent and character, of whom the best hopes may
be entertained. I mean Mr. Hillard. He told the
Senate of Massachusetts that he would vote for no in
structions, whatever, to be forwarded to members of Con
gress, nor for any resolutions to be offered, expressive of
the sense of Massachusetts, as to what her members of
Congress ought to do. He said, that he saw no propriety
in one set of public servants giving instructions and
reading lectures to another set of public servants. To
their own master all of them must stand or fall, and that
master is their constituents. I wish these sentiments
could become more common, a great deal more common.
I have never entered into the question, and never shall,
about the binding force of instructions. I will, how
ever, simply say this : if there be any matter pending in
this body, while I am a member of it, in which Massa-
chusetts has an interest of-her own not adverse to the
general interests of the country, I shall pursue her in
structions with gladness of heart, and with all the effi
ciency which I can bring to the occasion. But if the ques
tion be one which affects her interest, and at the same
time equally affects the interests of all the other States,
I shall no more regard her particular wishes or instruc
tions, than I should regard the wishes of a man who
might appoint me an arbitrator, or referee, to decide
some question of important private right between him and
his neighbor, and then me to decide in his favour.
instruct
If ever there was a Government upon earth, it is this
Government; if ever there was a body upon earth, it is
this body, which should consider itself as composed by
agreement of all, each member appointed by some, but
organized by the general consent of all, sitting here under
the solemn obligations of oath and conscience, to do, that
which they think to be best for the good of the whole.
Then, sir, there are the abolition societies, of which I
am unwilling to speak, but in regard to which I have
very clear notions and opinions. I do not think them
useful. I think their operations for the last twenty
years have produced nothing good or valuable. At the
same time, I know thousands of their members to be
honest and good men; perfectly well meaning men.
They have excited feelings; they think they must do
something for the cause of liberty, and in their sphere of
action they do not see what else they can do, than to
contribute to an abolition press, or an abolition society,
or to pay an abolition lecturer. I do not mean to impute
gross motives even to the leaders of these societies, but I
am not blind to the consequences of their proceedings.
I cannot but, see what mischiefs their interference with
the South has produced. And is it not plain to every
man ? Let any gentleman who doubts of that, recur to
the debates in the Virginia House of Delegates in 1832,
and he will see with what freedom a proposition made
by Mr. Randolph for the gradual abolition of slavery was
discussed in that body. Every one spoke of slavery as
he thought; very ignominious and disparaging names
and epithets were applied to it. The debates in the
House of Delegates on that occasion, I believe, were all
published. They were read by every colored man who
could read, and to "those who could not read, those de
bates were read by others. At that time Virginia was
not unwilling nor afraid to discuss this question, and to
let that part of her population know as much of the dis
cussion as they could learn. That was in 1832. As
has been said by the honorable member from South
Carolina, these abolition societies commenced their course
of action in 1835. It is said, I do not know how true it
may be, that they sent incendiary publice+ions into , the
slave States; at any event, they attempted to arouse,
and did arouse, a very strong feeling; in other words,
they created great agitation in the North against South
ern slavery. Well, what was the result ? The bonds
of the slaves were bound more firmly than before; their
rivets were more strongly fastened. Public opinion,
which in Virginia had begun to be exhibited against
slavery, and was opening out for the discussion of the
question, drew back and shut itself up in its castle. I
wish to know whether any body in Virginia can, now,
talk as Mr. Randolph, Governor McDowell, and others
talked, openly, and sent their remarks to the press, in
1832 ? We all know the fact, and we all know the
cause; and every thing that this agitating people have
done has been, not to enlarge, but to restrain, not to set
free, but to bind faster the slave population of the
South. That is my judgment. Sir, as I have said,
I know many abolitionists in my own neighbourhood,
very honest, good people, misled, as I think, by strange
enthusiasm; but they wish to do something, and they
are called on to contribute, and they do contribute;
and it is my firm opinion this day, that within the
last twenty years as much money has been collected
and paid to the abolition societies, abolition presses,
and abolition lecturers, as would purchase the free
dom of every slave, man, woman, and child, in the
State of Maryland, and send them all to Liberia. I
have no doubt of it. But I have yet to learn that the
benevolence of these abolition societies has at any time
taken that particular turn. [Laughter.]
Again, sir, the violence of the press is complained of.
The press violent! Why, sir, the press is violent every
where. There are outrageous reproaches in the North
against the South, and there are reproaches no better in
the South against the North. Sir, the extremists of both
parts of this country are violent; they mistake loud and
violent talk for eloquence and for reason. They think
that he who talks loudest reasons best. And this we
must expect, when the press is free, as it is here, and I
trust always will be; for, with all its licentiousness, and
all its evil, the entire and absolute freedom of the press
is essential to the preservation of government on the basis
of a free constitution. Wherever it exists, there will be
foolish paragraphs and violent paragraphs in the press, as
there are, I am sorry to say, foolish speeches and violent
speeches in both Houses of Congress. In truth, sir, I
must say that, in my opinion, the vernacular tongue of
the country has become greatly vitiated, depraved, and
corrupted by the style of our congressional debates.
[Laughter.] And if it were possible for those debates
to vitiate the principles of the people, as much as they
have depraved their taste, I should cry out “ God save
the Republic!”
Well, in all this I see no solid grievance, no grievance
presented by the South, within the redress of the Go
vernment, but the single one to which I have referred;
and that is, the want of a proper regard to the in
junction of the Constitution, for the delivery of fugitive
slaves.
There are also complaints of the North against the
South. I need not go over them The first
particularly.
and gravest is, that the North adopted the Constitution,
recognising the existence of slavery in the States, and
recognising the right, to a certain extent, of representa
tion of the slaves in Congress/ under a state of sentiment
and expectation, which do not now exist; and that, by
events, by circumstances, by the eagerness of the South
to acquire territory and extend her slave population, the
North finds itself, in regard to the relative influence of
the South and the North, of the free States and the slave
States, where it never did expect to find itself when they
agreed to the compact of the Constitution. They com-
plaiii, therefore, that, instead of slavery being regarded
as an evil, as it was then, an evil which all hoped would
be extinguished gradually, it is now regarded by the South
as an institution to be cherished, and preserved, and ex
tended ; an institution which the South has already ex
tended to the utmost of her power by the acquisition of
new territory.
Well, then, passing from that, everybody in the North
reads; and everybody reads whatsoever the newspapers
contain; and the newspapers, some of them, especially
those presses to which I have alluded, are careful to
spread about among the people every reproachful senti
ment uttered by any Southern man bearing at all against
the North; every thing that is calculated to exasperate,
to alienate; and there are many such things, as every
body will admit, from the South, or some portion of it,
which are disseminated among the reading people; and
they do exasperate, and alienate, and produce a most
mischievous effect upon the public mind at the North.
Sir, I would not notice things of this sort , appearing in
obscure quarters; but'one thing has occurred in this de
bate which struck me very forcibly. An honorable
member from Louisiana addressed us the other day on
this subject. I suppose there is not a more amiable and
worthy gentleman in this chamber, nor a gentleman who
would be more slow to give offence to anybody, and he
did not mean in his remarks to give offence. But what
did he say ? Why, sir, he took pains to run a contrast
between the slaves of the South and the laboring people
of the North, giving the preference in all points of con
dition, and comfort, and happiness, to the slaves of the
South. The honorable member, doubtless, did not sup
pose that he gave any offence, or did any injustice. He
was merely expressing his opinion. But does he know
how remarks of that sort will be received by the labor
ing people of the North ? Why, who are the laboring-
people of the North? They are the North. They are
the people who cultivate thgir own farms with their own
hands; freeholders, educated men, independent men.
Let .me say, sir, that five-sixths of the whole property of
the North is in the hands of the laborers of the North;
they cultivate their farms, they educate their children,
they provide the means of independence; if they are
not freeholders, they earn wages; these wages accumu
late, are turned into capital, into new freeholds, and
small capitalists are created. That is the case, and such
the course of things among the industrious and frugal.
And what can these people think when so respectable
and worthy a gentleman as the member from Louisiana
undertakes to prove that the absolute ignorance and the
abject slavery of the South are more in conformity with
the high purposes and destiny of, immortal, rational, hu
man beings, than the educated, the independent, free
labor of the North ?
There is a more tangible and irritating cause of griev
ance at the North. Free blacks are constantly employed
in the vessels of the North, generally as cooks or stew
ards. When the vessel arrives at a Southern port, these
free colored men are taken on shore, by the police or
municipal authority, imprisoned, and kept in prison, till
the vessel is again ready to sail. This is not only irri
tating, but exceedingly unjustifiable and oppressive. Mr.
Hoar’s mission, some time ago, to South Carolina, was a
well-intended effort to remove this cause of complaint.
The North thinks such imprisonments illegal and uncon
stitutional ; and as the cases occur constantly, and fre
quently, they regard it as a great grievance.
Now, sir, so far as any of these grievances have their
foundation in matters of law, they can be redressed, and
ought to be redressed; and so far as they have their
foundation in matters of opinion, in sentiment, in mutual
crimination and recrimination, all that we can do is to
endeavor to allay the agitation, and cultivate a better
feeling and more fraternal sentiments between the South
and the North.
Mr. President, I should much prefer to have heard from
every member on this floor declarations of opinion that
this Union could never be dissolved, than the declaration
of opinion by anybody that, in any case, under the pres
sure of any circumstances, such a dissolution was possible.
I hear with pain, and anguish, and distress, the word
“ secession,” especially when it falls from the lips of those
who are patriotic, and known to the country, and known
all over the world, for their political services. Secession!
Peaceable secession! Sir, your eyes and mine are never
destined to see that miracle. The dismemberment of
this vast country without convulsion! The breaking up
of the fountains of the great deep, without ruffling the
surface! Who is so foolish, I beg everybody’s pardon, as
to expect to see any such thing? Sir, he who sees these
States, now revolving in harmony around a common cen
tre, and expects to see them quit their places and fly off
without convulsion, may look the next hour to see the
heavenly bodies rush from their spheres, and jostle
against each other in the realms of space, without caus
ing the crush of the universe. There can be no such
thing as a peaceable secession. Peaceable secession is an
utter impossibility. Is the great Constitution under
which we live, covering this whole country, is it to be
thawed and melted away by secession, as the snows on
the mountain melt under the influence of a vernal sun?
disappear almost unobserved, and run off? No, sir!
No, sir! I will not state what might produce the disrup
tion of the Union; but, sir, I see as plainly, as I see the
sun in heaven, what that disruption itself must produce;
I see that it must produce war, and such a war as I will
not describe, in its two-fold character.
Peaceable secession!—peaceable secession! The con
current agreement of all the members of this great repub
lic to separate ! A voluntary separation, with alimony on
one side and oh the other. Why, what would be the re
sult ? Where is the line to be drawn ? What States are
to secede ? What is to remain American ? What am I
to be ? An American no longer ? Am I to become a
sectional man, a local man, a separatist? with no coun
try in common with the gentlemen who sit around me
here, or who fill the other House of Congress ? Heaven
forbid! Where is the flag of the republic to remain?
Where is the eagle still to tower? or is he to cower,
and shrink, and fall to the ground? Why, sir, our
ancestors—our fathers and our grandfathers, those of
them that are yet living amongst us with prolonged
lives, would rebuke and reproach us; and our children
and our grandchildren would cry out shame upon us, if
we, of this generation, should dishonor these ensigns of
the power of the Government and the harmony of that
Union, which is every day felt among us with so much
joy and gratitude. What is to become of the army?
What is to become of the navy ? What is to become of
the public lands? How Is each of the thirty States to
defend itself? I know, although the idea has not been
stated distinctly, there is to be, or it is supposed possible
that there should be, a Southern Confederacy. I do not
mean, when I allude to this statement, that any one se
riously contemplates such a state of things. I do not
mean tb say that it is true, but I have heard it suggested
elsewhere, that that idea has originated a design to sepa
rate. I am sorry, sir, that it has ever been thought of,
talked of, or dreamed of, in the wildest flights of human
imagination. But the idea, so far as it exists, must be of a
separation, assigning the slave States to one side, and the
free States to the other. Sir, there is not, I may express
myself too strongly, perhaps, but some things, some moral
things, are almost as impossible as other natural or physical
things; and I hold the idea of a separation of these States,
those that are free to form one government, and those that
are slaveholding to form another, as a moral impossibility.
We could not separate the States by any such line, if we
were to draw it. We could not sit down here to-day and
draw a line of separation that would satisfy any five men
in the country. There are natural causes that would keep
and tie us together, and there are social and domestic re
lations which we could not break if we would, and which
we should not if we could. Sir, nobody can look over the
face of this country at the present moment, nobody can see
where its population is the most dense and growing, with
out being ready to admit, and compelled to admit, that
ere long America will be in the valley of the Mississippi.
Well, now, sir, I beg to inquire what the wildest en
thusiast has to say on the possibility of cutting that river
in two, and leaving free States at its source, and its branches,
and slave States down near its mouth, each forming a
separate Government ? Pray? sir; pray, sir, let me say
to the people of this country that these things are worthy
of their pondering and of their consideration. Here, sir,
are five millions of freemen in the free States north of the
river Ohio: can anybody suppose that this population
can be severed, by a line that divides them from the ter
ritory of a foreign and an alien Government, down some
where, the Lord knows where, upon the lower banks of
the Mississippi ? What would become of Missouri ? Will
she join the arrondissement of the slave States ? Shall
the man from the Yellow Stone and the Platte be con
nected, in the new Republic, with the man who lives on
the southern extremity of the Cape of Plorida ? Sir, I am
ashamed to pursue this line of remark. I dislike it, I
have an utter disgust for it. I would rather hear of na
tural blasts and mildews, war, pestilence, and famine, than
to hear gentlemen talk of secession. To break up! to break
up this great Government, to dismember this glorious coun
try, to astonish Europe with an act of folly such as Europe
for two centuries has never beheld in any Government or
any People! No, sir; no, sir! There will be no secession ’
Gentlemen are not serious when they talk of secession.
Sir, I hear there is to be a Convention held at Nash
ville. I am bound to believe that if worthy gentlemen
meet at Nashville in convention, their object will be to
adopt counsels conciliatory, to advise the South to forbear
ance and moderation, and to advise the North to forbear
ance and moderation; and to inculcate principles of
brotherly love and affection, and attachment to the Con
stitution of the country as it now is. I believe, if the
Convention meet at all, it will be for this purpose; for
certainly, if they meet for any purpose hostile to the
Union, they have been singularly inappropriate in their
selection of a place. I remember, sir, that when the
treaty was concluded between France and England, at the
peace of Amiens, a stern old Englishman and an orator,
who regarded the conditions of the peace as ignominious
to England, said in the House of Commons, that if King
William could know the terms of that treaty, he would
turn in his coffin! Let me commend this saying of Mr.
Windham, in all its emphasis and in all its force, to any
persons, who shall meet at Nashville for the purpose of
concerting measures for the overthrow of this Union, over
the bones of Andrew Jackson!
Sir, I wish now to make two remarks, and hasten to a
conclusion. I wish to say, in regard to Texas, that if it
should be, hereafter, at any time, the pleasure of the
Government of Texas to cede to the United States a por
tion, larger or smaller, of her territory which lies adjacent
to New Mexico, and north of 34° of north latitude, to be
formed into free States, for a fair equivalent in money or
in the payment of her debt, I think it an object well
worthy the consideration of Congress, and I shall be happy
to concur in it myself, if I should be in the public coun
sels of the country at that time.
I have one other remark to make. In my observar
tions upon slavery as it has existed in the country, and
as it now exists, I have expressed no opinion of the mode
of its extinguishment or melioration. I will say, how
ever, though I have nothing to propose, because I do not
deem myself so competent as other gentlemen to take
any lead, that if any gentleman from the South shall pro
pose a scheme of colonization, to be carried on by this
Government upon a large scale, for the transportation of
free colored people to any colony or any place in the
world, I should be quite disposed to incur almost any
degree of expense to accomplish that object. Nay, sir,
following an example set here more than twenty years
ago by a great man, then a Senator from New York, I
would return to Virginia, and through her for the benefit
of the whole South, the money received from the lands
and territories ceded by her to this Government, for any
such purpose as to relieve, in whole or in part, or in any
way, to diminish or deal beneficially with, the free colored
population of the Southern States. I have -said that I
honor Virginia for her cession of this territory. There
have been received into the treasury of the United States
eighty millions of dollars, the proceeds of the sales of the
public lands ceded by her. If the residue should be sold
at the same rate, the whole aggregate will exceed two
hundred millions of dollars. If Virginia and the South
see fit to adopt any proposition to relieve themselves
from the free people of color among them, or such as
may be made free, they have my free consent that the
Government shall pay them any sum of money out of its
proceeds, which may be adequate to the purpose.
And now, Mr. President, I draw these observations to
a close. I have spoken freely, and I meant to do so. I
have sought to make no display; I have sought to en
liven the occasion by no animated discussion, nor have
I attempted any train of elaborate argument. I have
wished only to speak my sentiments, fully and at large,
being desirous, once and for all, to let the Senate know,
and to let the country know, the opinions and sentiments
which I entertain on all these subjects. These opinions
are not likely to be suddenly changed. If there be any
future service that I can render to the country, consist
ently with these sentiments and opinions, I shall cheer
fully render it. If there be not, I shall still be glad to
have had an opportunity to disburden my conscience
from the bottom of my heart, and to make known every
political sentiment that therein exists.
And now, Mr. President, instead of speaking of the
possibility or utility of secession, instead of dwelling in
these caverns of darkness, instead of groping with those
ideas so full of all that is horrid and horrible, let us come
out into the light of day; let us enjoy the fresh air of
Liberty and Union; let us cherish those hopes which
belong to us; let us devote ourselves to those great ob
jects that are fit for our consideration and our action;
let us raise our conceptions to the magnitude and the
importance of the duties that devolve upon us; let our
comprehension be as broad as the country for which we
act, our aspirations as high as its certain destiny; let us
not be pigmies in a case that calls for men. Never did
there devolve on any generation of men higher trusts
than now devolve upon us, for the preservation of this
Constitution, and the harmony and peace of all who are
destined to live under it. Let us make our generation
one of the strongest and brightest links in that golden
chain, which is destined, I fondly believe, to grapple the
people of all the States to this Constitution, for ages to
come. We have a great, popular, constitutional Govern
ment, guarded by law, and by judicature, and defended
by the whole affections of the people. No monarchical
throne presses these States together; no iron chain of
military power encircles them; they live and stand upon
a Government popular in its form, representative in its
character, founded upon principles of equality, and so con
structed, we hope, as to last for ever. In all its history it
has been beneficent; it has trodden down no man’s liberty;
it has crushed no State. Its daily respiration is liberty
and patriotism; its yet youthful veins are full of, enter
prise, courage, and honorable love of glory and renown.
Large before, the country has now, by recent events, be
come vastly larger. This republic now extends, with a
vast breadth, across the whole continent. The two great
seas of the world wash the one and the other shore. We
realize, on a mighty scale, the beautiful description of the
ornamental edging of the buckler of Achilles—
Now the broad, shield complete, the artist crown’d With his last hand, and poured the ocean round; In living silver seem’d the waves to roll, And beat the buckler’s verge, and bound the whole.
Comments